PCR Tests and Kary Mullis.

It is claimed that the PCR test gives many false positives.

If this was the case they would show up in countries like New Zealand and Australia who did lots of PCR testing but NO positives (false or otherwise).

That is because the SARS-CoV-2 virus wasn’t there then. If the PCR test was producing many false positives and detecting the common cold or flu viruses by mistake it would have shown up. There wasn’t any.

Similarly here in the UK during the summer of 2021 there was very few positive results because the virus had subsided. If the accused faulty PCR test with its so-called inbuilt “false positive” design was real they would have shown up. They didn’t which goes to prove that the PCR test is highly specific and accurate (when done properly).

There was a letter to The Lancet from a statistician (not a scientist or medic) which suggested that labs are only testing for one gene and not the two or more as recommended by the WHO and the PCR test was detecting flu and common cold viruses by mistake.

That may well be the case in a few instances but poor Quality Control and poor practices by a few labs does not negate the specificity and accuracy of PCR tests which have been regarded as a vital detection tool by scientists since 1985.

Very early on in the so-called “pandemic” Corman-Drosten identified the gene sequence of SARS-CoV-2 with the help of computer generation to complete the sequence as they were trying to publish it as quickly as possible to give the world an accurate PCR test.

They came up with the unique partial sequence of FAM-CCAGGTGGWACRTCATCMGGTGATGC-BBQ.

SARS-CoV-2 and it’s variants have 29,903 base pairs which have been laboriously whole gene sequenced (it takes 4 to 5 days and NOT computer generated) and uploaded to the GISAID Initiative over 7 million times. This has shown that the original computer enhanced gene sequence by Corman-Drosten was correct.

What scientists have always known is that the PCR can test for a virus with high accuracy but it cannot ascertain whether the virus is dead or alive and infectious or not. The CT rate is an indication (low rate probably infectious <25, high rate>25 probably not). Only cell culture can confirm infectiousness.

The PCR test works in Real Time and is essentially over when it goes positive regardless of how many cycles the machine goes up to.

If it's positive after 15 cycles it is recorded as 15 cycles. The machine may automatically continue to the full 45 cycles but the result is the same.

In the UK the vast majority of positives are well before 35 cycles and rarely goes anywhere near 45 cycles.

The PCR test is highly accurate at detecting a fragment of the gene sequence SARS-CoV-2 "ONLY IF" the testing lab has scrupulous controls to stop contamination resulting in false positives. The lab is highly incompetent if they produce many false negatives.

What it doesn’t detect is if the virus is viable or not (ie is the person infectious) and that can only be done in a wet lab and cell culture.

It has never been shown to test positive for other coronaviruses or inanimate objects in a scientific test, it is only hearsay. The PCR test is very, very specific in what it tests for.

The amplification or CT rate is essentially over when a positive result is achieved.

They may be designated to go up to 45 amplifications but taking the UK Coronavirus (Covid-19) Infection Survey 2020 Table 6a (they stopped showing the CT rates after this) as an example the vast, vast majority of positive results are achieved before 35 amplifications and there are NO positive results after 37 amplifications.

There were 309,607 participants in the survey over the last 6 weeks of December 2020 which is a good sample rate for accurate estimates across the country.

The mean average is a CT rate of no more than 28.4 and the highest 34.7 with the lowest at 15.1. The figures show that potentially 60% of UK cases are not infectious.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/datasets/coronaviruscovid19infectionsurveydata

It is governments who decide not to differentiate between the infectious and the possibly 60% who are not infectious in the UK (85% to 90% in the US). https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/29/health/coronavirus-testing.html

It is not a fault with the PCR test or most scientists. The scientists advising governments are the ones who are at fault.

If the SARS-CoV-2 PCR test is done properly it cannot pick up the cold and flu viruses which have a similar but different gene sequence.

It can pick up the SARS-CoV-2 virus 12 weeks later NOT a year later.

People have misread the CDC announcement that they are replacing the current PCR tests with a different PCR test where they are asking labs to have an assay to detect both SARS-CoV-2 virus AND the flu virus.

This is purely to save time by using one test for both and not two separate tests.

PCR tests are a highly accurate and specific lab tool used since 1985 invented two years earlier by the late great Kary Mullis who is often misquoted or quoted out of context. Kary Mullis is not going to rubbish his own test for which he received the Nobel prize.

The mass testing Lighthouse labs have poor Quality Control and produce many false positives.

Governments are mass testing for SARS-CoV-2 which in the vast majority of instances is a virus producing no or mild symptoms to inflate the numbers and fear.

If they stopped mass testing the perceived problem would be relegated to an endemic virus the same as colds and flu.