Coronavirus: what real science would look like, if it existed

by Jon Rappoport

(To join our email list, click here.)

Continuing my “greatest COVID hits” articles. To read my introduction to this ongoing series, go here.  To support my work and get value for value, order My Matrix Collections here and subscribe to my substack here.

March 10, 2020

This is one of the most important articles I’ve written on the current “epidemic.” (full archive here)

When you look at the justification for all the lunatic measures being taken to “stem the tide” of the coronavirus, you come to the simplicity of CASES.

How many cases are there? How many people are “infected?”

And the answer to that comes from what?

From tests. From diagnostic tests.

Of course, some people are ridiculously labeled “cases” without tests. I’ve explained that nonsense in other articles.

Outside of China, the most widely used test is called the PCR. It must be done with tremendous care, because contamination with irrelevant microbes and cellular material can yield a misleading and absurd result.

The PCR, it is claimed, can take a tiny, tiny bit of material from a patient and blow it up many times, so it can be identified. “This is the coronavirus. This patient is infected.”

Not only that, the test’s proponents assert that, quite easily, the PCR can also determine the AMOUNT of virus in the patient’s body. Why is that vitally important? Because, to even begin talking about the patient ever getting sick, he must have millions and millions of coronavirus actively replicating in his body.

There are people (and I’m one of them) who challenge the claim that the PCR can show how much virus is in the patient’s body. The experts try to brush us off—we don’t understand the intricacies of the test, it’s highly technical, we’re not qualified to make a judgment, etc.

I’ve been searching for a way around this futile argument. In the process, I’ve discovered something important about the PCR. I SEE NO EVIDENCE THAT THE ACCURACY OF THE TEST HAS EVER BEEN PROVEN.

Let me explain. You bring your car to a good repair shop. The mechanics hook it up to a device and run a test to diagnose what’s causing the car to stall. Who says their tests are accurate? At some point in the past, these diagnostic procedures have been vetted, to make sure they work properly.

And sure enough, when the mechanics say, “We’ve found the problem,” and when they correct that problem, you drive the car and it doesn’t stall anymore. This is called a real-life result.

This is not the situation re the PCR. Its proponents claim it can count how much virus is in a patient’s body—how much of a particular virus. But where is the proof, in real-life terms, that the PCR can do that? How was that proof ever established?

When I say proof, I don’t mean technical mumbo-jumbo. I’m not referring to the highly dense language these scientists use among themselves. I’m talking about real live human patients, and results.

After all, if the PCR is being used to diagnose people, and if the results are being used to count the number of coronavirus cases in various countries, and if the number of cases forms the basis for, say, locking down the whole of Italy in a mass quarantine…THE TEST IS IMPORTANT, WOULDN’T YOU SAY?

I have seen no wide-ranging proof that the PCR was ever checked properly, when it was first introduced, to show it could do what researchers say it can do.


I have come up with a process—a simple process—which will check the veracity of the PCR. It should have been carried out decades ago. The fact that it wasn’t is an enormous scandal.

Here it is.

From a hundred patients, very small tissue samples are taken. The PCR lab people don’t take the samples. They don’t ever see the patients or know who they are.

The lab professionals run these hundred samples through the PCR, obtain results, and then report: what virus did they find in each case, and how much of that virus did they find?

Let’s say, in six instances, the lab techs claim they found a great amount of virus in the patients.

Well, those patients should be sick.

Are they? ARE THEY?

“We’ve determined that patients 4, 9, 32, 54, 65, and 86 all have a huge amount of virus in their bodies.”

“Interesting. Thanks. Let’s see. Hmm. Turns out these people are fit as a fiddle. Not sick. I guess your test didn’t work. It’s a flop.”

Or maybe the test does work. The six patients are sick. LET’S FIND OUT. IN THE WORLD, NOT IN JOURNALS.

That’s what I mean by real-life results. No jive, no tap dancing.

There is more. This experiment with the hundred patients? It should be done, not just once, but many times. A hundred patients here at this facility, a hundred patients there at that facility. Thirty or forty different facilities, and thirty or forty different sets of a hundred patients. It should be done by independent scientists without conflicts of interest.

It should have been done decades ago. I see no evidence that it was.


Think about what that means.

Think it through.

Trace all the implications.

For example, imagine you’re the political leader of a country, with 100 “reported cases of the coronavirus.” Are you going to lock it down? Are you?

Think about everything that’s happening now in the world. Use your intelligence.


Don’t jump on the fear bandwagon. Don’t jump on the “scientific” b.s. bandwagon.

Use your mind.

You’re interested in scandals? I’ve just presented one. It’s blaring with a thousand trumpets, right out in the open.

(There’s a ‘Part-2’ to this article. To access it, click here)

These “Greatest COVID Hits” Series Of Articles are archived under the category Covid Revisited

These articles — at the time of original publication — are archived under the category Covid

(Episode 37 of Rappoport Podcasts“THE OHIO TRAIN DISASTER: I’ve dug up many vital facts and I’ll lay them out for you”—is now posted on my substack. It’s a blockbuster. To listen, click here.)

The Matrix Revealed

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)

To read Jon’s articles on Substack, click here.

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

9 comments on “Coronavirus: what real science would look like, if it existed

  1. Frank says:

    That could all be interesting if viruses even existed….

    Ask Stefan Lanka how he identified the virus WITHOUT the virus…nah, it is all bogus

  2. A Reader emailed me the following comment:


    This is just a quick note to let you know how much I appreciate you, your work and how grateful I’m that I was able to discover you few years back. I don’t need to go into recapping these last three years since you are probably one of the first people to realize the impact of this travesty. These past 3-4 years have toppled my world and yes I went through the proverbial rabbit hole. I work in the health care system and always was “holistically” inclined and practiced that. I didn’t fall for the “pandemic” and was fighting it’s implications pretty much from the beginning. I lived under communism before and would like to hope that my BS radar is more sensitive. I lost few jobs since I wouldn’t comply but was able to maintain one in the addiction field. I know exactly what you mean when you talk about fentanyl proliferation and destruction of our country. I have read more in these last three years than previous 10 years and the biggest awakening for me was the fact that there are no viruses. That has changed my view on many other aspects of our lives and made me much freer person. It also made me question everything even more than before and forced me to relearn most of our history.

    You were a big part of my transition which I view as something very positive. I admire your perseverance and commitment to the truth. You have my sincere gratitude and I wish you strength and good health since we need more people like you.

  3. A Reader emailed me the following comment:


    And in addition to all these very good points, the inventor of the method stressed repeatedly that it should not be used for testing, only to enhance the results of DNA tests. If this method is no good for SARS COV 2 testing, is it still valid for DNA testing of rapists? A fine distinction that also needs to be made.

  4. A Reader emailed me the following comment:


    Hello Jon, I read all of your articles and the one on the PCR test is verry good. I know you are familiar with Dr. Kerri Mullis, the inventor of the PCR test, and the fact that he won the Nobel Prize for this work. If anyone knows what it will and will not do it is him. His videos stating this are online or used to be. He states truthfully that the test is not able to detect or diagnose any illness present, and when magnified above a certain number of cycles it merely makes nothing look like something. He stated Fauci knows nothing about anything and challenged him to debate him at three different universities. Fauci did not even acknowledge to challenge at all. Many of us know what Fauci did during the AIDS crisis, his trip to Belgium to shut down the debate concerning HIV positive patients all over the world that were not getting AIDS. The film footage shows the bewildering look on the faces of some of these Doctors and it was a stunning sight. What he did to Peter Duesberg as well as others who say this conflicting lie for what it was, a lie. I smelled a rat as soon as this so-called deadly virus was released.

    I did not take the jab, got the virus and in four days it was gone, and no worse than a cold. The seasonal flu was ten time worse than this virus. I am 75 years old and have been a fitness Trainor and healthy eater for decades, but my Doctor at the VA wanted me to get the shot and I told him that I had no intention of taking this shit and didn’t want to hear about it again.

    I hope you do another article to include Kerri Mullis statements about his own test.

    Thanks for your logical, critical analysis as there are so few of you out there.

  5. A Reader emailed me the following comment:


    Thank you for your article re C19.

    I remember hearing that Anthony Fauci sent an email to all U.S. medical facilities to increase the number of rotations to give false readings.
    Even if tests were done all over the US, the testing setting and procedures would be different.

    In a state of Australia, Western Australia, there was one media broadcast stating that there was one person with the alleged C19 and the state was blocked off to any one entering or exiting the state, that is, a total lock down with one infection.

  6. A Reader emailed me the following comment:


    What about, the PCR Test inventor (Kary Mullis) claimed that the PCR Test was designed as a laboratory test and was not suitable to find an infectious pathogen at all.

  7. A Reader emailed me the following comment:


    I appreciate your articles – you write like I’d love to talk; clear, open and honest from your heart.

    Another who talks plain and simple and makes a lot of sense is NZ’s Dr Sam Bailey when she discusses subjects like this one on PCR.

    But a major difference is when she discusses media hype around the likes of PCR or even Project Veritas hype she distinctly reminds us viewers (she does great vlogs) that the rabbit hole continues to drag us down when we keep referring to people like Jordan Walker hype because it doesnt matter whether you call it ‘gain of function’ or designed dog faeces or Rotweiler Lipstick, the dog is not. There never was a dog just someone saying they heard a bark. Meaning there is no “it”, never was, never will be.

    Meaning ‘the’ virus doesn’t and any virus doesn’t exist. Never has.

    Instead, like PCR no-one has proven existence of a single virus even though they purport to have isolated one.

  8. Paul says:

    Stew Peters
    Dr. Francis A. Boyle

    Author, 1989 Law:
    Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act

  9. Paul says:

    WE Are Waiting For US.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *