Friday, June 14, 2024
HomeCOVID-19A beginner’s guide to Covid, Part 11: The Great PCR Fraud

A beginner’s guide to Covid, Part 11: The Great PCR Fraud


In January we published the first ten parts of Paul Weston’s series of articles intended for those who have not yet heard the truth about the disaster caused by the response to the covid non-pandemic. Today we are starting the final ten parts. You can catch up with the earlier chapters here. 

AFTER the pace of deaths driven by the Great Care Home Cull in spring 2020 showed down, the government switched to positive PCR tests to drive the Covid Pandemic. These tests were dishonest and fraudulent.

According to the government’s own research, the average range of false positive test results was 2.3 per cent – which means that out of 100,000 tests carried out, 2,300 (2.3 per cent of 100,000) were false (caused by poor testing, storage, dirty instruments etc) and thus should be removed from the data.

If 100,000 tests returned 10,000 positive results, the true positive number would be 7,700 (10,000 positive tests minus 2,300 false positives).

If 100,000 tests returned 2,301 positive results, the true positive is only 1.

If 100,000 tests returned 2,300 positive results, the true positive is zero.

If 100,000 tests returned 2,299 positive results the true positive is minus 1, or in real life data, zero. All minus numbers are effectively zero, no matter how large or small.

Let us look at a typical day in 2020. According to the government, 100,664 PCR tests were carried out on May 31, 2020, which returned 1,570 positive results.

For ease of reckoning, let us call the total number of tests carried out to be exactly 100,000 rather than 100,664.

So, 100,000 tests returned 1,570 positive results. The government claimed 1,570 new Covid-19 cases that day, because they didn’t deduct the 2,300 false positives they should have. If they had, there would have been minus 730 (1,570 minus 2,300) or in real life data, zero.

May 31 2020 was not unusual. Most days during 2020 saw zero new Covid-19 cases if the 2.3 per cent false positive rate had been deducted from the overall positive test result numbers.

The government never deducted it though. To do so would have bought an end to the ‘pandemic’ overnight. Ergo, the government perpetuated the pandemic – for whatever reason – via the fraudulent manipulation of data. The NHS remained closed down as a result, and patients with cancelled cancer treatment or heart operations died as a direct result of criminal, murderous, governmental fraud.

It gets worse. Health Secretary Matt Hancock was confronted about the false positives on live TV by Julia Hartley-Brewer. Astonishingly, Hancock seemed to be under the impression that the false positive percentage rate should be applied to the small number of positive cases returned, rather than the large number of tests carried out.

If we go back to the PCR tests performed on May 31 2020 (100,000 tests returning 1,570 positive results) Hancock applied the 2.3 per cent false positive rate to the 1,570 positive results rather than the 100,000 tests.

2.3 per cent of 1,570 equates to 36. So, Hancock subtracted the 36 from the 1,570 and claimed 1,534 true positive test results. As I explained earlier, the true figure was minus 730 (1,570 minus 2,300) or in real life data, zero.

It really shouldn’t be possible to drive a tyrannical global pandemic response based on a poor understanding of maths. Hancock should have been sacked on the spot. The pandemic should have ended there and then. It didn’t, of course.

If there was one thing alone during 2020 which persuaded me that the entire pandemic was a colossal fraud, it was Hancock’s dodgy sums (at best) or deliberate malfeasance at worst. The misreading of covid test data didn’t just happen in Britain of course; the same ‘mistake’ was made across the world.

The sheer enormity of this – in terms of both tyranny and murderous consequences – is almost beyond mere words, but I will write some anyway: a basic error was made in establishing the presence of a viral pandemic. Had the error not been made, there would have been no pandemic. The entire political, scientific, medical and journalistic industries failed to notice this most obvious and glaring error.

It gets worse again. PCR tests are extremely complicated and long-winded. They entail repeated cycles of heating and cooling (in strict laboratory conditions) of the individual test specimens. The standard number of cycles required to determine the existence of a particular viral molecule is 25. As the number of heating/cooling cycles increases, so too does the chance of creating false positives. The 2.3 per cent false positive average quoted by the government was related to 25 cycles, but when this is upped to 45 cycles the false positive rate rises to 97 per cent.

The government never told us how many cycles were used in the 2020 tests, but it now turns out to have been anywhere between 35 and 45. They were all useless, in other words. The entire thing was a con designed to allow the continuation of a ‘pandemic’ when no pandemic existed.

Here are a couple of final thoughts about the PCR testing farce which might appeal to the more conspiratorial amongst us:

Towards the end of 2020, the government claimed to be processing up to a million PCR tests in a single day. Given the complexity and time involved in each test, one has to wonder if we were being lied to. Does England really have sufficient technicians, laboratories and specialist annealing ovens to carry out a million such complex tests every day?

Secondly, why were the nasal swabs so extreme? Why were they rammed so far up our noses? Were they actually designed to harvest something else entirely? Is it possible that the government now holds the DNA record of every single person who was nasally assaulted via a PCR test?

Taking it a stage further, was the government collecting our DNA – after we had been vaccinated – in order to see what effect the gene-editing mRNA vaccine was having on our DNA and the entire human genome?

It seems pretty clear to me that the answers are all yes.

Paul’s book: Covid-19: All Lies. All Crime can be found here.

If you appreciated this article, perhaps you might consider making a donation to The Conservative Woman. Unlike most other websites, we receive no independent funding. Our editors are unpaid and work entirely voluntarily as do the majority of our contributors but there are inevitable costs associated with running a website. We depend on our readers to help us, either with regular or one-off payments. You can donate here. Thank you.
If you have not already signed up to a daily email alert of new articles please do so. It is here and free! Thank you.

Paul Weston
Paul Weston
Paul Weston is a political commentator, concentrating on the various factors involved in the relentless war against Western civilisation.

Sign up for TCW Daily

Each morning we send The ConWom Daily with links to our latest news. This is a free service and we will never share your details.