A landmark court case in Portugal ruled that the PCR test used worldwide to diagnose COVID-19 was not fit for purpose. Most importantly, the judges ruled that a single positive PCR test cannot be used as an effective diagnosis of infection[1].
“In their ruling, [the] judges referred to several scientific studies. Most notably a study by Jaafar et al., which found that – when running PCR tests with 35 cycles or more – the accuracy dropped to 3%, meaning up to 97% of positive results could be false positives”.
The ruling goes on to conclude that, based on the science they read, any PCR test using over 25 cycles is totally unreliable. Governments and private labs have been very tight-lipped about the exact number of cycles they run when PCR testing, but it is known to sometimes be as high as 45. Even fearmonger-in-chief Anthony Fauci has publicly stated anything over 35 is totally unusable[6].

Even the W.H.O. admitted the unreliability of the PCR test[2][3]:
“The design principle of RT-PCR means that for patients with high levels of circulating virus (viral load), relatively few cycles will be needed to detect virus and so the Ct value will be low. Conversely, when specimens return a high Ct value, it means that many cycles were required to detect virus. In some circumstances, the distinction between background noise and actual presence of the target virus is difficult to ascertain”.

The W.H.O. admission is gone from their website – but you can find it in the Web archive[3].

Dr Kary Mullis, who won the Nobel Prize for inventing the PCR process, was clear that it wasn’t meant as a diagnostic tool, saying[2]:
“with PCR, if you do it well, you can find almost anything in anybody”; and
“If you have to go more than 40 cycles to amplify a single-copy gene, there is something seriously wrong with your PCR.”

Associate Medical Director at MIT[5]:
At this point, Ct value is not included in the test results MIT Medical receives, and we have no way of obtaining that information. “While we can’t know the Ct value associated with your test or any other,” says Ferullo, “we can be pretty sure that your test result is a true positive. But it may be a subclinical case, meaning that your viral load is so low that you are not infectious and cannot spread the virus to other people, including those in your immediate household — which is a good thing!”

According to the TGA[4]:
“The extent to which a positive PCR result correlates with the infectious state of an individual is still being determined”
The original statement was taken down, but luckily Off-guardian[2] kept a screenshot.


  1. https://principia-scientific.com/who-finally-admits-covid19-pcr-test-has-a-problem/
  2. https://off-guardian.org/2020/12/18/who-finally-admits-pcr-tests-create-false-positives/
  3. https://web.archive.org/web/20210120083427/https://www.who.int/news/item/14-12-2020-who-information-notice-for-ivd-users
  4. https://www.tga.gov.au/covid-19-testing-australia-information-health-professionals
  5. https://medical.mit.edu/covid-19-updates/2020/11/pcr-test-result
  6. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_Vy6fgaBPE&t=250s

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *