On the 12th of Januaray, 2020, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention published a document entitled "CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel".(1) The cover page states clearly it is "Instructions for Use". On the first page the PDF explains the Diagnostic Panel is a "real-time RT-PCR test intended for the qualitative detection of nucleic acid from SARS-CoV-2 in upper and lower respiratory specimens." It is 80 pages long and goes into minute details about what should be done to perform the test correctly.
I will show the authors of this document knew full well the test they gave instructions for was scientifically and medically useless. They carefully noted its defects in the middle of the report under a heading Limitations on pages 40-41. All of this is of no importance, however, when we realize that it is really a political tool.
THE PCR TESTS LOOKS FOR PARTS OF THE SARS-CoV-2 VIRUS
The standard PCR test is set up to look for two different parts of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes Covid-19, the E and RdRp gene.(2) There around 30,000 proteins in the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Here is a picture of where these two genes fit into the total sequence:
The person who supervised the development of the test, Christian Drosten, chose 20-30 of the 30,000 proteins as "typical". One is the Ee-gene, the envelope gene, which exists in many SARS viruses. There is a second primer: RdRp primer which codes an enzyme, and this is typical of SARS viruses as well. In practice most labs only look for the E-gene, which can be done quickly and is not specific to the Wuhan virus. In what follows I will show the only valid result of any PCR test is "these molecules are there" in the specimen. No PCR test can say the SARS-CoV-2 virus has infected the person who gave the specimen.(3)
THE PCR TEST IS LIMITED BY COVID-19 PREVALENCE
The "prevalence" of a disease refers to the percentage of the population being tested which has the disease. On page 40 under "Limitations" we find this:
"Positive and negative predictive values are highly dependent on prevalence. False-negative test results are more likely when prevalence of disease is high. False-positive test results are more likely when prevalence is moderate to low."
The issue of prevalence is a well known issue for any kind of medical testing. If the prevalence of the disease is high in the population, a positive test is more likely to be correct (or a negative test mistaken) since so many people have the disease. If the prevalence of the disease is low in the population, a positive test is more likely to be mistaken since so few people have the disease. This graph from a talk by Dr Wolfgang Wodarg shows the relationship between prevalence and reliability.
There is little doubt the prevalence of Covid-19 is greatest in the winter months. In Dr Wodarg's graph below we can see that the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 in Germany was only above 10% for 7 weeks. Testing at other times would have been "pointless" or "Ungezietes" because the prevalence of Covid-19 infections would have been low.
So what will be the reliability of PCR tests for fragments of the SARS-CoV-2 virus over the summer months? Governments run these PCR tests all year around. They and most of the people who pay attention to the results completely ignore the way the small number of Covid-19 infections in many parts of the year means that their "results" are statistically meaningless.
POSITIVE PCR TEST DOES NOT PROVE THE SUBJECT HAS AN INFECTIOUS VIRUS.
The passage below highlights two different limitations. The first is that even though the swab taken from a person yields a positive PCR test, this does not mean that that person actually has an infectious virus. It is hard to avoid the conclusion that the first 12 words of this sentence on their own completely destroys the reliability of any PCR test.
"Detection of viral RNA may not indicate the presence of infectious virus or that SARS-CoV-2 is the causative agent for clinical symptoms."
When we remember that the CDC is one of the great movers and shakers in world of Covid-19 science, this statement should stop the whole Covid-19 pandemic in its tracks. The fact that it does not just shows clearly THE COVID EMERGENCY IS NOT BASED ON SCIENTIFIC OR MEDICAL RESEARCH. The Emergency is based on POLITICAL DIRECTION BY PEOPLE OUTSIDE THE LEGALLY RECOGNIZED POLITICAL SYSTEMS.
POSITIVE PCR TEST DOES NOT SHOW WHAT CAUSED THE SYMPTOMS OF AN INFECTION
Remember PCR test is not a test for an illness. It looks for two genes which can be part of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, but they can also be parts of other SARS viruses. An infection is usually identified by symptoms like a cough, a cold, hoarseness, a temperature, bronchitis, or a fever. The idea that someone can "have" Covid-19 without an infection and/or symptoms is simply a medical myth. Until the Covid Emergency anyone who said a person could have a viral infection with no symptoms would not have lasted very long in medical school.
If the person who provided the swab for the test actually had an infection and symptoms of Covid-19, the PCR test does not itself prove that the SARS-CoV-2 virus was the cause of the illness. Why is this? No causal connection is shown because there are about 20 upper respiratory illnesses which have the same symptoms. In other words, because the test only identifies two small parts of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, it cannot identify which of the many pathogens has infected the subject of the test. Here a list of pathogens with Covid-19 like symptoms from a document supervised by Mr Drosten himself:
The first five on the list are closely related to SARS-CoV-2: HCoV-HKU1 (Human Coronavirus, identified in Hong Kong), HCoV-OC43, HCoV-NL63 (identified in the Netherlands), HCov-299E, MERS-CoV (Middle Eastern Respiratory Syndrome identified in the Middle East). Next there are 6 different kinds of influenza. Rhinovirus is said to be the usual cause of the common cold. Enterovirus can also cause the common cold. Respiratory syncytial virus can hospitalize infants, cause colds in adults and pneumonia in older people. Parainfluenza viruses can cause croup, bronchiolitus and pneumonia. Metapneumovirus causes lower respiratory infection in young children. Adenovirus can cause mild respiratory infections in young children and can become a life-threatening multi-organ disease in people with a weakened immune system. Human bocavirus can cause lower respiratory tract infections.(3)
After what we have seen, it comes as no surprise that this point is also one of the listed Limitations of the PCR test in the CDC PDF on page 41:
"This test cannot rule out diseases caused by other bacterial or viral pathogens."
Here we see again that the PCR test is MEDICALLY USELESS. If a person comes to a medical facility with symptoms the first task of doctors is to determine what is causing the symptoms. This task is known as differential diagnosis. It involves considering all the things which could be causing the symptoms and then eliminating them one by one. There are in fact tests which can look for up to 20 pathogens in one test. If a doctor wanted to help an infected person they would not give them a PCR test, because it can't help to eliminate any of the possible causes. Instead they might use one of these multiple tests to help them identify the cause.
Simply by looking at the way the standard Covid-19 PCR test works we can see that it has not been designed for any scientific or medical research and no such claims are made for it in instructions: CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel. When used to test a patient, it can tell a doctor NOTHING RELEVANT TO THE TREATMENT OF A PATIENT. Surprising as it may seem, I believe the test was devised not to provide medical information. The people who wrote the Instructions knew it had no medical value. The people behind this test, like Mr Drosten, must have known that its only value was political. The test looks "scientific" to outsiders because it is based on a standard instrument used in medical and scientific research. Like all the other "science" behind the Covid Emergency, it is a fraud. The Covid Emperor Has No Clothes, but only the very brave are prepared to say this publicly.
1. CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel https://www.fda.gov/media/134922/download
2. Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR separator https://www.eurosurveillance.org/content/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.3.2000045
3. Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg's Summary of the Corona Crisis - Session 40: The Great Recall https://odysee.com/@Corona-Ausschuss:3/CA-40---Wodarg:f
4. Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR separator https://www.eurosurveillance.org/content/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.3.2000045