Month after month, week after week, day after day, the big news in the mainstream media “news” is the rising number of COVID cases.
Absent from coverage is the main reason cases are spiking: fearful millions are lining up, waiting hours to get tested… or being forced to by their employers and/or governments. As we again note, the recovery rate from the virus is 99.8 percent, and most cases are mild… and the tests are inaccurate.
In our 1 December Trends Journal, we cited the reporting of Peter Andrews, a medical journalist based in London, who wrote about a Portuguese court case won by defendants forced into quarantine. The case was based on the judge’s determination that the widely used COVID-19 PCR test used to indicate levels of infection was flawed. Thus, the test result data was thrown out as inadmissible evidence.
This past week, Mr. Andrews reported on a new study conducted by 22 respected experts revealing “10 major flaws” with the PCR test. The study was conducted by a consortium of molecular geneticists, immunologists, biochemists, and microbiologists from Europe, Japan, and the United States.
This peer-reviewed report was published on 27 November and is titled, “External peer review of the RTPCR test to detect SARS-CoV-2 reveals 10 major scientific flaws at the molecular and methodological level: consequences for false-positive results.”
The report carefully analyzed a previous study, called the Corman-Drosten paper, published on 23 January, which was quickly adopted as the reason to make the PCR test what the CDC referred to as the “Gold Standard.”
After coming under the scrutiny of the consortium of medical experts issuing this new report, the PCR “Gold Standard” test can be seen more accurately as the “Lead Weight Standard.”
Below is an excerpt from the report on just how flawed the original paper promoting the PCR test was:
“Neither the presented test nor the manuscript itself fulfils the requirements for an acceptable scientific publication. Further, serious conflicts of interest of the authors are not mentioned. Finally, the very short timescale between submission and acceptance of the publication (24 hours) signifies that a systematic peer review process was either not performed here, or of problematic poor quality. We provide compelling evidence of several scientific inadequacies, errors and flaws.”
As Mr. Andrews gleans from the report, the major weaknesses of the PCR test include that it:
- “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.”
In addition, three of the authors of the original paper used to promote the PCR test had a major conflict of interest: “At least three of them are on the payroll of the first companies to perform PCR testing.”
Given the central role the PCR test has played in determining levels of infection worldwide, Andrews concludes:
“It is difficult to overstate the implications of this revelation. Every single thing about the COVID-19 orthodoxy relies on ‘case numbers,’ which are largely the results of the now widespread PCR tests. If their results are essentially meaningless, then everything we are being told – and ordered to do by increasingly dictatorial governments – is likely to be incorrect.”
PUBLISHER’S NOTE: Not only is this information barely reported by the mainstream media, when it is, they distort it so it is perceived as inaccurate or a conspiracy theory.
Or, as it is happening to myself, any COVID analysis that contradicts the mainstream pitch is being censored.
Yesterday, I received this warning from YouTube for my “Trends in The News” video, titled, “Corona Hysteria: Presstitutes and Politicians Killing Economy” posted on their channel:
“Hi Gerald Celente,
We wanted to let you know our team reviewed your content, and we think it violates our medical misinformation policy. We know you may not have realized this was a violation of our policies, so we’re not applying a strike to your channel. However, we have removed the following content from YouTube:
Video: Corona Hysteria: Presstitutes and Politicians Killing Economy
We realize this may be disappointing news, but it’s our job to make sure that YouTube is a safe place for all. If you think we’ve made a mistake, you can appeal this decision.
What our policy says
YouTube doesn’t allow content that explicitly disputes the efficacy of local health authorities’ or World Health Organization (WHO) guidance on social distancing and self isolation that may lead people to act against that guidance.”
Despite my quoting factual scientific data, the superior medical experts at YouTube “think it violates [their] medical misinformation policy.”
“Think”? How about providing data to prove it was misinformation. “We think” is not a legal or professional substitute for “we know.”
Furthermore, much of my reporting quotes WHO data.
Thus, in the new ABnormal world of Slavelandia, you are not free to Think for Yourself, and you must obey what the “authorities” dictate.