{"id":63052,"date":"2020-12-19T01:18:50","date_gmt":"2020-12-19T07:18:50","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/?p=63052"},"modified":"2020-12-19T01:18:50","modified_gmt":"2020-12-19T07:18:50","slug":"63052","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/?p=63052","title":{"rendered":""},"content":{"rendered":"

COVID-19 Testing Scandal Deepens<\/a><\/p>\n

Positive reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests have been used as the justification for keeping large portions of the world locked down for the past nine months. Not reliable hospitalization or death rates; just positive PCR test numbers \u2014 a large portion of which are from people who have no symptoms of actual illness \u2014 are the triggers behind the shutdowns.<\/p>\n

Experts are now coming forward in growing numbers denouncing mass PCR testing as foolhardy and nonsensical if not outright criminal. Why? Because we\u2019re now finding that PCR tests rarely tell us anything truly useful, at least not when they\u2019re used as they have been so far.<\/p>\n

Why PCR Tests Are the Wrong Tool to Assess Pandemic Threat<\/h2>\n

<\/p>\n

We now know that PCR tests:<\/p>\n

\n

1.<\/span>Cannot distinguish between \u201clive\u201d viruses and inactive (noninfectious) viral particles and therefore cannot be used as a diagnostic tool \u2014 For this reason, it is grossly misleading to refer to a positive test as a \u201cCOVID-19 case.\u201d<\/p>\n

As explained by Dr. Lee Merritt in her August 2020 Doctors for Disaster Preparedness1<\/span><\/sup>\u00a0lecture, featured in \u201cHow Medical Technocracy Made the Plandemic Possible<\/a>,\u201d media and public health officials appear to have purposefully conflated \u201ccases\u201d or positive tests with the actual illness.<\/p>\n

Medically speaking, a \u201ccase\u201d refers to a sick person. It never ever referred to someone who had no symptoms of illness. Now all of a sudden, this well-established medical term, \u201ccase,\u201d has been arbitrarily redefined to mean someone who tested positive for the presence of noninfectious viral RNA. As noted by Merritt, \u201cThat is not epidemiology. That\u2019s fraud.\u201d<\/p>\n

2.<\/span>Cannot confirm that 2019-nCoV is the causative agent for clinical symptoms as the test cannot rule out diseases caused by other bacterial or viral pathogens.<\/p>\n

3.<\/span>Have not been established for monitoring the treatment of 2019-nCoV infection.<\/p>\n

4.<\/span>Have exceptionally high false result rates \u2014 The higher the cycle threshold (CT) \u2014 i.e., the number of amplification cycles used to detect RNA particles \u2014 the greater the chance of a false positive.<\/p>\n

While any CT over 35 is deemed scientifically unjustifiable,2<\/span>,<\/sup>3<\/span>,<\/sup>4<\/span><\/sup>\u00a0the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommend running PCR tests at a CT of 40.5<\/span><\/sup><\/p>\n

Drosten tests and tests recommended by the World Health Organization are set to a CT of 45. These excessively high CTs guarantee the appearance of widespread (pandemic) infection when infection rates are in fact low.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

The CT Is the Key to the Pandemic<\/h2>\n

Many if not most laboratories amplify the RNA collected far too many times, which results in healthy people testing \u201cpositive\u201d for SARS-CoV-2 infection and being ordered to take off work and self-isolate for two weeks.<\/p>\n

To optimize accuracy and avoid imposing unnecessary hardship on healthy people, PCR tests must be run at far fewer cycles than the 40 to 45 CTs currently recommended.<\/p>\n