Facebook Twitter YouTube SoundCloud RSS
 

New Peer Review Report Finds PCR Test ‘Useless’, Further Debunking Asymptomatic ‘Superspreader’ Theory

Street Level 'Superspreaders'?

Now more than ever, it’s time to do the one thing that COVID-aligned media have been asking for almost a year now – follow the science. Well, here it is for all the world to see.

Not only is the following scientific evidence damning for the ‘New Normal’ lockdown culture that’s been perpetuated, the primary method for reporting ‘cases’ that public health officials and politicians have been using to wield their newfound power – the PCR test – has just been summarily rendered “useless” by a global team of experts in this new report.

The “Corman-Drosten Review Report was authored by the International Consortium of Scientists in Life Sciences (ICSLS), and is an external peer review report that reveals ’10 fatal flaws’ in the PCR test – the main test used for COVID:

In light of our re-examination of the test protocol to identify SARS-CoV-2 described in the Corman-Drosten paper we have identified concerning errors and inherent fallacies which render the SARS-CoV-2 PCR test useless.

The authors reference the term “useless” eight different times in their report and concluded that a major consequence of the flawed PCR testing protocol is false positives.

SEE ALSO: “Your Coronavirus Test Is Positive. Maybe It Shouldn’t Be.”

Here is a brief summary of the report’s findings on the PCR test’s scientific flaws at the molecular and methodological level, originally compiled here:

  • is non-specific, due to erroneous primer design
  • is enormously variable
  • cannot discriminate between the whole virus and viral fragments
  • has no positive or negative controls
  • has no standard operating procedure
  • does not seem to have been properly peer reviewed

The authors conclude their report by asking the publisher of the original Corman-Drosten study on novel coronavirus detection using the PCR test, Eurosurveillance, to retract the paper.

If PCR tests are useless as this new report finds, then how can they possibly be relied upon to accurately determine the true nature of the ‘pandemic’?

More on this from Mercola.com…

According to media reports, COVID-19 “cases,” meaning positive PCR test results, are soaring across the U.S. and around the world, leading to the implementation of measures that in some cases are stricter than what we endured during the initial wave.

However, as detailed in several recent articles, including “Why COVID-19 Testing Is a Tragic Waste,” PCR tests are being used incorrectly, resulting in the false appearance of widespread transmission.

In reality, the vast majority of people who end up with a positive test will not develop symptoms and aren’t infectious. Needless to say, if you’re not infectious, you pose no health risk to anyone, and being placed under what amounts to house arrest is nothing but cruel and unusual punishment for no reason whatsoever.

Positive Test Rates Have No Bearing on Mortality Rates

 

In The Highwire report above, Del Bigtree breaks down how excessively high test sensitivity leads to falsely elevated “case” numbers that in reality tell us nothing about the situation at hand. As noted by Bigtree, what’s missing from the COVID-19 conversation is the actual death rate.

“If COVID is a deadly virus, what should we see when cases increase?” he asks. The answer, of course, is an increase in deaths. However, that’s not what’s happening.

Aside from a small bump at the beginning, when doctors were unsure of the appropriate treatment and some states recklessly and irresponsibly sent infected patients into ill equipped nursing homes, the death rate has remained relatively flat while positive test rates have dramatically risen and fallen in intervals.

In the video, Bigtree features a November 4, 2020, tweet1 by White House coronavirus adviser Dr. Scott Atlas showing the number of positive tests (aka “cases”) in blue and COVID-19 related deaths in red, since the start of the pandemic up until the end of October 2020. As you can see, there’s no correlation between the positive test rate and subsequent deaths.

Casedemic Chart: US COVID-19 Cases and Deaths

Vast Majority of ‘COVID-19 Patients’ Are Asymptomatic

One of the explanations for why positive test rates and mortality do not go hand in hand is the simple fact that a vast majority of those testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 are asymptomatic. They simply aren’t sick. The PCR test is merely picking up inactive (noninfectious) viral particles.

In one study,2 which looked at pregnant women admitted for delivery, 87.9% of the women who tested positive for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 had no symptoms. Another study3 looked at a large homeless shelter in Boston. After a cluster of COVID-19 cases was observed there, researchers conducted symptoms assessments and testing among all guests residing at the shelter over a two-day period.

Of 408 people tested, 147, or 36%, were positive, yet symptoms were conspicuously absent. Cough occurred in only 7.5% of cases, shortness of breath in 1.4% and fever in 0.7%. All symptoms were “uncommon among COVID-positive individuals,” the researchers noted.

Asymptomatic Transmission Is Very Rare

During a June 8, 2020, press briefing, Maria Van Kerkhove, the World Health Organization’s technical lead for the COVID-19 pandemic, made it very clear that asymptomatic transmission is very rare, meaning an individual who tests positive but does not exhibit symptoms is highly unlikely to transmit live virus to others.

“We have a number of reports from countries who are doing very detailed contact tracing. They’re following asymptomatic cases, they’re following contacts, and they’re not finding secondary transmission … it’s very rare, and much of that is not published in the literature,” Van Kerkhove said.

Just one day later, Dr. Mike Ryan, executive director of the WHO’s emergencies program, backpedaled Van Kerkhove’s statement, saying the remarks were “misinterpreted.”4 Needless to say, when you’re trying to justify the implementation of a vast surveillance network, it’s no good to admit a vast majority of people are having their privacy infringed upon for no good reason whatsoever.

Asymptomatic People Pose No Risk to Others

Most recently, a study5 in Nature Communications assessed the risk posed by asymptomatic people by looking at the data from a mass screening program in Wuhan, China.

The city had been under strict lockdown between January 23 and April 8, 2020. Between May 14 and June 1, 2020, 9,899,828 residents of Wuhan city over the age of 6 underwent PCR testing. In all, 92.9% of the entire city population participated in the testing. Of these, 9,865,404 had no previous diagnosis of COVID-19 and 34,424 were recovered COVID-19 patients.

Not a single one of the 1,174 people who had been in close contact with an asymptomatic individual tested positive.

In all, there were zero symptomatic cases and only 300 asymptomatic cases detected. (The overall detection rate was 0.3 per 10,000.) Importantly, not a single one of the 1,174 people who had been in close contact with an asymptomatic individual tested positive.

Additionally, of the 34,424 participants with a history of COVID-19, 107 individuals (0.310%) tested positive again, but none were symptomatic. As noted by the authors:6

“Virus cultures were negative for all asymptomatic positive and repositive cases, indicating no ‘viable virus’ in positive cases detected in this study … The 300 asymptomatic positive persons aged from 10 to 89 years …

The asymptomatic positive rate was the lowest in children or adolescents aged 17 and below (0.124/10,000), and the highest among the elderly aged 60 years and above (0.442/10,000). The asymptomatic positive rate in females (0.355/10,000) was higher than that in males (0.256/10,000).”

Asymptomatic People Have Low Viral Load

Interestingly, when they further tested asymptomatic patients for antibodies, they discovered that 190 of the 300, or 63.3%, had actually had a “hot” or productive infection resulting in the production of antibodies. Still, none of their contacts had been infected.

In other words, even though asymptomatics were (or had been) carriers of apparently live virus, they still did not transmit it to others. As noted by the authors, “there was no evidence of transmission from asymptomatic positive persons to traced close contacts.” They further added:7

“Compared with symptomatic patients, asymptomatic infected persons generally have low quantity of viral loads and a short duration of viral shedding, which decrease the transmission risk of SARS-CoV-2.

In the present study, virus culture was carried out on samples from asymptomatic positive cases, and found no viable SARS-CoV-2 virus. All close contacts of the asymptomatic positive cases tested negative, indicating that the asymptomatic positive cases detected in this study were unlikely to be infectious.”

Reinfected Individuals Are Not Infectious Either

The same held true for people who tested positive a second time after having recovered from an active infection.

“Results of virus culturing and contract [sic] tracing found no evidence that repositive cases in recovered COVID-19 patients were infectious, which is consistent with evidence from other sources,” the authors said.8

The researchers also pointed out that virus cultures and genetic studies have shown the virulence of SARS-CoV-2 appears to be weakening over time, and that newly infected individuals are more likely to be asymptomatic and have a lower viral load than the cases seen earlier in the outbreak.

What does all of this tell us? It tells us there’s no reason to panic simply because the number of positive tests are on the rise. Remember, the more people you test using a PCR test that is set to an excessive cycle threshold, the more false positives you’ll get.

As explained in “Asymptomatic ‘Casedemic’ Is a Perpetuation of Needless Fear,” by using an excessive cycle threshold that amplifies the viral RNA to the point that it detects inactive (noninfectious) particles is at the heart of this so-called pandemic. It’s what keeps the pandemic narrative going, when in fact it’s long since over.

CDC Uses Questionable Sources to Counter China Study

Interestingly, the same day the China study came out, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention updated its guidance9,10 on mask wearing, claiming asymptomatic people account for more than half of all transmissions. Where did they get that from?

The two references listed as support for that claim include a study11 from July 2020, and CDC data that haven’t even been published yet.12 It just says it was “submitted” for publication sometime in 2020, therefore, we are unable to provide any source link. The CDC makes no mention of the China study, which included nearly 10 million individuals.

CNN, which reported the CDC’s update, parroting the idea that asymptomatic spread is why it’s so important to wear a mask, also made no mention of the landmark study from China. Curious, don’t you think? It’s almost as though the CDC doesn’t want us to know we have nothing to fear from healthy people.

Read more at Mercola.com…

READ MORE COVID NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire COVID Files

PLEASE HELP SUPPORT OUR WINTER FUNDRAISING DRIVE HERE