Current PCR Testing Produces 97% False Positives

1) DR FAUCI:

“if you get a cycle threshold of 35 or more that the chances of it being replication competent are minuscule…you almost never can culture virus from a 37 threshold cycle. So I think if somebody comes in there with 37/38 even 36 you gotta say it’s just dead nucleotides period.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A867t1JbIrs&feature=emb_logo

2) NYT

"Most tests set the limit at 40";

"Any test with a cycle threshold above 35 is too sensitive, agreed Juliet Morrison, a virologist at UC, Riverside. “I’m shocked that people would think that 40 could represent a positive,”

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/29/health/coronavirus-testing.html

3) MIT

MIT confirms: its own COVID19™ tests are set to 40 amplification cycles.

https://medical.mit.edu/covid-19-updates/2020/11/pcr-test-result

4) CAMBRIDGE

As if any is needed - I already quote FAUCI, MIT and NYT -- not sure why you would need any more proof, but... here you go...

Makes sense: University of Cambridge recently found 100% false positives - during one full testing cycle - across ~4000 students:

~~https://twitter.com/pcrclaims/status/1336679025335545857~~

https://adapnation.io/cambridge-uni-exposes-the-extent-of-false-positives/

5) COURT CONFIRMATION

As if any is needed - I already quote FAUCI, MIT, NYT & CAMBRIDGE -- not sure why you would need any more proof, but... here you go...

Portuguese courts have recently cited:

"“if someone is testing by PCR ...when a threshold of 35 cycles or higher is used (as is the rule in most labs in EU and the US), ...the probability that said result is a false positive is 97%.”"

https://www.collective-evolution.com/2020/11/23/portuguese-court-rules-that-the-pcr-test-is-unable-to-determine-a-covid-19-infection/

6) ANECDOTALLY CONFIRMED BY ELON MUSK:

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1327125840040169472?lang=en

7) INVENTOR OF PCR:

Still not enough? Here's the inventor of the PCR test:

8) QUARANTINES