If the PCR Test was so unreliable, how can we be sure Covid-19 ever existed?

The invasive swabs were never a trustworthy diagnostic tool, yet formed the basis of the 'case-demic' that lead to the roll-out of the Covid-19 'vaccination' programme and its deadly outcome...

Let’s cut straight to the chase. Does Covid-19 exist? Is there anyone out there who can prove the mystery illness with the 99.97% survival rate was ever really a thing? Or was it just the flu?  You know, the seasonal detox with the same symptoms that just happened to disappear around the same time Covid hit centre stage. Don’t you find it a little peculiar that the flu just upped and vanished and the thing with the same symptoms took its place, with the same mortality rate? Let’s discount those deaths encouraged by a little Remdesivir and Midazolam to keep the fear porn cases greased on da telly, followed by the spike in deaths after the ‘safe and effective’ Covid ‘vaccine’ rollout.

Odd, isn’t it? Or maybe just another one of those weird coincidences that just keep on coinciding. No-one seems to notice either. Weirder still.

Is it just me or isn’t it just a little funny that the PCR test could never actually detect Covid-19? So what was it actually producing apart from a whole heap of money for the venal and the vapid? Just cold and flu apparently.

Look at this Freedom of Information response to a Mr Howard Hughes from University College Dublin, shared on Twitter. It’s rather telling. 

Isn’t it interesting? Here’s the bit that caught my attention:

You requested the following: “as the named laboratory for my daughter’s  PCR test, please provide to us the signed, documented and verified studies for the causative agent of Covid-19”.

Having considered the provisions of the Acts, I have decided to deny access to the requested records on the grounds that the records to not exist.

Well that couldn’t be clearer. Let’s see what other labs had to say on the matter.

On the March 13, 2022, Wion (World Is One News) News reported: 

British Scientist says flawed PCR tests mistook common colds, flu for Covid-19

Professor Francois Balloux, director of University College London’s Genetics Institute told the Indian multinational, English language, news channel:

“Many people may not have been infectious, despite getting a positive test”. 

Another professor is quoted in the piece, Alan McNally, a University of Birmingham microbiologist:

“Why did we need expensive PCRs? The test results basically became meaningless”.

So what was it all about then, this Covid pandemic? How can we prove it even existed? Why did I have to get the toxic carcinogen ethylene oxide swirled up the back of my nose, three times, just to board a plane to visit my family in Ireland, even though I was perfectly healthy?

Something is amiss here. Even the FDA conceded the Covid PCR test was developed without isolated Covid samples for test calibration. So what was it testing for if not for the mysterious Covid-19?

A document released by the US Food and Drug Administration openly admits that the PCR test was developed with genetic material from the common cold virus and not the elusive Boogieman itself. Does anybody find that a little strange? Is anyone paying attention? Does anyone care?

Page 39 reads:

Since no quantified virus isolates of the 2019-nCoV are currently available, assays designed for detection of the 2019-nCoV RNA were tested with characterized stocks of in vitro transcribed full length RNA”.

In other words it was synthetically produced.

In July 2021, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention announced it was discontinuing use of the PCR test by the end of the year in the US. The original test was officially called CDC 2019-nCov Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel and was the first Covid-19 test to receive emergency use authorisation from the FDA.

Note emergency use authorisation basically means the usual standards don’t apply because, hey, it’s an emergency, apparently. Of course the fact checkers were quick to shut down queries that the test could only detect cold and flu, except they couldn’t produce any hard evidence to the contrary. Those Big Pharma funded checkers claimed proudly, the new, replacement PCR test could generate results for SARS-CoV-2, influenza A, and influenza B at the same time. Not exactly reassuring. 

In December 2021, let’s not forget, former vice president of Pfizer, Dr Mike Yeadon, along with a team of lawyers, a police officer and activists submitted an official complaint to the International Criminal Court at the Hague calling out this global medical scam as a crime against humanity. The ICC acknowledged the case and attributed the following reference number OTP-CR-473/21.

For the purposes of this article, let’s just focus on the PCR test which the team said was an untrustworthy diagnostic tool and went beyond the recommended cycles for detection of the mystery virus. In other words, if you run the cycles high enough, you’ll find whatever you want. 

It’s exactly what Dr Kary Mullis, the Noble Prize winning inventor of the PCR test warned us against before his untimely death on August 7, 2019, just before the ‘pandemic’ kicked off. What would Dr Mullis have said about Ireland running the cycles at 45? As we were soon to find out, anything over a cycle count threshold of 24-25 (Ct) is just cell junk with a 97% false positive rate.

Dr Mullis was vocal in his criticism of Dr Anthony Fauci who served as the Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) from 1984 to 2022, and the Chief Medical Advisor to the President from 2021 to 2022.

“Guys like Fauci get up there and start talking. You know he doesn’t know anything really about anything. And I’d say that to his face. Nothing. The man thinks you can take a blood sample and stick it in an electron microscope and if it’s got a virus in there you’ll know it. He doesn’t understand electron microscopy and he doesn’t understand medicine and he should not be in a position like he’s in. Most of those guys up there on top are just total administrative people and they don’t know anything about what’s going on on the bottom. You know, those guys have got an agenda which is not what we’d like them to have, being that we pay for them to take care of our health in some way. They’ve got a personal kind of agenda. They make up their own rules as they go, they change them when they want to…like Tony Fauci does not mind going on television in front of the people who pay his salary and lie directly into the camera”.

If only Dr Mullis were still alive to give us his thoughts on the misuse of his invention today. Thankfully we have enough recorded evidence to grasp the gravity of the situation. 

German American lawyer Reiner Fuellmich’s Grand Jury investigations into the so-called pandemic also concluded the scam was based on the fraudulent use of the PCR tests. The high cycles were used to generate false positive cases to invoke fear, ushering in the ‘vaccines’ which the Grand Jury describes as “the worst experiment ever performed on mankind” and that “drastic population reduction is among the nefarious goals of those responsible”.

It doesn’t get more serious than that which is why we must keep asking questions about the PCR test, the tool central to driving the ‘case-demic’. Remember the WHO changed the definition of pandemic in 2009 to mean an outbreak that doesn’t necessarily need large numbers of deaths. The fear was fueled by the PCR test, which was never a reliable diagnostic tool, the cycles were too high and the results untrustworthy.

This is a discussion that needs to be held freely, without interference or censorship or vested interests shutting down debate. The media failed in its duty to provide that space. The medical community failed in its duty to investigate the anomalies thoroughly and the government failed in its duty to protect its citizens. It is up to us to keep the pressure on and demand answers to reasonable questions. If the diagnostic tool was so faulty, how can we be sure Covid-19 ever existed?

Your support is greatly appreciated at this important time for independent journalism to hold authority to account and function freely. Thank you. CLICK HERE