'Covid' Casedemic: The Criminal Misuse of PCR
Two book excerpts documenting the fraudulent use of the PCR process
Source: Global Research
Creating Invisible Enemies – Timeline to Launch of the COVID-19 Deception
By Mark Keenan
February 20, 2024
In this article I provide extracts from my book No Worries No Virus. The book details:
comprehensive evidence of the Covid-19 hoax;
technical analysis and evidence showing that a Covid-19 virus causing disease simply does not exist (no evidence of being isolated, ever);
evidence the pandemic situation was planned with a purpose;
analysis indicating the Covid-19 death numbers are fraudulent;
flawed modelling and false case numbers used to justify world lockdown;
the fraudulent Covid-19 PCR test used to create false case numbers;
the work of Dr Stefan Lanka and other experts demonstrating that pathogenic viruses causing disease do not exist – virology took a wrong turn
relevant world events between 1913 to 2019 that help one gain a deeper realisation of the agenda behind the Covid-19 world lockdown;
analysis of the World Economic Forum technocratic reset agenda.
Definition of a Pandemic Was Changed by the WHO – It’s a Pandemic Even if No One Dies
A crucial step in implementing the Covid-19 pandemic hoax was that the definition of a pandemic needed to be significantly changed prior to Covid-19. The WHO advisory group needed to be able to declare a pandemic even when there was not an enormous number of deaths and illnesses obvious in the community. They did this 14 years ago, just prior to the swine flu pandemic hoax by removing the requirement “for there to be enormous numbers of deaths and illnesses to an infectious agent”. The new definition simply states “a global pandemic can be declared when there are more cases of that disease than normal”. The reason for this drastic change of definition was never explained. In this new definition, any flu could be quickly turned into a pandemic. Thus, a pandemic could now be declared even if no one was dying from the disease.
Remember the 2009/2010 Swine Flu Fraud – A Trial Run for the 2020 Covid-19 Hoax
The WHO had persuaded countries, including Germany and Ireland, to agree to purchase vaccines if a pandemic was declared. With this new pandemic definition in place, the WHO, which is an organisation closely linked with the vaccine companies, declared the swine flu pandemic in 2009 with absolutely no evidence. The result was that swine flu vaccines were sold to governments on the basis of ‘sleeping’ contracts in which governments had agreed to purchase vaccines in the event of a declared pandemic. However, the swine was by no means the deadly killer virus that the pharmaceutical corporations and the WHO stated it was. They predicted millions of deaths ‘if’ people didn’t get vaccinated, but in reality, there were hardly any deaths from swine flu at all, if any. Sound familiar?
In Germany, the virologist, Mr. Drosten, was one of those creating panic in the population, repeatedly stating over and over again that the swine flu would kill millions of people. This corporate hoax was exposed by Dr Wolfgang Wodarg, who was a member of the German Bundestag.
Most of the German people rejected the swine flu vaccine and millions of doses of the vaccine had to be destroyed. In 2010, the Irish government was also obliged to purchase several million vaccine doses for the H1N1 swine flu.
The so-called ‘expert advisors’ that advised the governments were later exposed. It appears they had received large ‘kickbacks’ from the swine flu vaccine manufacturers[1]. This appears to have been a clear case of rigged market fraud producing billions of dollars of profits for pharmaceutical companies, whilst the taxpayers of these countries footed the bill. However, no-one was held to account. Could this have been a trial run for the 2020 Covid-19 hoax?
The Covid-19 pandemic appears to have been a repeat of this formula on a worldwide scale to create a rigged market worth potentially trillions of dollars via the sale of over 50 billion vaccines; and to create fear and social chaos. This facilitated increased government control via so-called health measures including mass vaccination.
Note also that in Germany the Covid-19 pandemic appeared to have been declared based on one opinion – the same person as in the swine flu hoax. In March, 2020, the German Bundestag announced an Epidemic Situation of National Importance, and, based on this announcement, all essential constitutional rights were suspended for an unforeseeable time. It appears that this government decision was based on only a single opinion, i.e., that of Mr. Drosten, and was, therefore, a violation of the principle of listening to both sides before making a decision. It appears that Mr. Drosten is the same person whose scare-mongering tactics were central to the swine flu hoax/corporate scam 12 years earlier.
Creating Invisible Enemies – ‘Viruses’ Become Enemies of the World’s Governments
After the so-called ‘fall of communism’ in The Soviet Union in 1990, the NATO powers had no more enemies left to fight. However, the military-industrial complex of mega-corporations needed countries to have ‘enemies’ so that heightened tensions and even wars might take place. The obvious outcome of this ratcheting up of geopolitical tensions invariably leads to vast arms sales and increased military budgets being justified. Communism in The Soviet Union was to be replaced by a more capitalist system, and the elites realised that they were running out of enemies that would justify vast government expenditure on military contracts.
[Aside: The deeper story of the connection between western capitalist banks and communism in Russia is referred to in my book Transcending the Climate Change Deception Toward Real Sustainability. Both capitalism and communism have been, in reality, just tools used by a group of financialists that control world banking (commonly referred to as globalists) to achieve their plans of controlling the world’s wealth and resources.]
Enemies have often been fabricated or ‘hyped-up’ in order to create fear, anger, and angst amongst the general population, thereby justifying vast amounts of taxpayer’s money/government funding being spent on military-industrial projects.
“I’m running out of Demons” – Colin Powell, US Secretary of State, while attempting to justify a $300 billion military in the post-cold-war era
The owners of the mega-banks and mega-corporations of the military industrial complex are the real winners of every war as wars create vast debt and require huge amounts of industrial production. By 1990 it was time to ‘create’ more enemies. These enemies were to be terrorists and invisible viruses. A crisis has to be created that enables, or gives an excuse, for the government puppets to do what has been ‘advised’ by international institutions of the unelected world government, such as NATO, the UN, the WEF, and the WHO.
After the terrible events of 911, which was clearly a controlled demolition, see the videos in this article, the event appears to have been used as an excuse to launch a ‘war on terror’ to find ‘invisible terrorists’.
My research indicates that the terrible events of 911 were pre-planned as a pre-text for implementing geo-political plans that had been drawn up years beforehand, including the invasion of seven countries in the middle-east. Amidst the ongoing debate about who was responsible for 911, I note that in an interview Dr Alan Sabrowsky, Director of Studies at the US Army War College, 2010, described with astonishing candor intriguing facts on the implication of Israel in 9/11 events that are by and large unheard of in mainstream media[2].
“It is 100% certain that 911 was a Mossad (Israeli intelligence) operation… all of them (the buildings) were wired for demolition… 911 has led directly to 60,000 Americans dead and wounded, God knows how many hundreds of thousands of people in other countries we have killed or wounded or made homeless, if Americans ever know that Israel did this they are going to scrub them off the earth… the Zionists are playing this as truly an all or nothing exercise…” – Dr Alan Sabrowsky, Director of Studies, US Army War College, 2010
“Every time we do something you tell me America will do this and do that, let me tell you… We, the Jewish people, control America, and the Americans know it” – Israeli Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon
The US then spent years supposedly chasing Osama Bin Laden, who, the world was told, was a terrorist hiding in a cave somewhere. In the US, ‘The Patriot Act’ was passed in which people’s freedoms and rights of privacy were encroached upon, sound familiar? You may recall also that there were months of corporate media propaganda priming the world population for a US invasion of Iraq. During that time, the media had spent months telling the world that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. However, it was later proved that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction at all. The invasion of Iraq had been justified by that lie.
The next war was to be germ warfare against an invisible bio-terror, i.e., viruses.
My research indicates that simulation games/pandemic exercises took place from 1999 to 2005, and the Rockefeller ‘Lockstep’ scenario, a strategy for totalitarian control during a pandemic, was published in 2010. The people participating in these simulation games/pandemic exercises included senior government officials, leading journalists, high-ranking members of the bio-pharmaceutical industry, the WHO, etc., mass vaccinations were a regular part of these simulation games.
According to researcher Paul Schreyer, the exercises were named ‘Dark Winter’ (2001), ‘Global Mercury’ (2003), ‘Atlantic Storm’ (2005), ‘Clade X’ (2018), and the infamous ‘Event 201’ (2019)[3]. The pandemic preparedness plans implemented after the so-called real Covid-19 pandemic in 2020 had been simulated and discussed for about 20 years. These previous simulations contained language, such as:
“The question is how and to what extent we enforce these things. How much violence do you use to keep people in their homes?… In the event of a pandemic basic civil rights, such as the right of assembly or freedom of movement could no longer be taken for granted”.
Schreyer describes that, in 1998, a chapter titled ‘Twenty First Century Germ Warfare’, written by Homeland Security’s Biodefense Programs Director appeared in a Pentagon internal strategy paper, called ‘Battlefield of the Future: 21st Century Warfare Issues’.
That same year, the Center for Civilian Bio-Defense was founded, it is now named the Center for Health Security at Johns Hopkins University. So, now the US had a centre for ‘combatting the invisible enemy’, i.e., germs, and germs have been ‘re-packaged’ as a national bio-security threat. Note that that this centre was also a partner of the WEF event 201 pandemic simulation games that took place twenty years later in 2019.
Pandemic Exercises Since 1999 – Timeline to Covid-19 Launch
It is described by Paul Schreyer that pandemic simulation symposiums were held in 1999 and 2000, sponsored by the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, the US Department of Health and Human Services, and the Infectious Diseases Society of America. In 2002, various governments launched initiatives to improve health security worldwide. These initiatives included testing for a flu pandemic and international level pandemic simulations. In 2003, the pandemic simulation ‘Global Mercury’ took place. This was a command-post exercise involving Global Health Security Agenda (GHSAG) nations. This group consisted of more than 70 countries, international and non-government organizations, private sector companies that had come together to combat global health threats posed by infectious diseases, as well as the WHO and the European Commission. The simulation included practising getting information to the media and eliminating all contrary information via censorship and ‘information flood’ strategies. In 2005, the pandemic simulation ‘Atlantic Storm’ took place. In this one, Madelaine Albright, played the US President.
It appears that all these simulation exercises were also about the removal of human rights, mass vaccination, and authoritarian politics. In 2009, the aforementioned so-called ‘swine flu pandemic’, a trial run for Covid, was launched in the real world. In 2010, the Rockefeller ‘Scenarios for the Future’ document was published, which includes the infamous ‘Lockstep’ scenario.
In 2017, health ministers from the G20 countries met for the first time ever in Berlin and exercised a pandemic scenario of a respiratory virus. In this same year, the International Advisory Board on Global Health was founded, including members from the Gates Foundation and Wellcome Trust. In 2018, another pandemic scenario took place. The title of this one was: ‘High ranking elitist sect develop virus to reduce world’s population’.
In October 2019, just 3 months before the so-called real pandemic, the infamous WEF Event 201 pandemic simulation exercise took place, this was a high-level coronavirus simulation exercise, and participants included high-level representatives from the Gates Foundation, The UN Foundation, the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, the vaccine manufacturer Johnson and Johnson, Edelman, major airline corporations, and a former Deputy Director of the CIA.
All these simulations were funded by ultra-rich foundations. Event 201 was attended by top representatives of governments and the ultra-rich mega-corporations of the world. This was their final practice run. Such people are the corporate arms and legs of the so-called elites.
Rockefeller Foundation Rehearsal and ‘Lockstep’ Strategy for Totalitarian Control
A document by the Rockefeller Foundation over a decade ago predicts, in detail, everything that has happened during Covid-19. It predicted the worldwide pandemic, worldwide lockdown, the collapse of the world economy, and the enforcement of authoritarian control. The document is titled ‘Scenario for the Future of Technology and International Development’.
That says it all: ‘a scenario for the future’. It has a chapter called ‘Lockstep’, in which a global pandemic is reported as if it had happened in the past, but which is obviously intended as a rehearsal of a future ‘means to control the population’. The Rockefeller document defines ‘Lockstep’ as:
“A world of tighter top-down government control and more authoritarian leadership”
The ‘Scenario for the Future’ compares two different responses to their predicted pandemic: the US only ‘strongly discouraged’ people from flying, while China enforced mandatory quarantine for all citizens. The US response is accused of being a health danger, while the enforcement of a lock-down is praised. The Lockstep document came to the conclusion that the only way to mitigate a worldwide pandemic was by using China’s hardcore police state lockdown as the model worldwide.
Then in March 2020, after the Covid-19 pandemic was ‘declared’ in real-life, nearly every government implemented almost the exact same plans, at the exact same time, as had been described in detail in the Rockefeller ‘Lockstep’ strategy. This is obviously not by chance or coincidence. The document describes the implementation of totalitarian controls – see a relevant excerpt below:
“The Chinese government’s quick imposition and enforcement of mandatory quarantine for all citizens, as well as its instant and near-hermetic sealing off of all borders, saved millions of lives, stopping the spread of the virus far earlier than in other countries and enabling a swifter post-pandemic recovery… During the pandemic, national leaders around the world flexed their authority and imposed airtight rules and restrictions, from the mandatory wearing of face masks to body-temperature checks at the entries to communal spaces like train stations and supermarkets.”
Obviously, the flexing of authority is the desired response. However, it gets worse, according to this ‘Scenario of the Future’:
“Even after the pandemic faded, this more authoritarian control and oversight of citizens and their activities stuck and even intensified…. In developed countries, this heightened oversight took many forms: biometric IDs for all citizens, for example, and tighter regulation of key industries whose stability was deemed vital to national interests.”
Rockefeller Handbook on Implementing Authoritarian Control During a Pandemic
In the above Rockefeller Foundation scenario, a global pandemic must result in increased control, where people happily surrender their freedom, in order to feel safe again. That was step one. The Rockefeller Foundation then came forward with step two, which was a handbook on how to implement new authoritarian control systems during a pandemic. This handbook is titled ‘National Covid-19 Testing Action Plan – Pragmatic steps to re-open our workplaces and our communities’. The book recommends that all the required control mechanisms and networks are to be in place before the world society is allowed to open up again.
The overall plan becomes clear when you combine the two Rockefeller documents. Firstly, they declare a worldwide pandemic with a coronavirus and conclude what it should lead to, namely, a whole new police-state of authoritarian control based on the Chinese model. Secondly, they give practical recommendations on how to apply this control system. The following are illustrations and quotes from their handbook on authoritarian control:
‘Digital apps and privacy-protected tracking software should be widely used to enable more complete contact tracking…. In order to fully control the Covid-19 epidemic, we need to test the majority of the population on a weekly basis.’
In their ‘Scenario of the Future’, the entire world population should get a digital ID that indicates who has received all the vaccines. Those people without sufficient vaccinations would be denied access to schools, concerts, restaurants, churches, public transport, etc. When the Covid-19 pandemic was declared the above authoritarianism is exactly what seemingly almost all governments called for and implemented.
Why Did Almost All Governments Respond in Unison to the Pandemic in the Exact Same Way?
Why did almost all governments worldwide comply and respond to the pandemic in almost the exact same way and with almost the exact same plans, at the exact same time, as had been described in detail in the Rockefeller ‘Lockstep’ strategy. The entire world was placed into ‘lockdown’, contact tracing was rapidly deployed, and plans for mass vaccination were unleashed everywhere. It was as if all governments of the world had been hypnotised to move in ‘lockstep’ by a stage hypnotist. Even a flock of sheep being herded by a sheep dog would not have moved in such a uniform fashion.
After the pandemic was declared ‘pandemic preparedness plans’ had been put into action. These plans were to be activated in all the WHO member countries when a pandemic was declared. The plans were initially crafted by corporate partners of the WHO, including the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Word Bank, and the International Monetary Fund. The corporate-mass-media played their corrupt part by psychologically priming the populations to hope for mass vaccination to save themselves from supposed impending death.
Various doctors and scientists were pointing out that the Covid PCR test was bogus, but these professionals were not given an input into public policy, nor were they given a platform on corporate and government media channels, and some even lost their jobs. Judy Wilyman, an expert who has carried out PhD research on government rationales for vaccination policy, sums up the situation, as follows:
“The WHO is no longer using objective scientific information in the design of global health policies that all member countries have signed up to under the international health regulations. National governments have lost their sovereignty by signing up to these corporations and this is putting the human race at serious risk to their health and being able to be controlled and surveilled by the government. “ —Judy Wilyman PhD
Worldwide Contact Tracing Was Not to Control a Virus, It Was an Attempt to Control Humanity
Bill Gates has also talked about the utilisation of a digital ID to control people, asserting that only people who have taken the Covid-19 vaccines should be allowed to travel, go to school, attend meetings, and go to work[4]. Development programs for linking vaccines to digital ID’s had already been launched[5], and Gates already has a patent on the technology, called WO2020-060606, that enables the tracing of an individual’s body anywhere[6]. Furthermore, Gates had wanted to set up a worldwide monitoring network, which will track everyone who has come into contact with Covid-19[7].
Given the above information it is not surprising that contact tracking and tracing was rapidly introduced after the pandemic was declared, despite the numerous warnings about the threat of contact tracing to human freedom and privacy. In essence, those people aware of the fake pandemic that would not consent to this tracking and tracing, were in a state of conflict with their own governments, their own national institutions, and with almost all of the media.
Bio-metric Technology to Monitor the World Population
Big-tech and big-pharma want all of us connected to worldwide networks that can monitor us constantly. They would like to dictate to us whether we can move freely or not, during so-called pandemics. In 2015, Richard Rothschild patented a method that involves the use of bio-metric technology to transmit a person’s health information to ‘the cloud’, where the data is analysed to indicate whether the person is suffering from a virus, such as so-called Covid-19, see the accompanying screenshot[8].
Why did Richard Rothschild, who is a lawyer, want to do this? When all this data is in ‘the cloud’, it can be used by the authorities to monitor and control us. In ‘the cloud’, the data is fed to artificial intelligence computer algorithms. The cloud technology is owned and controlled by big-tech, who we know are already involved in worldwide public-private partnerships with governments, for example, via the mechanisms of the WHO, the WEF, and various foundations. If contact tracing is established long-term, the worldwide monitoring of the population becomes entirely possible. This appears to be the future that these mega-narcissists have attempted to implement.
Coronavirus Pandemic Simulation 3 Months Before the Real Coronavirus Pandemic
Three months before the actual coronavirus pandemic was proclaimed by the WHO, Bill Gates, in partnership with the WEF and the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, organized an event in New York City, called Event 201.
The event was a ‘Coronavirus pandemic simulation exercise’ and contained the slogan “We need to prepare for the event that becomes a pandemic”. Bill Gates organized a practice event for a worldwide coronavirus pandemic, right before the worldwide coronavirus pandemic happened. This was not a coincidence, the Event 201 simulation was in reality planning, practicing, and preparation for the ‘actual’ coronavirus pandemic. The participants in the simulation event include some of the same people that became deeply involved in fighting the so-called real pandemic and profiteering from it, as well. The following quotes are from the Event 201 Coronavirus pandemic simulation:
“we are at the start of what appears will be a severe pandemic and there are problems emerging that can only be solved by global business and governments working together”
– Tom Ingelsby, Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security
“public health agencies have issued travel advisories while some countries have banned travel from the worst affected areas… Countries are reacting in different ways as to how best to manage the overwhelming amount of dis- and mis-information circulating over the internet, in some cases limited internet shutdowns are being implemented”
– Coronavirus pandemic news broadcast simulation
“governments need to be willing to do things that are out of their historical perspective – it’s really a war footing that we need to be on”
– Stephen Redd, U.S. Centers for Disease Control
“the social media platforms have to step forward… partnering with the scientific and health communities to counterweight if not flood the zone of… information”
– Matthew Harrington, Edelman
“a step up on the part of the governments on enforcement actions against fake news”
– Lavan Thiru, Monetary Authority of Singapore
Shortly after this Coronavirus pandemic simulation, Bill Gates expressed his excitement about selling vaccines in the next year in the following tweet displayed below. In summary, the world’s no. 1 vaccine dealer guaranteed a global Coronavirus pandemic to occur in the next few years. He then organised a simulation for an imminent Coronavirus pandemic, stating that vaccines will be the only solution. Subsequently, he then tweets how excited he is about selling vaccines in the next year. About two months after that, the Covid-19 pandemic breaks out. As evidenced in my book No Worries No Virus the Covid case numbers were false as they were based on the bogus PCR test. Gates then proclaims that the only solution for humanity is to buy his vaccines.
Smoking Gun: $100 Billion Bill Gates Contact TRACE Deal Six Months Before Covid-19
If you think all the above is a coincidence, then please examine the following conundrum: how can you negotiate a $100 billion deal involving the by-products of monitoring a pandemic via tracing technology in August 2019 i.e., six to seven months before the outbreak of the pandemic even happens? But that is exactly what Bill Gates did. It appears this smoking gun situation was first reported by experienced researchers John Moynihan and Larry Doyle. They reported how Bill Gates negotiated a $100 billion contact tracing deal with a Democrat Party congressman sponsor of the controversial testing reaching and contacting everyone (TRACE) act six months before the pandemic occurred[9].
John Moynihan and Larry Doyle described that:
in the US, the controversial TRACE act was brought before the house by Bobby L Rush.
representatives from the Gates foundation met with congressman Rush in Rwanda, east Africa, in mid-August 2019, to discuss who would score the windfall from a government contact tracing program. The event Rush travelled to was underwritten by the Gates Foundation and the Rockefeller Fund.
Why would you need to establish a government contact tracing program in August 2019? There was no pandemic then and no one was supposed to have even heard of Covid-19 at this stage. Just six months after this reported meeting the so-called pandemic hit and just nine months after the meeting Rush introduced the $100 billion HR6666 contact tracing TRACE act.
This established a CDC program for national contact testing and contact tracing. Amazingly, how did they know this $100 billion contact testing and tracing system was needed nine months ahead of schedule? It appears this ‘perfect storm’ was in reality a rigged market of corporate profiteering, as mass vaccinations and mass contact tracing were, consequently, in big demand.
The deal was for $100 billion for the first year and sanctions “such sums as may be deemed necessary for any subsequent fiscal years during which the emergency period continues”. This was, in essence, a blank cheque for a government-controlled contact-tracing system to track people that are ‘deemed’ dangerous or infected”.
Based on the research of John Moynihan and Larry Doyle it appears that the whole situation reeks of premeditated corruption, profiteering, and sinister surveillance.”
The WEF Attempted a World Technocratic ‘Reset’ at the Same Time as the Pre-orchestrated World Covid Lockdown
Note that in March 2020, central bankers launched a planned and co-ordinated financial ‘reset’ under cover of world lockdown; and Covid-19 was an excuse for an attempted WEF world technocratic ‘reset’ at the same time as the pre-orchestrated world lockdown.
These topics, including the WEF reset plan for a Fourth Industrial Revolution and the constraints of this so-called new world order technocracy are detailed in my book No Worries No Virus.
Mark Gerard Keenan, is a former scientist at the UK Government Dept. of Energy and Climate Change, and at the United Nations Environment Division. He is author of the following books:
Transcending the Climate Change Deception Toward Real Sustainability
CO2 Climate Hoax – How Bankers Hijacked the Real Environment Movement
The Lies of Green Politics and How the Green Party Betrayed the People of Ireland
Mark’s E-books in PDF format are available at https://mkeenan.ie/shop/.
Notes
[1] Sources: https://www.globalresearch.ca/who-scandal-exposed-advisors-received-kickbacks-from-h1n1-vaccine-manufacturers/19587
https://greatgameindia.com/who-vaccine-industry/
April 2009, The H1N1 Pandemic: Political Lies and Media Disinformation regarding the Swine Flu Outbreak – Global Research – Centre for Research on Globalization at: https://www.globalresearch.ca/political-lies-and-media-disinformation-regarding-the-swine-flu-pandemic/13433
[2] Sources: https://www.veteranstodayarchives.com/2012/01/05/911-and-israel-alan-sabroskys-candid-interview/
https://www.scribd.com/document/58318030/US-Military-Knows-Israel-Did-9-11-Alan-Sabrosky-USMC
[3] Sourced from an article by Paul Schreyer titled ‘Pandemie-Planspiele – Vorbereitung einer neuen Ara?’ (Translation: Pandemic preparation for a new era?)
[4] Source:
[6] Source: https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=WO2020060606
[8] Source: https://nl.espacenet.com/searchResults?ST=singleline&locale=nl_NL&submitted=true&DB=&query=covid+rothschild
[9] Sources describing the Bill Gates $100 billion TRACE deal (August 2019)
HR 6666 (sponsor Bobby Rush) https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/6666/titles
Bobby Rush Travels to Ruanda in August 2019
https://projects.propublica.org/represent/members/R000515-bobby-l-rush/privately-funded-travel/116
Source: Global Research
Fear and Panic Resulting from Totally Invalid Covid-19 “Confirmed Cases”, Erroneous SARS-CoV-2 Mortality Data, Falsification of Death Certificates
What Is COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2: How Is It Tested? How Is It Measured? Chapter III of eBook, The Worldwide Corona Crisis: Global Coup d'Etat Against Humanity
March 16, 2024
This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”
The following text is Chapter III of:
The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity
by Michel Chossudovsky
ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0, Year: 2022, PDF Ebook, Pages: 164, 15 Chapters
Price: $11.50 Get yours for FREE! Click here to download. Click here to read online.
Scroll down for details at the foot of article
“The PCR is a process. It does not tell you that you are sick.” –Dr. Kary Mullis, (image right) Nobel Laureate and Inventor of the RT-PCR, passed away in August 2019.
“…All or a substantial part of these positives could be due to what’s called false positives tests.” –Dr. Michael Yeadon, distinguished scientist, former Vice President and Chief Science Officer of Pfizer
“This misuse of the RT-PCR technique is applied as a relentless and intentional strategy by some governments to justify excessive measures such as the violation of a large number of constitutional rights, … under the pretext of a pandemic based on a number of positive RT-PCR tests, and not on a real number of patients.” –Dr. Pascal Sacré, Belgian physician specialized in critical care and renowned public health analyst.
“I have seen massive efforts made to deliberately inflate Covid death numbers by relabelling cancer patients and stroke victims and all manner of normal regular deaths as Covid, in fact virtually anyone getting into an ambulance. The methods used to do so were totally flawed, PCR tests for example being run on 45 cycles we all know to be worthless, yet people are being euthanised on this basis and sometimes only on the basis of a chest x-ray alone.” –John O’Looney, Funeral Director, Milton Keynes, U.K.
Introduction
Media lies coupled with a systemic and carefully engineered fear campaign have sustained the image of a killer virus which is relentlessly spreading to all major regions of the world.
Several billion people in more than 190 countries have been tested (as well as retested) for COVID-19.
At the time of writing, more than 500 million people worldwide have been categorized as “COVID-19 confirmed cases” (“cumulative cases”).
The alleged pandemic is said to have resulted in more than 5.8 million COVID-19-related deaths.
Both sets of figures — morbidity and mortality — are invalid.
A highly organized COVID testing apparatus (part of which is funded by the billionaire foundations) was established with a view to driving up the numbers of “COVID-19 confirmed cases”, which are then used as a justification to impose the “vaccine” passport coupled with the repeal of fundamental human rights.
From the outset of this crisis in January 2020, all far-reaching policy decisions upheld and presented to the public as a “means to saving lives” were based on flawed and invalid RT-PCR positive cases.
These invalid COVID-19 “estimates” have been used to justify confinement, social distancing, wearing of the face mask, the prohibition of social gatherings, cultural and sports events, the closure of economic activity, as well as the enforcement of the mRNA “vaccine” launched in November 2020.
There is no such thing as a “COVID-19 confirmed case”.
Firmly acknowledged both by scientific opinion and the World Health Organization, the RT-PCR test used to “detect” the spread of the virus (as well as its variants) is not only flawed but TOTALLY INVALID.
The fear campaign is relentlessly spearheaded by political statements and media disinformation. A closer examination of official reports from national health authorities as well as peer-reviewed articles provides a totally different picture.
In this chapter, we will be focusing on the following issues:
1. The features of the SARS-CoV-2 virus as outlined by the WHO, the CDC and peer-reviewed reports. Is it a dangerous virus?
2. The Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) Test used to “detect/identify” SARS-CoV-2.
3. The reliability of the estimates of mortality and morbidity pertaining to the alleged COVID-19 infection.
Click here to download the full eBook.
The Features of SARS-CoV-2
Lies through omission: the media has failed to reassure the broader public.
Below is the official WHO definition of COVID-19 followed by that of the CDC:
Coronaviruses are a large family of viruses which may cause illness in animals or humans. In humans, several coronaviruses are known to cause respiratory infections ranging from the common cold to more severe diseases such as Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS). The most recently discovered coronavirus causes coronavirus disease COVID-19.
“The most common symptoms of COVID-19 are fever, dry cough, and tiredness. … These symptoms are usually mild and begin gradually. Some people become infected but only have very mild symptoms. Most people (about 80%) recover from the disease without needing hospital treatment. Around 1 out of every 5 people who gets COVID-19 becomes seriously ill and develops difficulty breathing.”1
Similar to Influenza According to the CDC
COVID-19 versus Influenza (Flu) Virus A and Virus B (and subtypes)
Rarely mentioned by the media or by politicians: The CDC (which is an agency of the US government) confirms that COVID-19 is similar to Influenza:
“Influenza (Flu) and COVID-19 are both contagious respiratory illnesses, but they are caused by different viruses. COVID-19 is caused by infection with a new coronavirus (called SARS-CoV-2) and flu is caused by infection with influenza viruses. Because some of the symptoms of flu and COVID-19 are similar, it may be hard to tell the difference between them based on symptoms alone, and testing may be needed to help confirm a diagnosis. Flu and COVID-19 share many characteristics, but there are some key differences between the two.”2
If the public had been informed and reassured that COVID is “similar to Influenza”, the fear campaign would have fallen flat.
The lockdown and closure of the national economy would have been rejected outright.
According to Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, pneumonia is “regularly caused or accompanied by coronaviruses”.3
Immunologists broadly confirm the CDC definition. COVID-19 has similar features to a seasonal influenza coupled with pneumonia.
According to Anthony Fauci (Head of NIAID), H. Clifford Lane, and Robert R. Redfield (Head of CDC) in the New England Journal of Medicine:
“…the overall clinical consequences of Covid-19 may ultimately be more akin to those of a severe seasonal influenza (which has a case fatality rate of approximately 0.1%) or a pandemic influenza (similar to those in 1957 and 1968) rather than a disease similar to SARS or MERS, which have had case fatality rates of 9 to 10% and 36%, respectively.”4
How convenient: The above article was first published in the NEJM on March 26, 2020, exactly ten days after the declaration of a national emergency by President Trump on March 16, 2020. Had this authoritative peer-reviewed text been brought to the attention of the American public, the lockdown mandate would have fallen flat.
Fauci speaks to the White House press corps on COVID-19 in April 2020, watched by President Donald Trump (left) and Vice President Mike Pence (right). (By The White House, licensed under the Public Domain)
Dr. Anthony Fauci is lying to himself. In his public statements, he says that COVID is “ten times worse than seasonal flu”.5
He refutes his peer-reviewed report quoted above. From the outset, Fauci has been instrumental in waging a fear and panic campaign across America.6
The Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) Test
The slanted methodology applied under WHO guidance for detecting the alleged spread of the virus is the Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) test, which has been routinely applied all over the world since February 2020.
The RT-PCR test has been used worldwide to generate millions of erroneous “COVID-19 confirmed cases”, which are then used to sustain the illusion that the alleged pandemic is real.
This assessment based on erroneous numbers has been used in the course of the last two and a half years to spearhead and sustain the fear campaign.
And people are now led to believe that the COVID-19 “vaccine” is the “solution”. And that “normality” will be restored once the entire population of planet Earth has been vaccinated.
“Confirmed” is a misnomer. A “confirmed RT-PCR positive case” does not imply a “COVID-19 confirmed case”.
Positive RT-PCR is not synonymous with the COVID-19 disease! PCR specialists make it clear that a test must always be compared with the clinical record of the patient being tested, with the patient’s state of health to confirm its value [reliability]. (Dr. Pascal Sacré)7
The procedure used by the national health authorities is to categorize all RT-PCR positive cases as “COVID-19 confirmed cases” (with or without a medical diagnosis). Ironically, this routine process of identifying “confirmed cases” is in derogation of the CDC’s own guidelines:
“Detection of viral RNA may not indicate the presence of infectious virus or that 2019-nCoV is the causative agent for clinical symptoms. The performance of this test has not been established for monitoring treatment of 2019-nCoV infection. This test cannot rule out diseases caused by other bacterial or viral pathogens.”8 (emphasis added)
The methodology used to detect and estimate the spread of the virus is flawed and invalid.
False Positives
The earlier debate at the outset of the crisis focused on the issue of “false positives.”
Acknowledged by the WHO and the CDC, the RT-PCR test was known to produce a high percentage of false positives. According to Dr. Pascal Sacré:
“Today, as authorities test more people, there are bound to be more positive RT-PCR tests. This does not mean that COVID-19 is coming back, or that the epidemic is moving in waves. There are more people being tested, that’s all.”9
The debate on false positives (acknowledged by health authorities) points to so-called errors without necessarily questioning the overall validity of the RT-PCR test as a means to detecting the alleged spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus.
The PCR Test Does Not Detect the Identity of the Virus
The RT-PCR test does not identify/detect the virus. What the PCR test identifies are genetic fragments of numerous viruses (including influenza viruses types A and B and coronaviruses which trigger common colds).
The results of the RT-PCR test cannot “confirm” whether an individual who undertakes the test is infected with SARS-CoV-2.
The following diagram summarizes the process of identifying positive and negative cases. All that is required is the presence of “viral genetic material” for it to be categorized as “positive”. The procedure does not identity or isolate COVID-19. What appears in the tests are fragments of the virus.10
Source: Commonwealth Fund
A positive test does not mean that you have the virus and/or that you could transmit the virus.
According to Dr. Kary Mullis, inventor of the PCR technique,
“The PCR detects a very small segment of the nucleic acid which is part of a virus itself.”
According to renowned Swiss immunologist Dr. B. Stadler:
So if we do a PCR corona test on an immune person, it is not a virus that is detected, but a small shattered part of the viral genome. The test comes back positive for as long as there are tiny shattered parts of the virus left. Even if the infectious viri are long dead, a corona test can come back positive, because the PCR method multiplies even a tiny fraction of the viral genetic material enough [to be detected].11
Dr. Pascal Sacré concurs, “These tests detect viral particles, genetic sequences, not the whole virus.”12
“In an attempt to quantify the viral load, these sequences are then amplified several times through numerous complex steps that are subject to errors, sterility errors and contamination.”
The WHO’s “Customized” RT-PCR COVID-19 “Test”
Two important and related issues.
The PCR test does not identify the virus as outlined above. Moreover, the WHO in January 2020 did not possess an isolate and purified sample of the novel 2019-nCoV virus.
What was contemplated in January 2020 was a “customization” of the PCR test by the WHO, under the scientific guidance of the Berlin Virology Institute at Charité Hospital.
Dr. Christian Drosten and his colleagues at the Berlin Virology Institute undertook a study entitled “Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR”.13
Screenshot from Eurosurveillance
The title of the Berlin Virology Institute study is an obvious misnomer. The PCR test cannot “detect” the 2019 novel coronavirus. (See Dr. Kary Mullis, Dr. B. Stadler, Dr. Pascal Sacré quoted above).
Moreover, the study published by Eurosurveillance acknowledges that the WHO did not possess an isolate and purified sample of the novel 2019-nCoV virus:
[While]… several viral genome sequences had been released,… virus isolates or samples [of 2019-nCoV] from infected patients were not available …”14
The Drosten, et al. team then recommended to the WHO that in the absence of an isolate of the 2019-nCoV virus, a similar 2003 SARS-CoV should be used as a “proxy” (point of reference) of the novel virus:
“The genome sequences suggest presence of a virus closely related to the members of a viral species termed severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-related CoV, a species defined by the agent of the 2002/03 outbreak of SARS in humans [3,4].
We report on the the establishment and validation of a diagnostic workflow for 2019-nCoV screening and specific confirmation [using the RT-PCR test], designed in absence of available virus isolates or original patient specimens. Design and validation were enabled by the close genetic relatedness to the 2003 SARS-CoV, and aided by the use of synthetic nucleic acid technology.” (Eurosurveillance, January 23, 2020, emphasis added).15
What this ambiguous statement suggests is that the identity of 2019-nCoV was not required and that “COVID-19 confirmed cases” (aka infection resulting from the 2019 novel coronavirus) would be validated by “the close genetic relatedness to the 2003 SARS-CoV.”
What this means is that a coronavirus detected 19 years ago (2003 SARS-CoV) is being used to “validate” the identity of a so-called “novel coronavirus” first detected in China’s Hubei Province in late December 2019.
The recommendations of the Drosten study (generously supported and financed by the Gates Foundation) were then transmitted to the WHO. They were subsequently endorsed by the Director-General of the WHO, Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus.
The WHO did not have in its possession the “virus isolate” required to identify the virus. It was decided that an isolate of the new coronavirus was not required.
The Drosten, et al. article pertaining to the use of the RT-PCR test worldwide (under WHO guidance) was challenged in a November 27, 2020 study by a group of 23 international virologists, microbiologists, et al.
It stands to reason that if the PCR test uses the 2003 SARS-CoV virus as “a point of reference”, there can be no “confirmed” COVID-19 cases of the novel virus 2019-nCoV (subsequently renamed SARS-CoV-2) or of its variants.
Click here to download the full eBook.
Has the Identity of the 2019-nCoV Been Confirmed? Does the Virus Exist?
While the WHO did not possess an isolate of the virus, is there valid and reliable evidence that the 2019 novel coronavirus had been isolated from an “unadulterated sample taken from a diseased patient”?16
The Chinese authorities announced on January 7, 2020 that “a new type of virus” had been “identified” “similar to the one associated with SARS and MERS” (related report, not original Chinese government source). The underlying method adopted by the Chinese research team is described below:
We prospectively collected and analysed data on patients with laboratory-confirmed 2019-nCoV infection by real-time RT-PCR and next-generation sequencing.
Data were obtained with standardised data collection forms shared by WHO and the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection Consortium from electronic medical records.17 (emphasis added)
The above study (quotation above as well as other documents consulted) suggests that China’s health authorities did not undertake an isolation/purification of a patient’s specimen. Using “laboratory-confirmed 2019-nCoV infection by real-time RT-PCR” (as quoted in their study) is an obvious misnomer, i.e. the RT-PCR test cannot under any circumstances be used to identify the virus. The isolate of the virus by the Chinese authorities is unconfirmed.18
Freedom of Information Pertaining to the Isolate of SARS-CoV-2
A detailed investigative project by Christine Massey entitled Freedom of Information Requests: Health/Science Institutions Worldwide “Have No Record” of SARS-COV-2 Isolation/Purification provides documentation concerning the identity of the virus. The responses to these requests from 127 entities in 25 countries confirm that there is no record of isolation/purification of SARS-CoV-2 “having been performed by anyone, anywhere, ever.”19
The Threshold Amplification Cycles. The WHO Admits that the Results of the RT-PCR “Test” Are Totally Invalid
The RT-PCR test was adopted by the WHO on January 23, 2020 as a means to detecting the SARS-CoV-2 virus, following the recommendations of the Berlin Virology research group (quoted above).
Exactly one year later on January 20, 2021, the WHO retracts. They don’t say “we made a mistake”. The retraction is carefully formulated (see original WHO document here).20
The contentious issue pertains to the number of amplification threshold cycles (Ct). According to Pieter Borger, et al.:
The number of amplification cycles [should be] less than 35; preferably 25-30 cycles. In case of virus detection, >35 cycles only detects signals which do not correlate with infectious virus as determined by isolation in cell culture…(Critique of Drosten Study)21
The World Health Organization (WHO) tacitly admits one year later that ALL PCR tests conducted at a 35 cycle amplification threshold (Ct) or higher are INVALID. But that is what they recommended in January 2020, in consultation with the Virology team at Charité Hospital in Berlin.
If the test is conducted at a 35 Ct threshold or above (which was recommended by the WHO), genetic segments of the SARS-CoV-2 virus cannot be detected, which means that ALL the so-called “COVID-19 confirmed cases” tabulated worldwide in the course of the last two and a half years are invalid.
According to Pieter Borger, Bobby Rajesh Malhotra, Michael Yeadon, et al., the Ct > 35 has been the norm “in most laboratories in Europe & the US”.22
The WHO’s Mea Culpa
Below is the WHO’s carefully formulated “retraction”.
“WHO guidance Diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2 states that careful interpretation of weak positive results is needed (1). The cycle threshold (Ct) needed to detect virus is inversely proportional to the patient’s viral load. Where test results do not correspond with the clinical presentation, a new specimen should be taken and retested using the same or different NAT technology.
WHO reminds IVD users that disease prevalence alters the predictive value of test results; as disease prevalence decreases, the risk of false positive increases (2). This means that the probability that a person who has a positive result (SARS-CoV-2 detected) is truly infected with SARS-CoV-2 decreases as prevalence decreases, irrespective of the claimed specificity.”23 (emphasis added)
“Invalid Positives” Is the Underlying Concept
This is not an issue of “weak positives” and “risk of false positive increases”. What is at stake is a “flawed methodology” which leads to invalid estimates of “COVID-19 confirmed cases”.
What this admission of the WHO confirms is that the estimate of COVID positive from a PCR test (with an amplification threshold of 35 cycles or higher) is invalid. In which case, the WHO recommends retesting, “a new specimen should be taken and retested…”
The WHO calls for “retesting”, which is tantamount to saying “we screwed up”.
That recommendation is pro-forma. It won’t happen. Several billion people worldwide have already been tested, starting in early February 2020.
From the outset, the PCR test has routinely been applied at a Ct amplification threshold of 35 cycles or higher. What this means is that the PCR methodology as applied worldwide has in the course of the last two and a half years led to the compilation of faulty and misleading COVID-19 estimates, which according to the WHO (January 20, 2021) are based on an invalid methodology.
And these are the statistics which are used to measure the progression of the so-called “pandemic”. Above an amplification cycle of 35 or higher, the test will not detect fragments of the virus. Therefore, the official “COVID numbers” (COVID-19 confirmed cases) are meaningless.
It follows that there is no scientific basis for confirming the existence of a pandemic, which in turn means that the lockdown/economic measures which have resulted in social panic, mass poverty and unemployment (allegedly to curtail the spread of the virus) have no justification whatsoever. According to scientific opinion:
“if someone is tested by PCR as positive when a threshold of 35 cycles or higher is used (as is the case in most laboratories in Europe & the US), the probability that said person is actually infected is less than 3%, the probability that said result is a false positive is 97%
…
3. The number of amplification cycles (less than 35; preferably 25-30 cycles);
In case of virus detection, >35 cycles only detects signals which do not correlate with infectious virus as determined by isolation in cell culture [reviewed in 2]; if someone is tested by PCR as positive when a threshold of 35 cycles or higher is used (as is the case in most laboratories in Europe & the US), the probability that said person is actually infected is less than 3%, the probability that said result is a false positive is 97%” (emphasis added) (Pieter Borger, Bobby Rajesh Malhotra, Michael Yeadon, Clare Craig, Kevin McKernan, et al. Critique of Drosten Study)24
As outlined above, “the probability that said result is a false positive is 97%”, it follows that using the >35 cycles detection will indelibly contribute to “hiking up” the number of “fake positives”.
The WHO’s mea culpa confirms that the COVID-19 PCR test procedure as applied is meaningless.
The CDC Orders the Withdrawal of the PCR Test
The WHO’s historic retraction is followed six months later by a mea culpa on the part of the CDC. On July 21, 2021, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) calls for the withdrawal of the PCR test as a valid method for detecting and identifying SARS-CoV-2:
“After December 31, 2021, CDC will withdraw the request to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) of the CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel, the assay first introduced in February 2020 for detection of SARS-CoV-2 only.”
In preparation for this change, CDC recommends clinical laboratories and testing sites that have been using the CDC 2019-nCoV RT-PCR assay select and begin their transition to another FDA-authorized COVID-19 test.
CDC encourages laboratories to consider adoption of a multiplexed method that can facilitate detection and differentiation of SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses. (emphasis added)25
Read carefully: what this CDC directive tacitly admits is that the PCR test does not effectively differentiate between “SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses”. We have known this from the outset.
As of January 1, 2022, the CDC has withdrawn its endorsement of the RT-PCR test in the US.
If the PCR test is invalid as intimated by both the CDC and the WHO, more than 574 million so-called “COVID-19 confirmed cases” (July 2022) as well as more than 6.3 million alleged COVID-related deaths (July 2022) collected and tabulated worldwide since the outset of the alleged pandemic are totally meaningless.
The Falsification of Death Certificates
Inasmuch as the PCR test is invalid, it follows that the estimates of “COVID-19 confirmed cases” including the detection of variants of SARS-CoV-2 are totally invalid. This in turn means that the methodology pertaining to establishing COVID-19-related deaths worldwide is also invalid.
It is worth noting that in a December 2020 report, the CDC reported that 94% of the deaths attributed to COVID have “comorbidities” (i.e. deaths due to other causes).26
For six percent of the deaths, COVID-19 was the only cause mentioned. For deaths with conditions or causes in addition to COVID-19, on average, there were 2.6 additional conditions or causes per death. The number of deaths with each condition or cause is shown for all deaths and by age groups.
“They’re writing COVID on all the death certificates,” according to Michael Lanza, Funeral Director at Staten Island, NY.
“Funeral directors doubt legitimacy of deaths attributed to pandemic, fear numbers are ‘padded.’” (Project Veritas)27
Moreover, had the CDC used the criteria in its Medical Examiners’ and Coroners’ Handbook on Death Registration and Fetal Death Reporting Revision 2003:
” … the COVID-19 fatality count would have been approximately 90.2% lower” (See H. Ealy, M. McEvoy, and et al., August 09, 2020)28
US Fatalities With At Least 1 Comorbidity. (Source: CDC via IPAK PHPI)
COVID-19: The “Underlying Cause of Death” and the CDC’s “More Often Than Not” Clause
While the CDC acknowledged the issue of comorbidities, it nonetheless enacted totally invalid instructions with regard to the death certificates.
Barely a week following the historic March 11, 2020 lockdown, specific guidelines were introduced by the CDC pertaining to death certificates (and their tabulation in the National Vital Statistics System (NVSS)).29
Will COVID-19 be the underlying cause of death? This concept is fundamental.30
The underlying cause of death is defined by the WHO as
“the disease or injury that initiated the train of events leading directly to death”.
What the CDC recommended with regard to statistical coding and categorization is that COVID-19 is expected to be the underlying cause of death“more often than not.”
The CDC combines these two criteria: “underlying cause of death” and “more often than not”.
Will COVID-19 be the underlying cause of death?
“The underlying cause depends upon what and where conditions are reported on the death certificate. However, the rules for coding and selection of the underlying cause of death are expected to result in COVID-19 being the underlying cause more often than not.”31
The above directive is categorical.
The CDC Concepts and Justifications
The certifier is not allowed to report coronavirus without identifying a specific strain. And the guidelines recommend that COVID-19 must always be indicated.
Screenshot from National Vital Statistics System
The certifier cannot depart from the CDC criteria. COVID-19 is imposed. Read carefully the CDC criteria.32
There are no loopholes.
These CDC directives have contributed to categorizing COVID-19 as the recorded “cause of death”. Two fundamental concepts prevail throughout:
The “underlying cause of death”
The “More Often than Not” clause which falsifies the cause of death
And these criteria are imposed despite the fact that the RT-PCR test used to corroborate the “cause of death” provides misleading results as acknowledged by both the WHO and the CDC.
In practice, as outlined above, “probable COVID-19” or “likely COVID-19” will be considered as the “underlying cause of death” without the conduct of a PCR test and without performing an autopsy.
The criteria establishing the “underlying” cause of death in the US are based on “the more often than not” clause (see above) established nationally by the CDC.
Click here to download the full eBook.
Canada: Flawed “Estimates” of the Cause of Death
In Canada, the criteria differ from one province to another. Categorizing the cause of death in Canada’s Province of Quebec has been the object of gross manipulation.33
According to a directive from Quebec’s Ministry of Health (April 2020):
“If the presumed cause of death is Covid-19 (with or without a positive test) an autopsy should be avoided and death should be attributed to Covid-19 as the probable cause of death. In addition, deaths whose probable cause is Covid-19 are considered natural, and are not subject to a coroner’s notice.“ (emphasis from the original document)34
The directive does not allow the counting of comorbidities. Applied on April 16, 2020, this directive was conducive to an immediate sharp increase in the number of deaths attributed to COVID-19:
44.9% of total deaths in Quebec were attributed to COVID-19 (week of 11-18 April 2020) (see table below).
According to Montreal’s La Presse, “April [2020] was the deadliest month”. But did La Presse consult the directives of the Ministry of Health?
Below are the (daily) causes of death for Quebec corresponding to the week of April 12 to 18, 2020 (immediately following the government directive) measured according to the criteria issued by the Ministry of Health.35 There were virtually no COVID cases or deaths recorded in March 2020.
Table below: Causes of Deaths, Daily Average
Source: La Presse
Are these figures the result of the so-called deadly pandemic? Or are they the result of the Ministry of Health’s “guidelines” based on erroneous criteria?
“presumed” case pertaining to COVID
“with or without a positive test”
“probable” cause of death
“autopsy should be avoided” in the case of COVID-19
“deaths of which the probable cause is COVID-19 are considered natural, and are not the object of a notice to the coroner“
According to Mr. Paul G. Brunet of the Council for the Protection of the Sick (CPM):
“… We realized through the denunciations by some of the doctors that people did not die from COVID, but from dehydration, malnutrition, abandonment, laments Mr. Brunet. So what did the thousands of people in CHSLDs [old persons nursing homes] and private residences really die of?” (quoted in La Presse, translated from French)
Test, Test, Test: Invalid Data and the “Numbers Game”
People are frightened. They are encouraged to do the PCR test, which increases the number of fake positives. Governments are involved in increasing the number of PCR tests with a view to inflating the estimates of so-called “COVID-19 confirmed cases”.
Moreover, starting in late 2021, several billion antigen and home test kits were distributed worldwide. More than a billion test kits were distributed in the US.
In Canada, which has a population of 38.5 million people, the federal government ordered (late 2021, early 2022) the delivery of 291 million COVID-19 antigen home testing kits. This decision has not only contributed to spearheading the fear campaign, it has created a situation of social chaos. It has contributed to pushing up the numbers of so-called “confirmed cases”.36 These tests are not routinely accompanied by a medical diagnosis of the patient.
Annex to Chapter III
Full text of the WHO directive dated January 20, 202137
Screenshot from WHO
Nucleic Acid Testing (NAT) Technologies that Use Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) for Detection of SARS-CoV-2
Product type: Nucleic acid testing (NAT) technologies that use polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for detection of SARS-CoV-2
Date: 13 January 2021
WHO-identifier: 2020/5, version 2
Target audience: laboratory professionals and users of IVDs.
Purpose of this notice: clarify information previously provided by WHO. This notice supersedes WHO Information Notice for In Vitro Diagnostic Medical Device (IVD) Users 2020/05 version 1, issued 14 December 2020.
Description of the problem: WHO requests users to follow the instructions for use (IFU) when interpreting results for specimens tested using PCR methodology.
Users of IVDs must read and follow the IFU carefully to determine if manual adjustment of the PCR positivity threshold is recommended by the manufacturer.
WHO guidance Diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2 states that careful interpretation of weak positive results is needed (1). The cycle threshold (Ct) needed to detect virus is inversely proportional to the patient’s viral load. Where test results do not correspond with the clinical presentation, a new specimen should be taken and retested using the same or different NAT technology.
WHO reminds IVD users that disease prevalence alters the predictive value of test results; as disease prevalence decreases, the risk of false positive increases (2). This means that the probability that a person who has a positive result (SARS-CoV-2 detected) is truly infected with SARS-CoV-2 decreases as prevalence decreases, irrespective of the claimed specificity.
Most PCR assays are indicated as an aid for diagnosis, therefore, health care providers must consider any result in combination with timing of sampling, specimen type, assay specifics, clinical observations, patient history, confirmed status of any contacts, and epidemiological information.
Actions to be taken by IVD users:
Please read carefully the IFU in its entirety.
Contact your local representative if there is any aspect of the IFU that is unclear to you.
Check the IFU for each incoming consignment to detect any changes to the IFU.
Provide the Ct value in the report to the requesting health care provider.
Notes
1. Diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2020, WHO reference number WHO/2019-nCoV/laboratory/2020.6.
2. Altman DG, Bland JM. Diagnostic tests 2: Predictive values. BMJ. 1994 Jul 9;309(6947):102. doi: 10.1136/bmj.309.6947.102.
Notes
1 WHO, March 8, 2020. Media Statement: Knowing the risks for COVID-19. https://www.who.int/indonesia/news/detail/08-03-2020-knowing-the-risk-for-covid-19
2 CDC, n.d. Similarities and Differences between Flu and COVID-19. https://www.cdc.gov/flu/symptoms/flu-vs-covid19.htm#table
3 Prof Michel Chossudovsky, April 5, 2020. Fake Coronavirus Data, Fear Campaign. Spread of the COVID-19 Infection. https://www.globalresearch.ca/fake-coronavirus-data-fear-campaign-spread-of-the-covid-19-infection/5708643
4 Anthony Fauci, Clifford Lane, et al., March 26, 2020. Covid-19 — Navigating the Uncharted. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMe2002387#
5 Ronald Bailey, March 11, 2020. COVID-19 Mortality Rate ‘Ten Times Worse’ Than Seasonal Flu, Says Dr. Anthony Fauci. https://reason.com/2020/03/11/covid-19-mortality-rate-ten-times-worse-than-seasonal-flu-says-dr-anthony-fauci/
6 Ibid.
7 Dr. Pascal Sacre, November 5, 2020. The COVID-19 RT-PCR Test: How to Mislead All Humanity. Using a “Test” To Lock Down Society. https://www.globalresearch.ca/covid-19-rt-pcr-how-to-mislead-all-humanity-using-a-test-to-lock-down-society/5728483
8 CDC, July 21, 2021. CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel. https://www.fda.gov/media/134922/download
9 Dr. Pascal Sacre, November 5, 2020. The COVID-19 RT-PCR Test: How to Mislead All Humanity. Using a “Test” To Lock Down Society. https://www.globalresearch.ca/covid-19-rt-pcr-how-to-mislead-all-humanity-using-a-test-to-lock-down-society/5728483
10 Joseph Hadaya, Max Schumm, et al., April 1, 2020. Testing Individuals for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2764238
11 Beda M Sadler, July 2, 2020. Coronavirus: Why Everyone Was Wrong. It is Not a “New Virus”. “The Fairy Tale of No Immunity”. https://www.globalresearch.ca/coronavirus-why-everyone-wrong/5718049
12 Dr. Pascal Sacre, August 7, 2020. COVID-19: Closer to the Truth: Tests and Immunity. https://www.globalresearch.ca/covid-19-closer-to-the-truth-tests-and-immunity/5720160
13 Victor M Corman, Olfert Landt, et al., January 23, 2020. Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR. https://www.eurosurveillance.org/content/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.3.2000045
14 Ibid.
15 Ibid.
16 Christine Massey, August 4, 2021. The Identity of the Virus: Health/Science Institutions Worldwide “Have No Record” of SARS-COV-2 Isolation/Purification. https://www.globalresearch.ca/foi-reveal-health-science-institutions-around-world-have-no-record-sars-cov-2-isolation-purification-anywhere-ever/5751969
17 Chaolin Huang, Yeming Wang, et al., January 24, 2020. Clinical features of patients infected with 2019 novel coronavirus in Wuhan, China. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7159299/
18 Fan Wu, Su Zhao, et al., February 3, 2020. A new coronavirus associated with human respiratory disease in China. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2008-3
19 Christine Massey, August 4, 2021. The Identity of the Virus: Health/ Science Institutions Worldwide “Have No Record” of SARS-COV-2 Isolation/Purification. https://www.globalresearch.ca/foi-reveal-health-science-institutions-around-world-have-no-record-sars-cov-2-isolation-purification-anywhere-ever/5751969
20 WHO, January 20, 2021. Nucleic acid testing (NAT) technologies that use polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for detection of SARS-CoV-2. https://www.who.int/news/item/20-01-2021-who-information-notice-for-ivd-users-2020-05
21 Pieter Borger, Bobby Rajesh Malhotra, et al., November 27, 2020. Review report Corman-Drosten et al. Eurosurveillance 2020. https://cormandrostenreview.com/report/
22 Ibid.
23 WHO, September 11, 2020. Diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/diagnostic-testing-for-sars-cov-2
24 Pieter Borger, Bobby Rajesh Malhotra, et al., November 27, 2020. Review report Corman-Drosten et al. Eurosurveillance 2020. https://cormandrostenreview.com/report/
25 CDC, July 21, 2021. Lab Alert: Changes to CDC RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2 Testing. https://www.cdc.gov/csels/dls/locs/2021/07-21-2021-lab-alert-Changes_CDC_RT-PCR_SARS-CoV-2_Testing_1.html
26 CDC, January 20, 2022. Conditions Contributing to COVID-19 Deaths, by State and Age, Provisional 2020-2021. https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/Conditions-Contributing-to-COVID-19-Deaths-by-Stat/hk9y-quqm
27 Project Veritas, April 30, 2020. BREAKING: Funeral Directors in COVID-19 Epicenter Doubt Legitimacy of Deaths Attributed to Pandemic, Fear Numbers are ‘Padded’. https://www.projectveritas.com/news/breaking-funeral-directors-in-covid-19-epicenter-doubt-legitimacy-of-deaths/
28 H. Ealy, M. McEvoy, et al., July 24, 2020. Covid-19: Questionable Policies, Manipulated Rules of Data Collection and Reporting. Is It Safe for Students to Return to School? https://www.globalresearch.ca/covid-fatalities-wer-90-2-lower-how-would-you-feel-about-schools-reopening/5720264
29 National Vital Statistics System, March 24, 2020. New ICD code introduced for COVID-19 deaths. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvss/coronavirus/Alert-2-New-ICD-code-introduced-for-COVID-19-deaths.pdf?fbclid=IwAR2XckyC93jfKqvOue5EdPlNA8LlKKgz4vPZTU1whI4vXLSOADSjsL9XY-M
30 Ibid.
31 Ibid.
32 Ibid.
33 Prof Michel Chossudovsky, February 14, 2021. Quebec: Falsification of Mortality Data Pertaining to Covid-19. https://www.globalresearch.ca/quebec-falsification-of-mortality-data-pertaining-to-covid-19/5737290
35 Ibid.
36 Prof. Michel Chossudovsky, July 19, 2022. Biggest Lie in World History: There Never Was A Pandemic. The Data Base is Flawed. The Covid Mandates including the Vaccine are Invalid. https://www.globalresearch.ca/biggest-lie-in-world-history-the-data-base-is-flawed-there-never-was-a-pandemic-the-covid-mandates-including-the-vaccine-are-invalid/5772008
37 WHO, January 20, 2021. Nucleic acid testing (NAT) technologies that use polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for detection of SARS-CoV-2. https://www.who.int/news/item/20-01-2021-who-information-notice-for-ivd-users-2020-05
.jpg){kind=link}
And now a little flash back to when the PCR process did not have the baggage its misuse during Covid foisted upon it. Contrary to popular belief, it does have LEGITMATE use. Misuse does not mean no use. Now, have a good laugh. These are hilarious.
Ways to connect
PGP Fingerprint: 7351 9c62 95cc 8130 d8b1 c877 ec99 9aaf 5b1f b029
Email: thetruthaddict@tutanota.com
Telegram: @JoelWalbert
The Truth Addict Telegram channel
Hard Truth Soldier chat on Telegram
The Truth Addict Media Archive (downloadable documentaries, interviews, movies, TV, stand-up, etc)
Mastodon: @thetruthaddict@noauthority.social
Session: 05e7fa1d9e7dcae8512eed0702531272de14a7f1e392591432551a336feb48357c
Odysee: TruthAddict
Rumble: thetruthaddict09
NoAgendaTube: The Truth Addict
Donations (#Value4Value)
Buy Me a Coffee (One time donations as low as $1)
Bitcoin:
bc1qc9ynhlmgxcdd2mjufqr8fxhf248gqee05unmpg (on chain)
lnbc1pjlzvaxpp5lvxg0putv5smxrzd2wckhszeklkahcx8dzqu94adeh3cz50y6vqqcqpjsp557f2656um3l473z4u2sph5hsh5ldpcpl73f3w7rtcgn74jyyylks9q7sqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqsqqqqqysgqdqqmqz9gxqyjw5qrzjqwryaup9lh50kkranzgcdnn2fgvx390wgj5jd07rwr3vxeje0glcll6nqgupdtf5suqqqqlgqqqqqeqqjqm557pc6k7k946xasteh9zx53jwhrpwlxft8xpu39d03w855vy4xs9qqjv5sa6q5jc26m2te5degyg9f2429y098nj590hvmv93cahvqqf4wfza (lightning)
nemesis@getalby.com (lightning)
joelw@fountain.fm (lightning)
+wildviolet72C (PayNym)
Monero:
8ByhEVizjL2Z7uy2pvgCsqHRpajwx18mQbeCVDtxK94ninbBz7ioFVJCnpdUEk55oV7g1yyLj4RhejSEUN8bfR7b6gbUcnP
