Tag Archives: PCR

The Pandemic Planners: Conversations in the Dark

by Jon Rappoport

February 9, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

A SIGN LIGHTS UP: JULY 10, 2019.

Do we have a launch date set for the pandemic?

Looks like December of 2019, or January 2020.

I’m still confused about the virus.

There is no virus.

Why not?

If our people could actually create one—highly doubtful—they would have no idea what it would do. All viruses mutate rapidly. You never end up with what you started with. But selling A STORY ABOUT A VIRUS—that’s a winner. That’s all we need.

How do we sell it? Won’t people catch on right away?

Are you kidding? Our people will develop a diagnostic test for the virus. How they build that test determines the outcome. It’ll register positive much of the time, along with some negatives. And here’s the important point: the technical details involved in constructing the PCR test are very dense. Even many professionals don’t understand them. It’s like speaking Icelandic to a South American tribe in the rain forest. Don’t worry, we’ll get away with it.

And the lockdowns? The quarantines?

They’ll come, trust me. The Chinese will start the ball rolling. They have the force to pull it off. They’ll lock down a few cities right away. Wuhan, for example. Maybe 60 million people. Overnight. It’ll be a startling development. The UN and the WHO will climb on board quickly and praise China for its handling of the crisis. China will become THE MODEL for the rest of the world. Other countries will follow suit.

Who is going to step forward in the West? Italy?

Yes. They’re next in line for big lockdowns. The Chinese regime has enormous clout with the Italian government. So Italy will become the first beachhead in the attack on the West.

America is the key. If they join the club, we’re in. How do we convince Trump to play along?

He’ll cave. We’ll feed him a computer projection of deaths in America. Something huge, like two million. Trump isn’t good with details. He’ll buy in.

But the lockdowns will decimate the US economy. Trump’s whole presidency rests on economic success.

He’ll give in to Fauci and Gates.

Why?

Because he doesn’t have the stomach for this battle. He won’t go up against the medical experts. He’s bold in some respects, but on this issue, he’s a wobbler. That’s our calculation.

The news media are ready?

With wall to wall messaging, 24/7. PANDEMIC. Cases. Deaths. There are no dissenters among them. We’ve got that all sewed up. Medical experts pontificating on-air. Fear.

I’m nervous about this. Will it really sell? I mean, how can they construct a PCR test if they don’t have a virus, if there is no virus?

It’s easy, trust me. We’ve done it before. Anyway, your part of the operation comes after the lockdowns. You’ve made a few hundred million doing business with China. You’ll be able to make a few BILLION soon, buying up distressed properties after the lockdowns gain traction.

I’m going to bankroll social justice movements. You know, protests, riots, burning, looting, assault, in major cities across America. It’s a terrific issue, and it’ll be a major distraction from the lockdowns.

I know all about that. I’m copied in on every aspect of the operation. Just make sure all those riots are focused on racism and police brutality. We don’t want any leakage about inner city gangs and drug cartels and banks.

No problem. The gangs distribute drugs for the cartels, the cartels wash their money through banks. It’s a tight fit. Nobody is going to prosecute the gangs as continuing criminal enterprises. That’s off the table completely. The protests will have no mention of gangs as a problem. We’ve got the foot soldiers all sewed up. Hell, some of them ARE gang members. Are you sure the 2020 presidential election is in the bag?

Absolutely. Trump has no chance. By the time we’re through with him, he’ll be persona non grata. Biden is our man. We need someone with SEVERE cognitive deficits in the Oval Office. Only a completely dim bulb, mentally speaking, would sign some of the orders we’re going to put in front of him. Harris is being prepped to step in if Biden has to resign for health reasons. She knows enough of the score. She won’t try to go off on her own. Give her a whiff of the presidency and she’ll do somersaults for us.

Here’s the thing. Forget about Trump. The real danger is all the people who support him. The millions of deplorables out there. They still think the American Republic and freedom are on the table.

I agree. They’re a problem. But there are solutions. We’re going to put a label on all their heads. ‘They’re very bad people. They all want to destroy the government.’ That’s how we’re going to paint them. Our modelers believe there are enough Americans who are beholden to the federal government…they’ll view Trumpers as a serious threat. Very serious. We’ll have that issue covered.

Is the QAnon op going to keep going?

We’ll keep it going forever. After Trump leaves the White House, we’ll have people saying he’s still president and he’s arresting every high-level evil person in the world.

BLACKOUT

The lights come back up.

Wow, THAT was a hell of a dream—who are you?

Agent Jones. Federal Domestic Terrorism Task Force.

What are you doing in my bedroom?

I’ve been recording your dream.

What?

We have it all. Two pandemic planners. Why were you dreaming about them?

I have no idea. Who—

It reflects a certain state of mind. A dangerous mindset. Why weren’t you dreaming about a television show or a garden in the forest? Have you been reading conspiracy literature?

I read newspapers. WHAT ARE YOU DOING HERE?

Something in you must have triggered this dream. A psychological predisposition. A latent dissatisfaction.

I’m not dissatisfied.

That was not the dream of a normal man. Thoughts and dreams lead to conclusions, and conclusions lead to action.

I once had a dream about jumping off a building. I haven’t jumped.

Not yet.

Why are you here?

Checking up on a potential defector.

A defector from what?

What the rest of us know.

I’m like everybody else.

Everybody else doesn’t dream about a plan to make billions of dollars buying up distressed properties.

Is that a joke? I wouldn’t know where to start, even if I had that ambition. Which I don’t.

You start from where you are. A man with his thoughts. We need to explore your life thoroughly. You may have connections you’re unaware of. A distant relative. A casual acquaintance. Something may have slipped through the cracks.

I have to be at the office in a few hours. And I want to speak with a lawyer.

About your dream?

About you. This situation. Am I being charged with a crime?

No.

Then I’m free to—

You’re not free. Your status is “suspended, depending on outcome.”

What status?

Who told you Kamala Harris would cooperate in a plot to subvert the government?

No one.

Where did you get the idea that Biden is disabled?

Nowhere. It was a just a statement a man in my dream made. I wasn’t speaking at all. I was watching and listening.

I wouldn’t advise trying to deny responsibility. I didn’t have the dream. Your neighbor didn’t. You did.

Do you dream?

No.

Never?

The kind of dream you had was aberrant. What makes you think there’s going to be a pandemic and it’s some sort of plan?

Why do you care about my dream?

Because some fantasies are dangerous.

And some are meaningless.

The key is the content. You were constructing a conspiracy scenario. Do you have an opinion about viruses?

No.

I’m going to leave now. By tomorrow, you’ll wonder whether this conversation actually took place. If you reject me, think of this event as a warning from your subconscious.

What are you going to do?

You’re on a list.

Meaning what?

A more thorough background investigation. Increased surveillance.

Even while I’m asleep?

Listen carefully, sir. You’re always asleep. In the dream, you woke up for a minute or two.

BLACKOUT

The Matrix Revealed

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

If there is no virus, what is the test testing for?

by Jon Rappoport

February 4, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

As my readers know, I’ve been demonstrating that no one has proven SARS-CoV-2 exists.

Therefore, what is the PCR test testing for?

There are two piles of information here. By assuming SARS-CoV-2 DOES exist, you discover multiple internal flaws in the PCR. I’ve explored all of them in detail. If you back out of that exploration and realize the existence of virus is unproven to begin with, you’re driven to the conclusion that the test results—positive or negative—are completely meaningless.

Performing the test would be on the order of building an outpost at the North Pole to count the population of passing nomadic desert tribes.

Or creating an auto safety bureaucracy that will examine deep-sea divers’ oxygen tanks.

The PCR test looks for a piece of RNA in the swab sample taken from a person. That piece of RNA is PRESUMED to be part of the virus. But since you don’t have an isolated purified specimen of the virus itself, all assumptions about that piece of RNA are null and void.

Therefore, the COVID case numbers, which are based on the test results, are meaningless. So are the death numbers.

The masks, the distancing, the lockdowns—which are based on case numbers—are absurd and destructive.

(For readers who are encountering my work for the first time in this article, I suggest you read my recent piece, “If there is no virus, why are people dying?” From there, read my articles demonstrating that the existence of SARS-CoV-2 is unproven.)

This is certainly not the first time a medical diagnostic test has been revealed as meaningless. As I’ve detailed, the existence of HIV is also unproven. The various antibody tests designed to register the presence of HIV are absurd.

Here is how the medical magic trick works. Arbitrarily take a group of symptoms, lump them together, claim they add up to a specific disease with a label; assert, without evidence, that the cause is a germ; devise a test for the germ that will register positive and negative; claim the test is detecting the germ whose very existence is unproven.

Analogy: you claim you’re the CEO of, and the major stockholder in, X254, a corporation that doesn’t exist. You say you’re worth a few billion dollars. All major media outlets and national governments back your claim. You’re in. Out of nowhere, you’ve become “official.”

Consider the example of pellagra, a horrible skin disease that was plaguing the American South a hundred years ago. It affected several million people.

Medical authorities insisted a germ was the cause. Effort after effort was mounted to find the germ. Zero results. Finally, after decades, a small band of independent researchers won the day. Their contention that pellagra was actually a niacin deficiency was shown to be correct. There was no germ.

Sometimes, the very test which medical authorities devise to detect “the germ causing a disease” backfires on them. Such was the case with Swine Flu.

In the summer of 2009, while the CDC was claiming there were thousands of cases of Swine Flu in America, the overwhelming percentage of test samples taken from patients were coming back, from labs, with no sign of Swine Flu or any other kind of flu.

The lab tests were contradicting the CDC’s assertion that there was a pandemic. Sharyl Attkisson (CBS News) broke this story. Then CBS shut it down.

Tests are terrific propaganda tools. That’s all some of them are. “Well, the doctor ran my tests and he gave me a diagnosis of X. The treatment involves taking three [toxic] drugs. So I’ve started on the regimen.”

“Are you sure you want to take those drugs?”

“Of course. The tests showed I need them.”

“One of those drugs stops all cells in the body from replicating.”

“Doesn’t matter. The tests say I need the drug.”

Sometimes, there is no test, but doctors use a blizzard of arcane labels to pretend their diagnoses are real.

Such is the case with psychiatry, one of the great cons loosed upon the population. The official bible of the profession, the DSM, lists some 300 distinct and separate and named “mental disorders.”

THERE IS NO DEFINING LAB TEST FOR ANY OF THESE “DISORDERS.”

It’s up to the psychiatrist to make his diagnosis seem legitimate to the patient.

If the hidden history of medicine were taught in schools and colleges, it would come as no surprise that the COVID test is a complete hustle and con.

But schools wouldn’t touch that history with a hundred-foot pole.

In 2009, I interviewed Dr. Barbara Starfield, a revered public health expert at the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health. The subject was her July 26, 2000, review, “Is US Health Really the Best in the World?” published in the Journal of the American Medical Association.”

Starfield concluded that, every year in the US, the medical system kills 225,000 people. 106,000 from the effects of FDA approved medicines, and 119,000 from mistreatment and errors in hospitals.

As you read an excerpt from this email interview, keep in mind that most of these deaths were preceded by a diagnostic test of some kind—which speaks volumes about how the tests are interpreted and used.

Rappoport: What has been the level and tenor of the response to your findings, since 2000?

Starfield: The American public appears to have been hoodwinked into believing that more interventions lead to better health, and most people that I meet are completely unaware that the US does not have the ‘best health in the world’.

Q: In the medical research community, have your medically-caused mortality statistics been debated, or have these figures been accepted, albeit with some degree of shame?

A: The findings have been accepted by those who study them. There has been only one detractor, a former medical school dean, who has received a lot of attention for claiming that the US health system is the best there is and we need more of it. He has a vested interest in medical schools and teaching hospitals (they are his constituency).

Q: Have health agencies of the federal government consulted with you on ways to mitigate the [devastating] effects of the US medical system?

A: NO.

Q: Since the FDA approves every medical drug given to the American people, and certifies it as safe and effective, how can that agency remain calm about the fact that these medicines are causing 106,000 deaths per year?

A: Even though there will always be adverse events that cannot be anticipated, the fact is that more and more unsafe drugs are being approved for use. Many people attribute that to the fact that the pharmaceutical industry is (for the past ten years or so) required to pay the FDA for reviews [of its new drugs]—which puts the FDA into an untenable position of working for the industry it is regulating. There is a large literature on this.

Q: Aren’t your 2000 findings a severe indictment of the FDA and its standard practices?

A: They are an indictment of the US health care industry: insurance companies, specialty and disease-oriented medical academia, the pharmaceutical and device manufacturing industries, all of which contribute heavily to re-election campaigns of members of Congress. The problem is that we do not have a government that is free of influence of vested interests. Alas, [it] is a general problem of our society—which clearly unbalances democracy.

Q: Can you offer an opinion about how the FDA can be so mortally wrong about so many drugs?

A: Yes, it cannot divest itself from vested interests. (Again, [there is] a large literature about this, mostly unrecognized by the people because the industry-supported media give it no attention.)

Q: Would it be correct to say that, when your JAMA study was published in 2000, it caused a momentary stir and was thereafter ignored by the medical community and by pharmaceutical companies?

A: Are you sure it was a momentary stir? I still get at least one email a day asking for a reprint—ten years later! The problem is that its message is obscured by those that do not want any change in the US health care system.

Q: Are you aware of any systematic efforts, since your 2000 JAMA study was published, to remedy the main categories of medically caused deaths in the US?

A: No systematic efforts; however, there have been a lot of studies. Most of them indicate higher rates [of death] than I calculated.

Q: What was your personal reaction when you reached the conclusion that the US medical system was the third leading cause of death in the US?

A: I had previously done studies on international comparisons and knew that there were serious deficits in the US health care system, most notably in lack of universal coverage and a very poor primary care infrastructure. So I wasn’t surprised.

Q: Did your 2000 JAMA study sail through peer review, or was there some opposition to publishing it?

A: It was rejected by the first journal that I sent it to, on the grounds that ‘it would not be interesting to readers’!

The Matrix Revealed

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

Why Twitter and FB must ban the NY Times

by Jon Rappoport

January 19, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

Message to Mark Zuckerberg and Jack Dorsey: you have to ban the NY Times. Now.

I’ve got the hard evidence.

The Times, on at least three separate occasions, has published terribly corrosive information that would destroy the official COVID narrative.

Do you realize what that means? People could form a different picture of the pandemic. They could, after reading the Times, decide the situation ISN’T DANGEROUS, AND THE LOCKDOWNS AREN’T NECESSARY. THEY COULD DECIDE ONLY A FOOL WOULD LINE UP FOR THE VACCINE.

I’ll lay it all out for you, dear reader. I’m sure you’ll agree Twitter and FB must take action at once.

ONE: September 22, 2020, the Times: “These Coronavirus Trials Don’t Answer the One Question We Need to Know”:

“If you were to approve a coronavirus vaccine, would you approve one that you only knew protected people only from the most mild form of Covid-19, or one that would prevent its serious complications?”

“The answer is obvious. You would want to protect against the worst cases.”

“But that’s not how the companies testing three of the leading coronavirus vaccine candidates, Moderna, Pfizer and AstraZeneca, whose U.S. trial is on hold, are approaching the problem.”

“According to the protocols for their studies, which they released late last week, a vaccine could meet the companies’ benchmark for success if it lowered the risk of mild Covid-19, but was never shown to reduce moderate or severe forms of the disease, or the risk of hospitalization, admissions to the intensive care unit or death.”

“To say a vaccine works should mean that most people no longer run the risk of getting seriously sick. That’s not what these trials will determine.”

TAKEAWAY FROM THE TIMES: The vaccine clinical trials are ONLY designed to show effectiveness in preventing mild cases of COVID, which nobody should care about, because mild cases naturally run their course and cause no harm. THERE IS NO NEED FOR A VACCINE THAT PREVENTS MILD CASES.

Therefore, the leading vaccine clinical trials are useless, irrelevant, misleading, and deceptive.

Therefore, what rational human would choose to receive the COVID vaccine?

TWO: On August 29, 2020, the New York Times published a long article headlined, “Your coronavirus test is positive. Maybe it shouldn’t be.”

Its main message? “The standard [COVID PCR] tests are diagnosing huge numbers of people who may be carrying relatively insignificant amounts of the virus…Most of these people are not likely to be contagious…”

“In three sets of testing data…compiled by officials in Massachusetts, New York and Nevada, up to 90 percent of people testing positive carried barely any virus, a review by The Times found.”

“On Thursday, the United States recorded 45,604 new coronavirus cases, according to a database maintained by The Times. If the rates of contagiousness in Massachusetts and New York were to apply nationwide, then perhaps only 4,500 of those people may actually need to isolate and submit to contact tracing.”

TAKEAWAY FROM THE Times: The 90% of people tested, who “carry barely any virus,” are FALSE POSITIVES. Up to 90% of ALL people who have been labeled “COVID cases” are not COVID cases. This fact would downgrade the pandemic to “just another flu season.” And there would be no reason for lockdowns.

THREE: NY Times, January 22, 2007, “Faith in Quick Tests [PCR Tests] Leads to Epidemic That Wasn’t.”

“Dr. Brooke Herndon, an internist at Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, could not stop coughing…By late April, other health care workers at the hospital were coughing…”

“For months, nearly everyone involved thought the medical center had had a huge whooping cough outbreak, with extensive ramifications. Nearly 1,000 health care workers at the hospital in Lebanon, N.H., were given a preliminary test and furloughed from work until their results were in; 142 people, including Dr. Herndon, were told they appeared to have the disease; and thousands were given antibiotics and a vaccine for protection. Hospital beds were taken out of commission, including some in intensive care.”

“Then, about eight months later, health care workers were dumbfounded to receive an e-mail message from the hospital administration informing them that the whole thing was a false alarm.”

“Now, as they look back on the episode, epidemiologists and infectious disease specialists say the problem was that they placed too much faith in a quick and highly sensitive molecular test [PCR] that led them astray.”

“There are no national data on pseudo-epidemics caused by an overreliance on such molecular tests, said Dr. Trish M. Perl, an epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins and past president of the Society of Health Care Epidemiologists of America. But, she said, pseudo-epidemics happen all the time. The Dartmouth case may have been one the largest, but it was by no means an exception, she said.”

“Many of the new molecular [PCR] tests are quick but technically demanding, and each laboratory may do them in its own way. These tests, called ‘home brews,’ are not commercially available, and there are no good estimates of their error rates. But their very sensitivity makes false positives likely, and when hundreds or thousands of people are tested, as occurred at Dartmouth, false positives can make it seem like there is an epidemic.”

“’You’re in a little bit of no man’s land,’ with the new molecular [PCR] tests, said Dr. Mark Perkins, an infectious disease specialist and chief scientific officer at the Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics, a nonprofit foundation supported by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. ‘All bets are off on exact performance’.”

“With pertussis, she [Dr. Kretsinger, CDC] said, ‘there are probably 100 different P.C.R. protocols and methods being used throughout the country,’ and it is unclear how often any of them are accurate. ‘We have had a number of outbreaks where we believe that despite the presence of P.C.R.-positive results, the disease was not pertussis,’ Dr. Kretsinger added.”

“Dr. Cathy A. Petti, an infectious disease specialist at the University of Utah, said the story had one clear lesson.”

“’The big message is that every lab is vulnerable to having false positives,’ Dr. Petti said. ‘No single test result is absolute and that is even more important with a test result based on P.C.R’.”

TAKEAWAY FROM THE TIMES: No large study validating the uniformity of PCR results, from lab to lab, has ever been done. At least a dozen very large studies should have checked for uniform results, before unleashing the PCR on the public; but no, this was not the case. It is still not the case.

Now imagine the scandalous information in these three NY Times articles appearing everywhere—on Twitter, FB, Instagram, etc. It would be terrible for Bill Gates, Fauci, and other great leaders in the Holy Church of Biological Mysticism.

Political leaders and public health experts would have, on their hands, a major refutation of their whole narrative about the “deadly pandemic.”

We can’t allow that.

We must protect the public from the Times.

The only way to achieve this is through censorship.

Ban the NY Times from Twitter and Facebook.

Do it now.

If Jack Dorsey and Mark Zuckerberg refuse, Attorneys General of all 50 states should sue them at once.

Freeze their personal and corporate bank accounts.

Place them on a special list of “COVID insurrectionists.”

As for the Times, seize their assets, remove them from online platforms, stop the distribution of their newspapers—using military force, if necessary—and cut off all communication from their wire service to other news outlets.

Keeping the public safe is paramount. This is our duty.

CENSORSHIP IS FREEDOM.

MIND CONTROL IS LOVE.

LOCKDOWNS LEAD TO PROSPERITY.

That is all for now.

SOURCES:

[1] nytimes.com/2020/09/22/opinion/covid-vaccine-coronavirus.html

[2] nytimes.com/2020/08/29/health/coronavirus-testing.html

[3] nytimes.com/2007/01/22/health/22whoop.html

The Matrix Revealed

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

COVID vaccine secret, a stunner

by Jon Rappoport

January 15, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

From the off-guardian, January 3, 2021, “What Vaccine Trials?” by Iain Davis:

“…the WHO protocols Pfizer used to produce the mRNA [for the vaccine] do not appear to identify any nucleotide sequences that are unique to the SARS-CoV-2 virus. When investigator Fran Leader questioned Pfizer they confirmed: ‘The DNA template does not come directly from an isolated virus from an infected person’.”

And there we are, right back where I started, some time ago. If you don’t have the isolated virus, how can you claim you’ve sequenced it?

And if you’ve sequenced it by ASSUMPTION and GUESS, how can you claim the sequence—or the virus—is real?

Answer: You SAY the sequence and the virus are real, but you have zero proof. Because you’re a “scientific authority,” people automatically believe what you SAY.

A man visits a vast auto junkyard looking for parts. Over the office door, he sees a sign: “1972 Ferrari 365 GTB/4 Daytona Spider. Inquire within.”

The owner of the junkyard tells him, “We’re offering shares in the Ferrari. Three thousand a share. When we eventually sell it, you’ll make at least double your investment.”

The man says, “Where is the car? I’d like to see it.”

“Well,” the junkyard owner says, “look around you. We’ve got several square miles of cars and parts. The Ferrari is out there somewhere. We recently ran a test on exhaust fumes with a special instrument. It concluded that the ’72 Ferrari had recently been driven through the yard here…”

This is the sort of thing that happens in virology.

Of course, no mainstream virologist would admit it. He would talk about analogues and gene banks and PCR and representative samples and in silico (computer modeling).

But the stark reality is clear.

Assumption and guess and slippery inference do not carry the day.

You either have the isolated virus or you don’t. If you don’t, anything you say about “it” is useless. You can’t validly claim it exists.

As I’ve written and said dozens of times now, the virological meaning of the word “isolate” is quite different from the ordinary meaning.

In the technical world of the con and the hustle, “isolated virus” means: “We have the virus in a soup in a dish in the lab. The soup contains human and monkey cells, toxic drugs and chemicals, and other genetic material. Some of the cells are dying. This means the virus is killing them.”

That assertion is false. The drugs and chemicals can be killing the cells. And the cells are being starved of vital nutrients. That alone could explain the cell-death.

Furthermore, a supposed virus mixed in a soup in a dish in a lab is definitely not “isolated.”

Bottom line: there is no persuasive evidence that a virus is in the soup.

What’s in the COVID vaccine? Among other material, a supposed fragment from a supposed virus that hasn’t been proven to exist.

Consider the PCR test. Several levels of valid criticism have been aimed at the test.

First, different labs will come up with different contradictory test results. This is true.

Drilling down a little deeper, the test, when it amplifies the tissue sample taken from a patient, is useless and dangerous when more than 34 cycles or steps of amplification are deployed. Why? Because then, huge numbers of false-positives occur.

Down yet another level, we discover that the PCR doesn’t detect a virus at all. It identifies a piece of RNA presumed to come from a virus.

And finally, the test identifies a piece of RNA from a virus that hasn’t been proven to exist.

This is the root of the poisonous tree.

The Matrix Revealed

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

The criminal WHO blows its own cover: fake PCR test

by Jon Rappoport

December 31, 2020

(To join our email list, click here.)

In early 2020, the WHO accepted a PCR test for “SARS-CoV-2” that was designed without having possession of the virus. Yet the test is meant to detect…the missing virus. This is evidence of deep criminal intent. [1]

But as of December 14, 2020, WHO has made a correction [2]. Thereby blowing its own cover. Why?

Two reasons. Huge numbers of people have caught on to the PCR test scam. And by their correction, WHO paves the way for “declining COVID case numbers”—thereby making it appear the new vaccine is a roaring success. I predicted this development. [3] [4]

A brief review. The PCR test (a complete fraud for several reasons) is run in “cycles.” Each cycle is a giant magnification of a tiny portion of the swab sample taken from the patient.

As I’ve reported, even Tony Fauci readily asserts that if the PCR is run at 35 cycles or higher, it’s meaningless. [5] [6]

Every positive result—indicating “infection with the virus”—occurring at 35 cycles or higher is meaningless.

BUT, as I’ve also pointed out, public health agencies recommend running the PCR test at up to 40 cycles. Therefore, labs comply.

Therefore, millions upon millions of PCR tests results, over the last nine months, which indicate “infection,” are a vast lie.

Therefore, the COVID case numbers are a vast lie, and the lockdowns, which are based on those numbers, are absurd, insane, criminal, and predatory.

NOW, the WHO is walking back their stance on how the PCR should be run, for the reasons I mentioned above.

The WHO document is titled, “WHO Information Notice for IVD Users/Nucleic acid testing (NAT) technologies that use real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) for detection of SARS-CoV-2.” [2]

Here are the money quotes. The language is mealy-mouthed, intentionally confusing, cautious, and sterile. Nevertheless, we can see the intent to lower the number of test cycles.

“Users of RT-PCR reagents should read the IFU [Information for Use] carefully to determine if manual adjustment of the PCR positivity threshold is necessary to account for any background noise which may lead to a specimen with a high cycle threshold (Ct) value result being interpreted as a positive result.”

Translation: Using too many test cycles—aka “high cycle threshold (Ct) value”—has resulted in patients being told they’re infected, which is a lie.

“In some cases, the IFU will state that the cut-off should be manually adjusted to ensure that specimens with high Ct values are not incorrectly assigned SARS-CoV-2 detected due to background noise.”

Translation: Running the test with a high number of cycles yields “background noise”—aka a false positive result. The patient is told he’s infected but he’s not.

“The design principle of RT-PCR means that for patients with high levels of circulating virus (viral load), relatively few cycles will be needed to detect virus and so the Ct value will be low. Conversely, when specimens return a high Ct value, it means that many cycles were required to detect virus. In some circumstances, the distinction between background noise and actual presence of the target virus is difficult to ascertain.”

Translation: When the test is run with a high number of cycles, we can’t tell the difference between “irrelevant” and “meaningful.”

A frank and honest translation of the WHO message: “We’re changing the way we’re doing PCR tests. We were running them with a high number of cycles and getting millions of false positives, and those numbers were deployed to justify the lockdowns—but NOW we’re moving to a lower number of cycles. This change, all on its own, will result in fewer positive results, fewer case numbers, making the vaccine look VERY GOOD.”

The WHO is still crazy, still criminal, but not entirely stupid. They know what they’re doing and why.

SOURCES:

[1] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/12/25/you-thought-the-pcr-test-detects-an-actual-virus-wrong/

[2] https://www.who.int/news/item/14-12-2020-who-information-notice-for-ivd-users

[3] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/09/22/how-cdc-will-fake-effects-of-covid-vaccine-make-it-look-like-success/

[4] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/11/13/how-theyll-fake-the-success-of-the-covid-vaccine/

[5] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/12/03/lockdowns-are-based-on-fraud-open-letter-to-people-who-want-freedom/

[6] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/12/08/florida-forces-labs-to-report-number-of-pcr-test-cycles/

The Matrix Revealed

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

In case you thought the PCR test detects an actual virus…wrong

by Jon Rappoport

December 25, 2020

(To join our email list, click here.)

In a CDC document titled, “Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) 2020 Interim Case Definition, Approved April 5, 2020,” under the section, “Laboratory Criteria,” we have this: [1]

“Detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 ribonucleic acid (SARS-CoV-2 RNA) in a clinical specimen using a molecular amplification detection test.”

The test referred to is the PCR. And as you can plainly see, it is detecting, not the virus itself, but a piece of RNA.

A piece of RNA ASSUMED to come from the virus, SARS-CoV-2.

I say ASSUMED because, where is the actual virus? Where is the virus isolated from all surrounding material?

If you don’t have the virus, you can’t say, with any degree of certainty at all, that you have a piece of it (the RNA).

As I’ve described many times, “isolated” is a term that is tortured by researchers and public health officials, so that it means just the opposite of what it is supposed to mean. [2]

Numerous studies that claim the virus has been isolated actually turn out to mean: “We have the virus in a soup in a dish in the lab. The soup contains various types of animal and humans cells, toxic chemicals and drugs, and other genetic material. The virus is completely surrounded, but it is there. We know this, because some of the cells are dying, and this dying must be the result of infection with the virus…”

This argument not only turns the definition of “isolation” on its head, it reveals, upon a moment’s consideration, that the dying of the cells could come from the action of the toxic chemicals and drugs; and on top of that, the cells are being starved of nutrients, so they could be dying as a result of that deprivation.

Therefore, to say “the virus must be in the soup in the dish in the lab” because is killing cells…well, that’s completely unproven, and therefore…

There is no reason under the sun to claim that the virus is there in the soup at all.

Hence, the claim that the PCR test is detecting a piece of RNA from the virus is unwarranted. Because, again…where is the virus? Where is the truly isolated virus?

Nowhere.

And on that basis alone, the PCR test is irrelevant, useless, and deceptive.

It is set up to look for and detect a piece of RNA material that has never been proved to come from this un-isolated phantom ASSUMPTION, called “SARS-CoV-2.”

A few more moments of clear thought, and you realize the whole string of “science” that leads to the lockdowns and the economic devastation is not science at all.

It is what is called, in the intelligence community, a cover story. A story launched to justify crimes.

In this case, capital crimes against humanity.

SOURCES:

[1] https://wwwn.cdc.gov/nndss/conditions/coronavirus-disease-2019-covid-19/case-definition/2020/

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R6-8VRGvNtQ “Conversations with Dr. Cowan and Friends Episode 12: Jon Rappoport” (Dec 17, 2020)

The Matrix Revealed

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

The five key events in the fake pandemic

by Jon Rappoport

December 22, 2020

(To join our email list, click here.)

This article is a summary. I’ve written extensively on each of the five key events.

ONE: The false claim that a new virus was discovered and isolated.

No true isolation has been performed. The so-called genetic sequencing of the virus was actually a concoction, a cobbling together of pieces of data referencing segments of RNA. These segments were PRESUMED to be parts of the new virus—but researchers didn’t have the virus, so their presumptions amounted to fraud.

TWO: The erecting of a diagnostic test (PCR) for the virus they didn’t have. Obviously, no such test has meaning. It is built on the same sorts of absurd assumptions that led to the fictional discovery of the virus. However, strategically speaking, the test has produced millions of “positive results,” which are taken to mean “infected by the virus.” On this foundation of sand, the lockdowns were declared.

THREE: The Chinese lockdown of 50 million citizens, for no medical reason. This unprecedented event provided the model for other governments, and for the CDC and the World Health Organization. Now it was “acceptable” to imprison the global population and wreak economic devastation across the planet.

FOUR: The absurd computer prediction of 500,000 deaths in the UK and two million in the US, made by historically failed modeler, Neil Ferguson. His institute at the Imperial College of London is bankrolled by Bill Gates. Ferguson’s predictions were used to convince Trump and Boris Johnson that states of emergency and lockdowns were necessary.

FIVE: The forced premature deaths of millions of elderly people across the world—which were falsely called “COVID-19 deaths.”

These people were and are suffering from multiple long-term health conditions, made far worse by decades of medical treatment with toxic drugs. Terrified by a COVID diagnosis, then isolated from family and friends, they give up and die.

There are other important events, to be sure, but these are the key five.

The underlying fact that needs to be understood: what is called COVID-19 is not one condition. It is a variety of illnesses and effects stemming from different traditional causes RE-PACKAGED under the label, “COVID.”

Where authentic new conditions and causes may be involved, independent investigators need to look closely at such clusters of people, where they live. For example, the investigators should find out whether toxic vaccine campaigns were initiated in a community or region prior to declaration of the “COVID outbreak.”

Here is a short piece of fiction I wrote early on during the “pandemic.” It paints a far different picture of COVID events. At that time, I hoped “white hats” would squash the insane lockdowns and economic devastation. That never happened. Instead, high-powered business leaders gladly caved in and took their turn at the bailout trough.

Coronavirus and Island X-24

There was a small island.

Amazingly, it had never been claimed by any country. It just sat there. It was inconsequential. Geographers were irritated that it had no name. In 1998, they named it X-24.

123 families lived there. They emigrated from 14 countries.

During the 2019 onset of the trouble in China, 19 citizens had escaped the lockdown in Wuhan and found their way to the island in a small makeshift boat, which broke into pieces near shore. The resident families welcomed them without fanfare, and offered them housing in huts on the north side of the island.

People on the island practiced agriculture on their tiny farms, and they raised chickens and ate eggs. There was no government. The families met once a month to discuss any issues that might have arisen since their last meeting. They did not vote. They used common sense. They were sensible people. They had no ideology. They had no phones, no computers, no electricity.

One of the newly arrived Chinese women explained, at a meeting, the coronavirus, the epidemic, the lockdown, the testing. She asked whether anyone was concerned that her people might have brought the virus with them. The people of the island looked around at each other and shrugged. They didn’t seem interested.

Three weeks later, an article appeared in the mainland Chinese press about X-24 and the 19 escaped Wuhan residents. It was picked up by a wire service and then republished by a number of outlets around the world. It did not become a big story.

However, a boat soon arrived at the island. A Chinese official and an American public health officer from the CDC stepped off. Several conversations ensued. The two bureaucrats were concerned that the virus might have come to X-24. The residents said they didn’t travel, and they didn’t even fish. Why not? No one had an answer. The bureaucrats took samples of rainwater from a backyard container. They took a look at all the X-24 residents and saw they were healthy. They took throat swabs from the new 19 Chinese residents. There was a bit of tension when the Chinese official told these Wuhan escapees they were living illegally on the island and should return home. The Chinese residents said they wouldn’t, but they had no intention of causing trouble. The visitors left.

A week later, at a meeting in government offices in Wuhan, CDC and Chinese scientists told a deputy mayor of the city that nine immigrants on X-24 had tested positive for the coronavirus. A call was immediately made to the public health and safety office of the national government, and the news was reported. Two hours later, a message came back: leave the people on X-24 alone for now.

The government in Beijing took up the X-24 issue in several committees. A decision was made. Drones would do high flyovers and surveil the island. No one would be permitted to leave it.

Three months later, with the world in lockdown, a small elite government committee met in Beijing. The news: all the residents of X-24 were going about their daily business. No sick people were observed, even among the elderly. No one had tried to leave the island. No one was practicing social distancing. People met and mingled as usual. A CDC/WHO message was read: It expressed concern about X-24. People who were positive for the virus couldn’t be allowed to live outside the limits of control. Something needed to be done.

Three weeks later, X-24 residents observed a group of armed boats approaching. Maneuvers were executed, and the craft made a ring around the island. They sat about 20 miles offshore. They stayed there.

This operation was noticed by the press. The X-24 story made a brief limited comeback. INFECTED PEOPLE LIVING ON AN ISLAND. QUARANTINE FORCED. A few reporters tried to get information on the condition of the X-24 residents. They couldn’t.

CDC meetings took place. The gist was: These people remain healthy. There is no sign of trouble. No disease. No illness. “What happens if THIS becomes a story?”

The issue was kicked up to the Chinese and American military. Very private meetings took place. “We could launch a drone missile attack and wipe them out.” “We could send in a kill-team.” “How about a massive fire? Drop a few incendiaries.” “Spray them with nasty chemicals. They’ll have a hell of time trying to breathe, they’ll foam at the mouth and die.”

But in the end, the military held back. A message from a carefully guarded private source came down the line: “Leave them alone. Remove the stupid ships. Observe from drones. Do not attack. They rate as experimental subjects. They constitute a control group. By CDC projections, at least a few of them should become ill. So far, that’s not the case.”

…A year later, on X-24, the Chinese woman, who had originally told the island residents about the coronavirus, wrote in the diary she had been keeping, “The mainland madness is just a faint memory. My mother here is 93. She is reasonably healthy. A few people get sick, as a matter of course, and then they get well. Nothing unusual. There were two deaths last year. A French woman and an American man. They were both in their 80s. I helped their families make them comfortable. I saw no sudden illness of the lungs. I liked all these island people from the start. I feel close to them now.”

Old habits die hard. She looked around her small cabin, as if some government authority might be present. She walked to the pile of stones arranged in the corner, where a low fire was burning. It occurred to her there was no reason to continue her diary. She bent down and placed it in the flames and watched it for a minute. The past was past.

Nothing untoward had happened on the island.

Back at the CDC, a private analysis was carried out. Nine mitigating factors were listed to explain why no one on the island had fallen ill from the virus. The conclusion was the island was not a proper representation of the real world. The analysis was sent up the line to the guarded source who had ordered the ring of ships to back off. He read the CDC analysis.

He sent back a message. “I wasn’t asking you to cover your ass or justify your role in this fiasco. Your so-called mitigating factors are a crock. Apparently, you’re unable to be honest. So let me send you my analysis. The people on X-24 didn’t get sick because they didn’t get sick. Remove promoted fear, diagnostic tests, treatment with toxic drugs, and other damage falsely labeled as COVID, and you have nothing. I see why you were disturbed about the story of X-24. But then, accounting for healthy people who stay healthy has never been your strong suit, has it? You’ve gone too far. I should set my hounds loose on you.”

A colleague of his walked into the steam room, picked up a pitcher of cold water and poured it on the rocks. Steam rose and the rocks hissed. Wrapped in white sheets, the two men sat side by side.

“Did you tear them a new one?”

“I gave them something to think about. These people are incorrigible. They really are.”

“When our friends arrive tonight, we’ll discuss the situation.”

“Yes. Recess is over. The bureaucrats interrupted business. Products must flow. Money must flow. They don’t understand we’re the engine of the world, for better or worse.”

“We’ll school these little bureaucrats. They parade around thinking they’re princes. They’re going to pay.”

The steam spread. The men were invisible.

TOPIC ARCHIVES:

https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/tag/virus/

https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/tag/testing/

https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/tag/pcr/

https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/tag/lockdown/

https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/tag/cases/

https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/tag/neil-ferguson/

https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/tag/old-people/

https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/tag/nursing-homes/

The Matrix Revealed

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

The real pandemic is an outbreak of PCR testing

And you can do something about this

by Jon Rappoport

December 17, 2020

(To join our email list, click here.)

I keep hammering on the test because it is the main piece of public fakery that holds this whole pandemic illusion in place.

If it falls, the illusion disappears.

In numerous past articles, I’ve shown the PCR test is useless and deceptive, from several angles.

Recently, I wrote about a Florida directive, issued by the governor and his department of public health: it forces labs to reveal the number of cycles at which each PCR test is run. [1]

A cycle is a quantum leap in amplification of the original sample taken from the patient.

Anthony Fauci himself has asserted that 35 cycles or higher makes the test result useless. Yet the FDA and the CDC recommend running the test at up to 40 cycles. This has opened the door to millions of false positives. [2] [3]

The cherry on the cake? Test labs never tell doctors or their patients how many cycles are deployed in the test. [4]

My first point today is this: if other states wake up and follow Florida’s lead, the whole false edifice of the test would collapse.

My second point: at labs all over the country (and the world), thousands and thousands of PCR tech employees understand the con, the hustle, and the crime—because they are participating in it EVERY DAY.

They are all silent.

If 20 of them stepped forward and told the truth, we would see the PCR test wobble and the fakery called “case numbers” and “pandemic” and “lockdowns” start to crumble.

These PCR techs would confess that they’re running the test at 40 cycles and therefore the results are MEANINGLESS.

So we need pressure on these PCR techs. Lots and lots of pressure. From us. From court cases. From every source we can muster.

The PCR techs are good Germans. They’re complicit and silent. THIS HAS TO END.

In 1992, strategist James Carville helped Bill Clinton win the presidency by suggesting that, coming out of a recession, the campaign should use the slogan, “It’s the economy, stupid!” It worked like a charm.

Now, the slogans/memes should be: IT’S THE CYCLES, STUPID! and IT’S THE TEST, STUPID!

The test spits out false positives like a fire hose, creating the impression of escalating COVID case numbers, which are used as the rationale for the lockdowns and the economic devastation.

Without those fake numbers, the authorities have NOTHING.

So get busy. Get the message about the tests out to one and all. Be relentless. Don’t curl up into a ball when people reject what you’re communicating. Keep going. Expose the fraudulent test cycles. Point to the PCR techs at labs as complicit enablers in the ongoing crime.

Here is my article from several weeks ago about Fauci and the test:

Smoking gun: Fauci states COVID test has fatal flaw; confession from the “beloved” expert of experts [5]

The COVID delusion is finished, blown apart

by Jon Rappoport

December 17, 2020

OK, here we go. Smoking gun. Jackpot.

Right from the horse’s mouth. Right from the man we’re told is the number-one COVID expert in the nation. What Fauci says is golden truth.

Well, how about THIS?

July 16, 2020, podcast, “This Week in Virology”: Tony Fauci makes a point of saying the PCR COVID test is useless and misleading when the test is run at “35 cycles or higher.” A positive result, indicating infection, cannot be accepted or believed.

Here, in techno-speak, is an excerpt from Fauci’s key quote (starting at about the 4-minute mark [3]):

“…If you get [perform the test at] a cycle threshold of 35 or more…the chances of it being replication-confident [aka accurate] are miniscule…you almost never can culture virus [detect a true positive result] from a 37 threshold cycle…even 36…”

Each “cycle” of the test is a quantum leap in amplification and magnification of the test specimen taken from the patient.

Too many cycles, and the test will turn up all sorts of irrelevant material that will be wrongly interpreted as relevant.

That’s called a false positive.

What Fauci failed to say on the video is: the FDA, which authorizes the test for public use, recommends the test should be run up to 40 cycles. Not 35.

Therefore, all labs in the US that follow the FDA guideline are knowingly or unknowingly participating in fraud. Fraud on a monstrous level, because…

Millions of Americans are being told they are infected with the virus on the basis of a false positive result, and…

The total number of COVID cases in America—which is based on the test—is a gross falsity.

The lockdowns and other restraining measures are based on these fraudulent case numbers.

Let me back up and run that by you again. Fauci says the test is useless when it’s run at 35 cycles or higher. The FDA says run the test up to 40 cycles, in order to determine whether the virus is there. This is the crime in a nutshell.

If anyone in the White House has a few brain cells to rub together, pick up a giant bullhorn and start revealing the truth to the American people.

“Hello, America, you’ve been tricked, lied to, conned, and taken for a devastating ride. On the basis of fake science, the country was locked down.”

If anyone in the Congress has a few brain cells operating, pull Fauci into a televised hearing and, in ten minutes, make mincemeat out of the fake science that has driven this whole foul, stench-ridden assault on the US economy and its citizens.

All right, here are two chunks of evidence for what I’ve written above. First, we have a CDC quote on the FDA website, in a document titled [6] [6a] [6b]: “CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel For Emergency Use Only.” See pdf page 38 (doc page 37). This document is marked, “Effective: 12/01/2020.” That means, even though the virus is being referred to by its older name, the document is still relevant as of Dec 2020. “For Emergency Use Only” refers to the fact that the FDA has certified the PCR test under a traditional category called “Emergency Use Authorization.”

FDA: “…a specimen is considered positive for 2019-nCoV [virus] if all 2019-nCoV marker (N1, N2) cycle threshold growth curves cross the threshold line within 40.00 cycles ([less than] 40.00 Ct).”

Naturally, MANY testing labs reading this guideline would conclude, “Well, to see if the virus is there in a patient, we should run the test all the way to 40 cycles. That’s the official advice.”

Then we have a New York Times article (August 29/updated September 17) headlined: “Your coronavirus test is positive. Maybe it shouldn’t be.” [4] Here are money quotes:

“Most tests set the limit at 40 [cycles]. A few at 37.”

“Set the limit” would usually mean, “We’re going to look all the way to 40 cycles, to see if the virus is there.”

The Times: “This number of amplification cycles needed to find the virus, called the cycle threshold, is never included in the results sent to doctors and coronavirus patients…”

Boom. That’s the capper, the grand finale. Labs don’t or won’t reveal their collusion in this crime.

Get the picture?

I hope so.

If a lawyer won’t go to court with all this, or if a judge won’t pay attention and see the light, they should be stripped of their jobs and sent to the Arctic to sell snow.

SOURCES:

[1] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/12/08/florida-forces-labs-to-report-number-of-pcr-test-cycles/

[2] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/12/03/lockdowns-are-based-on-fraud-open-letter-to-people-who-want-freedom/

[3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_Vy6fgaBPE

[4] nytimes.com/2020/08/29/health/coronavirus-testing.html

[5] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/11/06/smoking-gun-fauci-states-covid-test-has-fatal-flaw/

[6] https://www.fda.gov/media/134922/download

[6a] CDC-006-00019, Revision: 06, CDC/DDID/NCIRD/ Division of Viral Diseases, Effective: 12/01/2020; see: https://web.archive.org/web/20210102171026/https://www.fda.gov/media/134922/download

[6b] CDC-006-00019, Revision: 05, CDC/DDID/NCIRD/ Division of Viral Diseases, Effective: 07/13/2020; see: https://web.archive.org/web/20200715004004/https://www.fda.gov/media/134922/download

The Matrix Revealed

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

Boom: Florida forcing labs to report number of PCR test cycles—game changer

If the governor of Florida handles this breakthrough correctly, it could be the beginning of the end for one widespread piece of COVID test fakery…

And the beginning of the end of “rising case numbers”

by Jon Rappoport

December 8, 2020

(To join our email list, click here.)

As I’ve reported, COVID testing labs never tell doctors or patients how the PCR test is run. [1]

This means the number of cycles is a secret.

A cycle is a step up in amplification of the tissue sample taken from the patient.

As even Tony Fauci has asserted, tests run at 35 cycles or above are useless. [1] [2] They’re also misleading. The results tend to be positive, meaning the patient is “infected with the virus.” But this is false.

However, as I’ve also reported, the CDC and the FDA recommend that the test should be run at up to 40 cycles. [1] [3] This is a direct hustle. It ensures false positives and higher COVID case numbers—used as justification for lockdowns.

Now, the state of Florida is doing something unheard of. It’s demanding that labs report the “cycle threshold” for every test they run.

Here is the relevant wording in a release from the Florida governor, Ron DeSantis, and the state Department of Health, dated December 3, 2020 [4]:

“Cycle threshold (CT) values and their reference ranges, as applicable, must be reported by laboratories to FDOH via electronic laboratory reporting or by fax immediately.”

“If your laboratory is not currently reporting CT values and their reference ranges, the lab should begin reporting this information to FDOH within seven days of the date of this memorandum.”

We can assume there is only one reason for this order. The Florida governor and the Department of Health are aware that tests run at 35 cycles or higher are useless and misleading, and they want to stop this crime.

Imagine what happens if the trend of “new COVID cases” in Florida soon takes a sudden dip and keeps on falling—because labs are finally telling the truth. Because their deceptive test results are being rejected. The con will be exposed.

And imagine other states following Florida’s example.

I have a few concerns. The term “cycle threshold” is taken to be more or less synonymous with “number of cycles.” But I would prefer Florida simply say: “All labs must report the number of cycles for each PCR test they run.” For me, that would be clearer.

And then, down in the Florida memo, we have this: “If your laboratory is unable to report CT values and their reference ranges, please fill out the brief questionnaire attached to this memorandum and submit by facsimile to the FDOH’s Bureau of Epidemiology confidential fax line…” [the link to the questionnaire is in [4]]

Unable to report? Why would any lab be unable?

The questionnaire offers two bizarre possibilities. The first: “Although the qualitative result is generated based on a CT value, the assay/instrument does not provide the user [the lab] with the actual CT value—it only provides the qualitative result.”

What?? This indicates the lab’s PCR equipment is internally pre-programmed to run the test at a certain number of cycles, and the lab doesn’t know what that number is, can’t find out, and can’t demand the equipment manufacturer disclose that vital piece of information. ABSURD. We’re dealing with a state secret?

The second item in the questionnaire for labs: “The laboratory does not have a separate mechanism to report the CT value to FDOH [Florida Dept. of Health] since the CT value does not get reported to the submitting provider.”

No mechanism for reporting? SET ONE UP. Email, fax, pencil and paper, carrier pigeon. Also ABSURD.

As always, the devil is in the details. I’m sure many labs will try to avoid reporting. They don’t want to be exposed as the charlatans they are.

Memo to Florida Governor DeSantis: Don’t let the labs weasel out of this one. Don’t let them give you excuses. Don’t let them off the hook. Failure to report true facts during a public health crisis is felony. Charge a few labs, drag them into court. Put fear of prosecution into state labs. You’re on the right track. You’ve made a major breakthrough. You see the con at work. You don’t want your state to be pressured into lockdowns based on fake case numbers derived from deceptive tests. Now make sure your enforcement personnel crack down on reluctant labs. Go the distance. If labs have equipment pre-set for the number of cycles, and they don’t know how to get inside the equipment to find that number, bring in pros who will do the job for them. I believe you’ll uncover a major scandal. Much of that equipment will be pre-set for 40 cycles. Keep updating the public on what you discover. Blow this crime wide open. Keep a very close eye on your public health officials. Among them, you’ll find agents who don’t want the truth to emerge. They’ll try to sabotage your good efforts every which way they can.

DON’T LET THEM.

SOURCES:

[1] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/12/03/lockdowns-are-based-on-fraud-open-letter-to-people-who-want-freedom/

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_Vy6fgaBPE

[3] https://www.fda.gov/media/134922/download

[4] https://www.flhealthsource.gov/files/Laboratory-Reporting-CT-Values-12032020.pdf

The Matrix Revealed

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

Lockdowns are based on fraud: open letter to people who want freedom

by Jon Rappoport

December 3, 2020

(To join our email list, click here.)

This article is arranged so you see the fraud in more detail as you read further.

QUICK OVERVIEW:

The lockdowns are based on high levels of COVID cases.

“We have so many new cases, we have to lock down.”

This claim is based on the diagnostic PCR test.

The more tests you do, the more positive results come up. A positive result is taken to mean: the person is infected with the virus.

But overwhelmingly, these so-called “infected” people have no symptoms. They are healthy. Nevertheless, each one is called a “COVID case.” This is absurd.

A case should mean the person has clinical symptoms; he is sick.

These people aren’t sick, and there is no indication they will get sick.

So…expand testing, test millions of people, obtain results claiming “infection,” call all these healthy people “cases,” and order lock downs.

This is a straight-out con. The real goal is lockdowns and economic devastation.

IS THE PCR TEST DECEPTIVE?

You need one piece of background here.

The PCR test is run in “cycles.” Each cycle is a quantum leap in amplifying or magnifying the original tiny, tiny piece of material taken from the patient’s swab sample. It’s like blowing up a small photo to an amazing size.

The question is: how many cycles should the PCR test be run at? This is vital issue, because the number of cycles changes the result.

July 16, 2020, podcast, “This Week in Virology” [1]: Tony Fauci makes a point of saying the PCR COVID test is useless and misleading when the test is run at “35 cycles or higher.” A positive result, indicating infection, cannot be accepted or believed.

Here, in techno-speak, is an excerpt from Fauci’s key quote (starting at about the 4-minute mark [1]): “…If you get [perform the test at] a cycle threshold of 35 or more…the chances of it being replication-competent [aka accurate] are miniscule…you almost never can culture virus [detect a true positive result] from a 37 threshold cycle…even 36…”

Too many cycles, and the test will turn up all sorts of irrelevant material that will be wrongly interpreted as relevant.

That’s called a false positive.

What Fauci failed to say on the video is: the FDA, which authorizes the test for public use, recommends the test should be run up to 40 cycles. Not 35.

Therefore, all labs in the US that follow the FDA guideline are knowingly or unknowingly participating in fraud. Fraud on a monstrous level, because…

Millions of Americans are being told they are infected with the virus on the basis of a false positive result, and…

The total number of COVID cases in America—which is based on the test—is a gross falsity.

The lockdowns and other restraining measures are based on these fraudulent case numbers.

Let me back up and run that by you again. Fauci says the test is useless when it’s run at 35 cycles or higher. The FDA says run the test up to 40 cycles, in order to determine whether the virus is there. This is the crime in a nutshell.

If anyone in the White House has a few brain cells to rub together, pick up a giant bullhorn and start revealing the truth to the American people.

“Hello, America, you’ve been tricked, lied to, conned, and taken for a devastating ride. On the basis of fake science, the country was locked down.”

If anyone in the Congress has a few brain cells operating, pull Fauci into a televised hearing and, in ten minutes, make mincemeat out of the fake science that has driven this whole foul, stench-ridden assault on the US economy and its citizens.

All right, here are two chunks of evidence for what I’ve written above. First, we have a CDC quote on the FDA website, in a document titled: “CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel For Emergency Use Only.” [2] [2b] [2c] See pdf page 38 (doc page 37). This document is marked, “Effective: 12/01/2020.” That means, even though the virus is being referred to by its older name, the document is still relevant as of Dec 2020. “For Emergency Use Only” refers to the fact that the FDA has certified the PCR test under a traditional category called “Emergency Use Authorization.”

FDA: “…a specimen is considered positive for 2019-nCoV [virus] if all 2019-nCoV marker (N1, N2) cycle threshold growth curves cross the threshold line within 40.00 cycles ([less than] 40.00 Ct).”

Naturally, MANY testing labs reading this guideline would conclude, “Well, to see if the virus is there in a patient, we should run the test all the way to 40 cycles. That’s the official advice.”

A disastrous inference.

Then we have a New York Times article (August 29/updated September 17) headlined: “Your coronavirus test is positive. Maybe it shouldn’t be.” [3] Here are money quotes:

“Most tests set the limit at 40 [cycles]. A few at 37.”

“Set the limit” would usually mean, “We’re going to look all the way to 40 cycles, to see if the virus is there.”

The Times: “This number of amplification cycles needed to find the virus, called the cycle threshold, is never included in the results sent to doctors and coronavirus patients…”

Boom. That’s the capper, the grand finale. Labs don’t or won’t reveal their collusion in this crime.

Get the picture?

IS THE PCR TEST USEFUL AND MEANINGFUL?

Now let’s go to published official literature, and see what it reveals. Spoiler alert: the admitted holes and shortcomings of the test are devastating.

From “CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel For Emergency Use Only.” [2]:

“Detection of viral RNA may not indicate the presence of infectious virus or that 2019-nCoV is the causative agent for clinical symptoms.” (doc page 40)

Translation: A positive test doesn’t guarantee that the COVID virus is causing infection at all. And, ahem, reading between the lines, maybe the COVID virus might not be in the patient’s body at all, either.

From the World Health Organization (WHO): “Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) technical guidance: Laboratory testing for 2019-nCoV in humans”:

“Several assays that detect the 2019-nCoV have been and are currently under development, both in-house and commercially. Some assays may detect only the novel virus [COVID] and some may also detect other strains (e.g. SARS-CoV) that are genetically similar.”

Translation: Some PCR tests register positive for types of coronavirus that have nothing to do with COVID—including plain old coronas that cause nothing more than a cold.

The WHO document adds this little piece: “Protocol use limitations: Optional clinical specimens for testing has [have] not yet been validated.”

Translation: We’re not sure which tissue samples to take from the patient, in order for the test to have any validity.

From the FDA: “LabCorp COVID-19RT-PCR test EUA Summary: ACCELERATED EMERGENCY USE AUTHORIZATION (EUA) SUMMARYCOVID-19 RT-PCR TEST (LABORATORY CORPORATION OF AMERICA)” [5]:

“…The SARS-CoV-2RNA [COVID virus] is generally detectable in respiratory specimens during the acute phase of infection. Positive results are indicative of the presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA; clinical correlation with patient history and other diagnostic information is necessary to determine patient infection status…THE AGENT DETECTED MAY NOT BE THE DEFINITE CAUSE OF DISEASE (CAPS are mine). Laboratories within the United States and its territories are required to report all positive results to the appropriate public health authorities.”

Translation: On the one hand, we claim the test can “generally” detect the presence of the COVID virus in a patient. But we admit that “the agent detected” on the test, by which we mean COVID virus, “may not be the definite cause of disease.” We also admit that, unless the patient has an acute infection, we can’t find COVID. Therefore, the idea of “asymptomatic patients” confirmed by the test is nonsense. And even though a positive test for COVID may not indicate the actual cause of disease, all positive tests must be reported—and they will be counted as “COVID cases.” Regardless.

From a manufacturer of PCR test kit elements, Creative Diagnostics, “SARS-CoV-2 Coronavirus Multiplex RT-qPCR Kit” [6]:

“This product is for research use only and is not intended for diagnostic use.”

Translation: Don’t use the test result alone to diagnose infection or disease. Oops.

“non-specific interference of Influenza A Virus (H1N1), Influenza B Virus (Yamagata), Respiratory Syncytial Virus (type B), Respiratory Adenovirus (type 3, type 7), Parainfluenza Virus (type 2), Mycoplasma Pneumoniae, Chlamydia Pneumoniae, etc.”

Translation: Although this company states the test can detect COVID, it also states the test can read FALSELY positive if the patient has one of a number of other irrelevant viruses in his body. What is the test proving, then? Who knows? Flip a coin.

“Application Qualitative”

Translation: This clearly means the test is not suited to detect how much virus is in the patient’s body. That’s another indication that the test is useless for determining whether the patient is ill—since millions and millions of virus must be present, in order to produce illness.

“The detection result of this product is only for clinical reference, and it should not be used as the only evidence for clinical diagnosis and treatment. The clinical management of patients should be considered in combination with their symptoms/signs, history, other laboratory tests and treatment responses. The detection results should not be directly used as the evidence for clinical diagnosis, and are only for the reference of clinicians.”

Translation: Don’t use the test as the exclusive basis for diagnosing a person with COVID. And yet, this is exactly what health authorities are doing all over the world. All positive tests must be reported to government agencies, and they are counted as COVID cases.

Those quotes, from official government and testing sources, torpedo the whole “scientific” basis of the test.

CONCLUSION: The PCR test is useless and deceptive. It provides de facto dictators the opportunity to cite “new case levels” and lock down populations, creating economic and human devastation.

RESIST, REBEL, PROTEST, OPEN UP THE ECONOMY ANY WHICH WAY YOU CAN.

SOURCES:

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_Vy6fgaBPE

[2] https://www.fda.gov/media/134922/download

[2a] CDC-006-00019, Revision: 06, CDC/DDID/NCIRD/ Division of Viral Diseases, Effective: 12/01/2020; see: https://web.archive.org/web/20210102171026/https://www.fda.gov/media/134922/download

[2b] CDC-006-00019, Revision: 05, CDC/DDID/NCIRD/ Division of Viral Diseases, Effective: 07/13/2020; see: https://web.archive.org/web/20200715004004/https://www.fda.gov/media/134922/download

[3] nytimes.com/2020/08/29/health/coronavirus-testing.html

[4] https://web.archive.org/web/20200301092906/http://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/technical-guidance/laboratory-guidance (for http://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/technical-guidance/laboratory-guidance)

[5] https://www.fda.gov/media/136151/download

[6] https://www.creative-diagnostics.com/pdf/CD019RT.pdf

The Matrix Revealed

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