PCR Tests


Verified Member
Aug 15, 2013
monett missouri

I'm not a doctor, I just play one on the internet, but I found this stuff interesting


Bulgarian Pathology Association Though the whole world relies on RT-PCR to "diagnose" Sars-Cov-2 infection, the science is clear: they are not fit for purpose:
From Engelbrecht and Konstantin Demeter

Lockdowns and hygienic measures around the world are based on numbers of cases and mortality rates created by the so-called SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR tests used to identify "positive" patients, whereby "positive" is usually equated with "infected."

But looking closely at the facts, the conclusion is that these PCR tests are meaningless as a diagnostic tool to determine an alleged infection by a supposedly new virus called SARS-CoV-2.

PCR (Polymerase Chain Reaction) tests are being used in some locations to detect COV 19 "positivity." The intended use of the PCR was, and still is, to apply it as a manufacturing technique, being able to replicate DNA sequences millions and billions of times, and not as a diagnostic tool to detect viruses.

Here's PCR in a nutshell when used to reconstruct dna (from Salon dot com): "Put the gene you want to look at in a pipette with a little liquid. Heat it up and the double-stranded helix breaks apart. Each string of chemical beads drifts off by itself. Throw in a large and random assortment of loose A's, T's, C's and G's, and the individual chemical beads will seek out their pairs on the single strands. Once every chemical letter on each original strand has a new partner bead (the same-letter partner it always has because of chemical exclusivity), you cool down the mixture and the new rows of partner beads anneal into strands of their own, conveniently providing a new half to each original strand.

"The helix reforms and -- voila`! -- you've made two exact copies of the one gene you started with. Heat these two up and you have four separate strands. Throw in more loose chemical letters, let them pair up and you have four identical genes. Repeat this process 30 times and you have more than a billion copies of that one piece of DNA you started with -- cartloads of it in lab terms."

The idea is to produce enough of something to make testing or use of it possible when the needed amount of it is initially lacking. That's the genius of it in dna research, but the devil in virus testing. It allows "positive" results when there is a smaller "viral load" than would ordinarily need to be present to consider a person infected. (It also seems to produce 20% false negatives??)

Kary Mullis received the Nobel Prize for inventing the PCR test. oikos. org: "Nightline ran a two-part series, the first on Kary Mullis, the second on the HIV debate. Mullis was hired by ABC for a two-week period, to act as their scientific consultant and direct them to sources.

"The show was superb, and represented a historic turning point, possibly even the end of the seven-year media blackout on the HIV debate. But it still didn't fulfill Mullis' ultimate fantasy. "What ABC needs to do," says Mullis, "is talk to [Chairman of the National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) Dr. Anthony] Fauci and [Dr. Robert] Gallo [one of the discoverers of HIV] and show that they're assholes, which I could do in ten minutes."

"But, I [Celia Farber, Spin Magazine] point out, Gallo will refuse to discuss the HIV debate, just as he's always done."

"I know he will," Mullis shoots back, anger rising in his voice. "But you know what? I would be willing to chase the little bastard from his car to his office and say, 'This is Kary Mullis trying to ask you a goddamn simple question,' and let the cameras follow. If people think I'm a crazy person, that's okay. But here's a Nobel Prize-winner trying to ask a simple question from those who spent $22 billion and killed 100,000 people. It has to be on TV. It's a visual thing. I'm not unwilling to do something like that."

Mullis died last year. Dammit!