Global peer review finds 10 FATAL FLAWS in the main test for Covid and is demanding it’s urgently axed

A peer review of the paper on which most Covid testing is based has comprehensively debunked the science behind it, finding major flaws. They conclude it’s utterly unsuitable as a means for diagnosis – and the fall-out is immense.

Last week, I reported on a landmark ruling from Portugal, where a court had ruled against a governmental health authority that had illegally confined four people to a hotel this summer. They had done so because one of the people had tested positive for Covid in a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test – but the court had found the test fundamentally flawed and basically inadmissible.

Now the PCR testing supremacy under which we all now live has received another crushing blow. A peer review from a group of 22 international experts has found 10 “major flaws” in the main protocol for such tests. The report systematically dismantles the original study, called the Corman-Drosten paper, which described a protocol for applying the PCR technique to detecting Covid.

The Corman-Drosten paper was published on January, 23, 2020, just a day after being submitted, which would make any peer review process that took place possibly the shortest in history. What is important about it is that the protocol it describes is used in around 70 percent of Covid kits worldwide. It’s cheap, fast – and absolutely useless.

ALSO ON RT.COMLandmark legal ruling finds that Covid tests are not fit for purpose. So what do the MSM do? They ignore it

The 10 deadly sins

Among the fatal flaws that totally invalidate the PCR testing protocol are that the test:

  • 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

Oh dear. One wonders whether anything at all was correct in the paper. But wait – it gets worse. As has been noted previously, no threshold for positivity was ever identified. This is why labs have been running 40 cycles, almost guaranteeing a large number of false positives – up to 97 percent, according to some studies.

The cherry on top, though, is that among the authors of the original paper themselves, at least four have severe conflicts of interest. Two of them are members of the editorial board of Eurosurveillance, the sinisterly named journal that published the paper. And at least three of them are on the payroll of the first companies to perform PCR testing!…

https://www.rt.com/op-ed/508383-fatal-flaws-covid-test/

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.