Tag Archives: testing

Historic Portuguese Appeals Court ruling on PCR test

by Jon Rappoport

February 24, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

I’m continuing my series exposing the COVID test fraud. [1]

On November 11, 2020—and ignored completely by major media in the US and other countries—the Lisbon, Portugal, Court of Appeal ruled against lockdowns, because they were based on unreliable PCR tests. [2]

The ruling was historic.

The off-guardian covered the story [2]: “Portuguese Court Rules PCR Tests ‘Unreliable’ & Quarantines ‘Unlawful’; Important legal decision faces total media blackout in Western world”

“Most importantly, the judges ruled that a single positive PCR test cannot be used as an effective diagnosis of infection.”

“In their ruling, judges Margarida Ramos de Almeida and Ana Paramés referred to several scientific studies. Most notably [a study by Jaafar et al], which found that – when running PCR tests with 35 cycles or more – the accuracy dropped to 3%, meaning up to 97% of positive results could be false positives.”

“The ruling goes on to conclude that, based on the science they read, any PCR test using over 25 cycles is totally unreliable. Governments and private labs have been very tight-lipped about the exact number of cycles they run when PCR testing, but it is known to sometimes be as high as 45. Even fearmonger-in-chief Anthony Fauci has publicly stated anything over 35 is totally unusable.”

The Court was declaring the PCR test alone could not be sufficient for a diagnosis of disease, and it was outrageous to believe it could.

A “case of COVID disease” without a medical assessment of clinical symptoms in the patient is no case at all. It is a misnomer, and, the Court stated, represents a serious breach of the law.

I have explained the issue of “cycles” before. Each cycle is a quantum leap in magnification of the test sample swabbed from the patient. When 35 or more cycles are deployed (some reports say 25), the result of the test is meaningless.

However, many, many labs use 40 or even 45 cycles.

At more than 35 cycles, the test yields an overwhelming percentage of false-positives.

This Portuguese Court of Appeal is surely the best “COVID-educated” judicial body in the world.

In prior articles on the PCR, I’ve exposed a triangle of factors that surrounds COVID testing in the US.

One: Anthony Fauci readily asserts that running the test at 35 cycles or higher yields useless and meaningless results. [3]

Two: However, the FDA and the CDC recommend performing the test at up to 40 cycles. Therefore, US labs will comply—turning out millions of tests that are useless, BUT WHICH FALSELY STATE THE PATIENT IS INFECTED. [4] [4a] [4b]

Three: And the NY Times reports that labs in the US never reveal, to doctor or patient, how many cycles they are deploying. [5]

That’s a recipe for cooking up a false pandemic.

SOURCES:

[1] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/tag/pcr/

[2] https://off-guardian.org/2020/11/20/portuguese-court-rules-pcr-tests-unreliable-quarantines-unlawful/

[3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_Vy6fgaBPE (beginning at 3m50s mark)

[4] https://www.fda.gov/media/134922/download (see pdf page 38 (doc page 37))

[4a] 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

[4b] 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

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

PCR test revelations from official literature; they expose their own lies

by Jon Rappoport

February 23, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

Here is another article in my series exposing the COVID PCR testing fraud [1]. For purposes of discussion, I’m assuming the virus is real, and the case and death numbers are meaningful. Within that official world, the internal contradictions and lies are huge.

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. [2]

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. [3]

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

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” [pg 40; pdf pg 41] [4] [4a] [4b]:

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

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” [5] [5a]:

“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-19 RT-PCR test EUA Summary – December 9, 2020; EMERGENCY USE AUTHORIZATION (EUA) SUMMARY COVID-19 RT-PCR TEST (LABORATORY CORPORATION OF AMERICA)” [pg 2] [6]:

“…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” [7] [7a]:

“Regulatory status: For research use only, not for use in diagnostic procedures.”

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

“Specificity: 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.

And get this information out there, far and wide.

SOURCES:

[1] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/tag/pcr/

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

[3] nytimes.com/2020/04/28/opinion/coronavirus-testing.html

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

[4a] 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

[4b] 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

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

[5a] https://blog.microbiologics.com/2019-novel-coronavirus-what-microbiologists-need-to-know/

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

[7] https://web.archive.org/web/20200404082812/https://www.creative-diagnostics.com/pdf/CD019RT.pdf

[7b] 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.

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

The COVID PCR test is a complete fraud

by Jon Rappoport

February 22, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

This article is part of my current series on the COVID PCR test [1]. These articles prove that the test is fatally flawed, gives rise to hugely inflated and false case numbers, which in turn lead to the unnecessary and brutal lockdowns.

I’m hoping readers will spread this information far and wide.

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” [2]: 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 the 3m50s mark) [2]: “…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…”

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.

“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 global economy and its 8 billion 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 [3] [3a] [3b]: “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/tag/pcr/

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

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

[3a] 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

[3b] 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

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

The NY Times recalls an outbreak of PCR lies

by Jon Rappoport

February 19, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

This article is part of a current series of pieces [1] I’m posting—with the purpose of exposing the PCR fraud.

The war against humanity relies on this test. If the test falls, the whole official COVID narrative dissolves in front of our eyes.

You can perform a valuable service by spreading this information far and wide.

NY Times, January 22, 2007, “Faith in Quick [PCR] Tests Leads to Epidemic That Wasn’t.” [2] [3]

“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. Also, the extreme sensitivity of the test causes MANY false-positives.

Now imagine the scandalous information in this NY Times article appearing everywhere—on social media, blogs, websites, 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.”

Do something. Spread this information.

SOURCES:

[1] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/tag/pcr/

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

[3] https://web.archive.org/web/20210130121951/https://www.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.

Yes, the NY Times exposed the PCR test

by Jon Rappoport

February 18, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

As I’ve been telling readers for many months, even if you assume SARS-CoV-2 is real, the test is useful, and the case and death numbers are meaningful, there are vast and crippling internal contradictions within the official portrait of COVID-19.

Currently, I’m focusing on the PCR test and its fatal flaws.

The test is a MAJOR weak point in the enemy’s attack on humanity. If the test falls, the case and death numbers are shown to be wildly false, and the whole pandemic narrative collapses.

I urge readers to spread this information far and wide.

On August 29, 2020, the New York Times published a long article headlined, “Your coronavirus test is positive. Maybe it shouldn’t be.” [1] [2]

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: 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.

Of course, the Times goes on to say the solution to this problem is MORE TESTING. Only a moron would accept that notion.

The enduring message of their article still stands: the PCR test apparatus is a fraud, through and through. It enables the recording of monumentally false case numbers, which are used to declare unnecessary lockdowns and wall-to-wall economic destruction.

Make the truth known.

SOURCES:

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

[2] https://web.archive.org/web/20210217055535/https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/29/health/coronavirus-testing.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: The predatory testing labs are complicit in the crime

by Jon Rappoport

February 17, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

Test lab: “This specimen tests positive. The patient is infected with SARS-CoV-2.”

Patient: “Wait. How did you run the test? With how many cycles?”

Test lab: “That information is proprietary. You have no right to know.”

Patient: “Really? The number of cycles can determine the outcome. Change that number, and ‘infected’ becomes ‘healthy’.”

Test lab: “We know what we’re doing.”

Patient: “I’m sure you do. You’re ruining people’s lives and jacking up case numbers.”

Test lab: “You have no right to question our methods. This is bordering on harassment.”

Patient: “No, this is bordering on the truth.”

Test lab: “We’re official. You’re unofficial.”

I’ve written about this issue before, several times.

Now, I’m suggesting a solution.

If you, or someone close to you, is being pressured to take the COVID PCR test, ask the clinic or the doctor’s office how many cycles the test will deploy.

Chances are high they’ll tell you they don’t know, and only the testing lab has that information. Ask for the name of the lab.

Call the lab and ask them. Chances are high they won’t tell you. Inform them that the number of cycles affects the outcome of the test. Make them aware you know this.

Except in Florida [1] [2], US labs are under no obligation to inform the patient or the doctor how many cycles the PCR test deploys. They never inform doctor or patient.

Why? Because a crime is underway. The positive or negative result of any given PCR test is hanging in the balance, depending on the number of cycles.

A cycle is a quantum leap in magnification of the swab sample taken from the patient.

As even Fauci has asserted, at 35 cycles and above, the test result is useless. [3] [4]

Worse, at 35 cycles and above, the tendency of the test is to spit out false-positives.

Yet, as I’ve detailed, the CDC and FDA recommend doing the test at up to 40 cycles; and therefore, most if not all labs will follow that guideline. [5; See pdf page 38 (doc page 37)] [6]

This is a disaster for the patient, and it results in a flagrant inflation of COVID case numbers, which in turn provide a rationale for the lockdowns.

People at testing labs who have a few active brain cells to rub together know all this. They keep their mouths shut. They’re complicit in the crime.

They’re part of a silent bureaucracy that is there to rule The People.

Here is a further variation on a strategy. If you or anyone close to you is under pressure to take the PCR test, obtain the services of a good lawyer. Have the lawyer demand, before the test, a sworn affidavit from the lab stating how many cycles they’re using.

If necessary, explain why.

If necessary, go to court.

If necessary, sue.

It’s long past the time when labs should be allowed to stay secretive and pose as neutral.

History is littered with examples of faceless bureaucracies that have enabled leaders to commit crimes against humanity. Nazi Germany, the USSR, post-World War 2 East Germany. These days, China.

And now, every other country where rulers are declaring brutal lockdowns.

If a small handful of people who are told to get tested—three or four hundred—demand to know, from the labs, what is going on—how many cycles they’re using—and legal and personal pressure is exerted—the truth will come tumbling out, into the open.

This target of attack will expose a gaping vulnerability in the enemy’s position.

Test lab: “All right, you want to know? We run our tests at 40 cycles.”

Lawyer: “Very good. We are prepared, with a mountain of evidence, to show that you’re violating universally agreed upon science. Your lab is spitting out false-positives like a fire hose. You’re ruining lives and falsely inflating case numbers…”

Test lab: “We’re just following orders from the FDA and the CDC.”

Lawyer: “I’M JUST FOLLOWING ORDERS. Where have I heard that before? Oh yes, during the Nuremberg trials, after World War Two. That’s what the Nazi bureaucrats kept saying. It didn’t fly then, and it won’t fly now.”

SOURCES:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.