Social News – COVID-19 Testing


The Virus


The SARS-CoV-2 virus genome was “leaked” by the Chinese in January 2020.  (NCBI GenBank)


Scientifically the SARS-CoV-2 virus has never been isolated, does not have a gold standard, does not meet Koch’s postulates and does not pass peer-review. (article) (Dr. Thomas Cowan) (Dr. Sam Bailey) (article)


Dr. Thomas Cowan points out that the “whole genome” was derived of “37 base pairs from unpurified samples using PCR probes.  This means they actually looked at 37 out of the approximately 30,000 of the base pairs that are claimed to be the genome of the intact virus.  They then took these 37 segments and put them into a computer program, which filled in the rest of the base pairs.”  (article)


Dr. Cowan also notes that a report published by the USA’s Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) indicates that scientists could not get the SARS-CoV-2 virus to infect human tissue cultures. (article)


Dr. Tim O’Shea gives an overview of testing (15 mins) and notes that “the fact remains none of these tests is scientifically verifiable and reproducible as a valid differentiation for COVID-19 specifically.  They are all flawed, and they’re just estimates.” (video (mark 4:59 mins))


Critics say the tests are magnifying small fragments of DNA from numerous enzymes that are not exclusive to SARS-COV-2.  (article)  (article)  (article)


Ultimately, critics ask, does SARS-CoV-2 really exist?   (article)   (Icke/Dr. Andrew Kaufman video (54 mins))   (Icke/Dr. Andrew Kaufman video (47 mins))  (article)


If SARS-CoV-2 can’t be isolated or worse doesn’t exist outside the laboratory, how can vaccines be developed?  (AO News - Vaccines)


A retracted pubmed study links 5G with coronavirus in skin cells   (article)   (AO News – EMR Health)


See also AO COVID-19 Origin Story



In most cases (in fact, in almost all cases) the presence/absence of the virus is established by symptoms diagnosis or indirect testing. The indirect tests are commonly known as PCR and antibody tests. Without going into technical details, one may consider that these tests monitor specific types of proteins or related chemicals which are produced by the presence of viruses, not only by SARS-CoV2 or COVID-19, but by all pathogenic viruses as a defence mechanism to get rid of the viruses and/or to protect our bodies from their ill effects.


It is important to note here that when someone refers to testing for a virus, one does not determine the actual virus itself but a marker (such as a protein). (article)


SARS-CoV-2 testing was established under state of emergency conditions and is known to have limitations.


“No COVID-19 test is 100% accurate.”  William F. Marshall, III M.D.


There are two broad types of tests for SARS-CoV-2: 

1.   Tests to diagnose active infection - PCR tests (molecular), antigen tests

2.   Tests for post-infection antibodies – antibody tests (blood test)


Tests to Diagnose Active Infection


A test to diagnose SARS-CoV-2 that determines if you currently have the disease.  According to in the USA, the FDA approved two types of tests for diagnosing COVID-19 — molecular and antigen: (source)


-   Molecular test. This test detects genetic material of the virus using a lab technique called polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Also called a PCR test, a health care worker collects fluid from a nasal or throat swab or from saliva. Results may be available in minutes if analyzed onsite or one to two days if sent to an outside lab. Molecular tests are considered very accurate when properly performed by a health care professional, but the rapid test appears to miss some cases. The FDA also approved certain COVID-19 at-home test kits, available only with doctor approval: A nasal swab kit and a saliva kit. The sample is mailed to a lab for testing. The FDA warns consumers against buying unapproved home tests, because they may be inaccurate and unsafe.

-   Antigen test. Rapid diagnostic testing that isn’t as sensitive as molecular tests. This newer COVID-19 test detects certain proteins that are part of the virus. Using a nasal or throat swab to get a fluid sample, antigen tests can produce results in minutes. Because these tests are faster and less expensive than molecular tests are, some experts consider antigen tests more practical to use for large numbers of people.   According to, a positive antigen test result is considered very accurate, but there’s an increased chance of false-negative results — meaning it’s possible to be infected with the virus but have negative results. According to antigen tests have a higher risk of false positives (meaning that they’re more likely to say you have the infection when you don’t).  Depending on the situation, the doctor may recommend a molecular test to confirm an antigen test result. (article)


PCR Tests (molecular test)


The polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test runs cycles that amplify tagged DNA or RNA sequences and the smallest contaminants can ruin the test completely.  The amplification of DNA in PCR has to be initiated using short strands that are complementary to the target DNA, called primers. Keith Jerome, the head of virology at the University of Washington, points out that “primer design is still somewhat of an art, and not fully predictable.” (source)


Video:  The Evolution of PCR (7 mins)


It should be noted that the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test in this case is being used in emergency circumstances and according to its inventor, Kary Mullis, was not designed as a tool to detect infectious disease. 


PCR does not isolate and identify viruses. 

PCR does not provide RNA sequences of pathogens.

PCR offers no baseline for comparison with patient samples.

PCR cannot determine an infected from non-infected sample. (video (mark 12:24))


RT-PCR stands for reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction. (Wikipedia)


Professor Carl Heneghan and Tom Jefferson point out: “When a diagnostic test is studied in one setting – for example, in hospitals – and not in the intended population for which it is used – the community – problems with interpreting the results occur. Mass testing has taken off and the limitations of widely-used tests such as PCR have been ignored. PCR tests on their own cannot distinguish whether you are actively infected and infectious or whether you are recovering from the disease and simply have dead particles of Covid in your system. Up to a year ago a handful of laboratories were doing PCR – a highly delicate and specialised technique, vulnerable to contamination. The enormous expansion of testing in the community has meant procedures and training have been rushed through. Warnings by bodies such as the College of American Pathologists of the problems of using different uncalibrated PCR kits have been ignored. The detection of ‘cases’ in the community tell us little (apart from driving lockdowns). How many are serious; how many are contagious? No one knows.” (article) (AO COVID-19 - What Do Other Professionals Say?)



Cycle Threshold


COVID testing is typically performed using a nasopharyngeal swab, a 6-inch long swab inserted deep into the nostril. The swab is rotated for a while and then it is sent to a lab where a PCR test will dramatically amplify the amount of genetic material captured and then compare it to the DNA or RNA of a particular segment of the COVID virus (reference RNA).


To get enough genetic material to test the PCR process increases the genetic material present by copying it and then copying it again over and over. Each of these increasing steps is called a “cycle” and the genetic material in the solution is reacted against the reference DNA to determine a positive.  If the sample contains a large amount of COVID virus it will react positive after only a few cycles, while a sample with small amounts of genetic material will require more cycles to amplify enough genetic material to get a positive result.


Since the PCR test amplifies traces of COVID-19 through cycles, a lower number of cycles needed to get a positive suggests the presence of a higher viral load for the person being tested and therefore a higher contagion potential.


The number of cycling required to identify viral material in a given sample is called the cycle threshold (Ct).  (source)


Most COVID-19 PCR tests today have set the limit at 40 cycles. This means the sample is positive for the coronavirus if the test process requires up to 40 cycles to detect the virus. (source)  


“Tests with thresholds so high may detect not just live virus but also genetic fragments, leftovers from infection that pose no particular risk — akin to finding a hair in a room long after a person has left.”  Dr. Michael Mina, epidemiologist, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health.  (article)


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


45 cycles is the maximum limit recommended, above that would give 100% positive results.  (Dr. Andrew Kaufman video (47 mins) (mark 29))


PCR testing has many variables influencing the results of the tests.  The test is susceptible to contamination and there are errors inherent in the PCR test itself (i.e. whether there is a gold standard for comparison***); how the procedure is done (i.e. cycle threshold) and the specific thing that is being measured (i.e. whether the sample is concentrated or diluted).  


In Ontario test swabs are forwarded to one of 40+ laboratories across the province and in 4 to 6 hours one machine can process and analyze around 96 PCR tests.  It is unclear whether the cycle threshold is dictated to the laboratories, who sets the cycle threshold for the tests, what cycle threshold is set, how often it changes and what prompts a change.  It is possible that the cycle threshold could be manipulated to control the positive/negative case counts.


Public Health Ontario – Report: Focus on An Overview of Cycle Threshold Values and their Role In SARS-CoV-2 Real-Time PCR Test Interpretation


*** “If positive control material is limited, synthetic RNA sequence, identical to the target region of the virus, is used as an alternative.”  (Page 3)


Real-time PCR-based SARS-CoV-2 detection in Canadian laboratories


News – PCR Tests & Cycle Threshold







Bitchute / Dr. Tom Cowan

The PCR Test is not a valid Diagnostic Tool (11 mins)

Dr. Tom Cowan

AO What do Doctors say?


Assessment of SARS-CoV-2 RNA Test Results Among Patients Who Recovered From COVID-19 With Prior Negative Results

Liotti, Menchinelli, Marchetti, et al

-   Some COVID-19 recovered patients test positive suggesting new infection [or not, need to address PCR test inadequacies]


CBC News

Is more testing behind the record numbers of COVID-19 cases in Canada? Your testing questions answered

Emily Chung, Kieran McMurchy, Cheryl Brown

-      Impact from increase in testing

-      Wastewater surveillance

-      Nasal swabs (good for 72 hrs unfrozen)

“Rapid tests 70-80% accuracy vs 95% accuracy”


Bitchute / Spiro Skouras

We are being lied to!  Here is how … (26 mins mark 16:28)

Spiro Skouras, Dr. Thomas Cowan


Before It’s News

Attorney: Fake PCR Test Created Fake Covid-19 Pandemic Scandal

Reiner Fuellmich


Government of Ontario Confirms Westphalian Times Reporting on Cycle Thresholds

Marie Oakes


Youtube / Dr. Sam Bailey

Covid-19: Who Fact-Checks the Fact-Checkers? (10 mins)

Dr. Sam Bailey

-   Lab vs real world testing


International experts suggest that up to 90% COVID cases could be false positives – UPDATED

Marie Oakes


Government of Ontario

Public Health Ontario .pdf




NY TIMES: Up to 90% Who've Tested COVID-Positive Wrongly Diagnosed! TRUTH: A Whole Lot Worse! (Pt 3/3)

Michael Thau


NY TIMES: Up to 90% Who've Tested COVID-Positive Wrongly Diagnosed! TRUTH: A Whole Lot Worse!! (Pt 2)

Michael Thau


NY Times Raises Questions About COVID Testing [Updated]

Michael Thau

-   article “fact-checked” &  retracted by publisher


Your Coronavirus Test Is Positive. Maybe It Shouldn’t Be.

Apoorva Mandavilli

“up to 90 percent of people testing positive carried barely any virus”


Youtube/BBC Newsnight

How accurate are coronavirus test? (13 mins)

-   PCR test explanation


Youtube / BrightCanNews

No Mandatory Testing for Ontario Teachers Due to 50% False-Positive Rate (1 min)

Dr. Yaffe, government of Ontario

AO What do Doctors say?


USA Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)

CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel (.pdf)


“Positive results are indicative of active infection with

2019-nCoV but do not rule out bacterial infection or co-infection with other viruses. The agent detected may not be the definite cause of disease.”

“False-positive test results are more likely when prevalence is moderate to low.”


Bulgarian Pathology Association (BPA)

COVID19 PCR Tests are Scientifically Meaningless

Torsten Engelbrecht, Konstantin Demeter


Alberta Health Services

COVID-19 Scientific Advisory Group Rapid

Response Report (.pdf)

“clinical sensitivity and specificity values have not been determined for lab developed RT-PCR testing in Canada”



Antigen Tests/Rapid Tests


Between March and September 2020, only a single rapid, point-of-care test had been approved by Canadian regulators.  Following pressure from public health experts and Ontario Premier Doug Ford, Health Canada has since approved four more rapid testing devices. (article)  Rapid tests are less accurate than molecular/PCR tests.







‘Something extremely bogus is going on’: Musk says he’s positive & negative for Covid-19 after taking 4 tests in 1 day



CBC News

As parts of Canada tighten COVID restrictions, experts say rapid testing offers a way forward

John Paul Tasker


CBC News

Feds announce plan to buy 7.9 million rapid COVID tests as Health Canada defends slow response

John Paul Tasker



Direct LAMP test (Optigene) and rapid lateral flow tests (Innova) latter distinctly says should not be used in community settings – WHO says should focus on sick people


Tests for Antibodies


Human bodies make proteins known as antibodies found in the blood when they are fighting an infection.  An antibody test (aka serology test or blood test) does not look for the virus itself, instead it looks for the antibodies showing that there has been a response to infection.


After a person has been infected with SARS-CoV-2, they will typically develop antibodies within 7 to 10 days.  With SARS-CoV-2, the antibodies seem to disappear in many individuals after 3 to 6 months following an infection. Joseph F. Petrosino, PhD, chairman of the Department of Molecular Virology and Microbiology at the Baylor College of Medicine.  (article)


To be absolutely clear, antibody tests are not helpful in diagnosing current COVID-19 infection. (article)


According to (source)


-   a test looks for one or both kinds of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2:  (i) IgM antibodies (which happen early in an infection), (ii) IgG antibodies (which are more likely to show up later). 

-   most people have IgG antibodies about 14 days after symptoms start. They usually stay in your blood long after the infection goes away, but we don’t know how long that is for the new coronavirus.

-   It’s important to note that some tests can mistake IgM antibodies from other coronaviruses, such as common cold strains, for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies.

-   Testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies probably means you’ve had the virus.  It’s also possible to get a “false positive” if you have antibodies but had a different kind of coronavirus.  A positive result might mean you have some immunity to the coronavirus. It’s too early to know how strong it is or how long it might last.

-   Testing negative means you haven’t come into contact with the virus or you haven’t had it long enough to make antibodies. You could also have been exposed and not have antibodies -- this is called a “false negative”.

According to (source)


-   The level of immunity and how long immunity lasts are not yet known.

-   The timing and type of antibody test affects accuracy. If you have testing too early in the course of infection, when the immune response is still building up in your body, the test may not detect antibodies, so you may have to wait several days to get tested. Also, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) authorized and verified certain antibody tests, but many tests with questionable accuracy are now on the market.


News – Antibody Tests







Youtube / Joyne Freedom

"Doctor Mike" Admits Some Testing Problems (2 mins)

Dr. “Mike” Mikhail Varshavski



This Is When You Should Get a COVID-19 Antibody Test

Korin Miller


FDA Authorizes First Point-of-Care Antibody Test for COVID-19

Korin Miller

-   Drop of blood, 15 mins

-   Assure COVID-19 IgG/IgM Rapid Test fingerstick blood test



Accuracy of Tests


Scientifically the SARS-CoV-2 virus has never been isolated, does not have a gold standard (a 100% reliable standard as comparison), does not meet Koch’s postulates and does not pass peer-review.


The testing is known to be unreliable and inaccurate.  No COVID-19 test is 100% accurate.  (source) (article)


“Up to 90 percent of people [PCR] testing positive carried barely any virus.” Apoorva Mandavilli, New York Times


“Casedemic” when positive tests are counted as cases but do not mean illness or death. (video) (article)


Antigen tests:  Low test sensitivity.  Samples can be poor with nasal swabs. Challenge is finding the right antibodies with which to compare.   (source)


Unreliable false negative test results used to create fear (article)


BBC Newsnight – How accurate are coronavirus tests? (13 mins)


We are being lied to!  Here is how … (26 mins), Spiro Skouras


Australian Government Department of Health Statement


Accuracy of Tests


• SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR tests are high-fidelity tests designed for maximal sensitivity and minimal off-target

reactivity. RT-PCR tests are the gold standard for diagnostic SARS-CoV-2 testing in Australia. Available

evidence for the reliability of RT-PCR tests mainly comes from symptomatic patients. The test’s clinical

role in detecting asymptomatic carriers is still unclear given these in vitro diagnostic devices were not

designed for screening.

• As community prevalence of COVID-19 falls and the rate of asymptomatic testing increases, the

proportion of false positive results may increase. However, it is important to note that PHLN emphasises

the likelihood of false positive and false negative results occurring is still low.


(source .pdf)

Other Information Sources


Public Health Ontario website


Centers for Disease Control (USA) - Overview of Testing for SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19)




Positive Test Statement


“All positives [test results] are meaningless because they have not isolated the virus.”


Rocco Galati, lawyer for Vaccine Choice Canada et al. lawsuit to hold the governments of Canada and Ontario accountable


(video 1 hr 22 mins) [mark 20:16]



Mass Testing Statement


Current mass testing using the PCR test is inappropriate in its current form. If it is to continue, then results and reporting should be refined to meet the gold standard of testing methodology to give clinicians improved information so that they are able to make appropriate clinical decisions. Positive tests should be confirmed by testing a second sample and all positive tests should be reported along with the Cycle Threshold (Ct) obtained during the test to aid assessment of a patient’s viral load.


The PCR test for the virus is good enough to confirm infection in someone with symptoms. “Is it flu or is it COVID-19?” is a question easily answered. What it is very poor at, however, is what is being asked of it now, namely estimating the percentage of people who are currently infectious in the community.


The result of continuing to use this test alone on a massive widescale screening program is inevitably to generate a high proportion of false positives.


Paul Kirkham, Professor of cell Biology and Head of Respiratory Disease Research Group at Wolverhampton University


Dr Mike Yeadon, former CSO and VP, Allergy and Respiratory Research Head with Pfizer Global R&D and co-Founder of Ziarco Pharma Ltd


Barry Thomas, Epidemiologist


September 7, 2020


(source) (video 13 mins)











The coronavirus appears to have mutated. What does that mean for contagiousness?

Erika Edwards

-   Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico

-   D614G mutation


Spike mutation pipeline reveals the emergence of a more transmissible form of SARS-CoV-2

Korber, Fischer, Yoon et al

-   Not peer reviewed



NEWS - General: Testing for SARS-CoV-2







BBC News (UK)

Used coronavirus tests handed out by mistake in Birmingham



Principia Scientific International

Even CDC Now Admits No ‘Gold Standard’ Of COVID19 Virus Isolate

John O’Sullivan

-   Jon Rappoport


CBC News

Health Canada approves first rapid antigen COVID-19 test

John Paul Tasker


Bitchute / Spiro Skouras

We are being lied to! Here is how … (26 mins)

Spiro Skouras

-   Dr. Kary Mullis


Bitchute / David Icke (UK)

David Icke Talks to Dr. Andrew Kaufman About the UK Government’s Colossal Testing Scam

-   Dr. Andrew Kaufman

-   Operation Moonshot

-   UK’s goal to test 10 million people daily; the entire population on a weekly basis


Coronavirus Testing Suspended at Boston Lab Due to Nearly 400 False Positives

BN Frank


Youtube / Pamela Popper (USA)

Testing and More Testing and More Problems (17 mins)

Pam Popper

-   mark 8:17 incentivized $

-   inaccurate test, incompetent companies


Government of Ontario

Ontario Updates COVID-19 Testing Guidelines

Dr. Barbara Yaffe, Associate Chief Medical Officer of Health


34 people in Durham got incorrect positive COVID-19 results this past weekend

Jillian Follert


Government of Ontario

Ontario Expands COVID-19 Testing to Pharmacies

Office of the Premier

Keeping Ontarians Safe plan


A 15-minute COVID-19 test kit was recently approved in the U.S. — why is Canada so far behind?

Rosa Saba

-   Abbott Panbio


Bitchute / WellnessForumHealth

Testing, Government Assessment of Testing and Consequences of Testing (16 mins)

Pam Popper


Youtube / talkRadio

Dr. Mike Yeadon: “Government are using a COVID-19 test with undeclared false positive rates (13 mins)

Dr. Mike Yeadon

AO What do Doctors say?


Youtube / Pamela Popper

Testing and Adjusting the Numbers. What is Going On? (13 mins)

Pamela Popper

-   mark 1:40 mins


Youtube / Ivor Cummins

Viral Issue Crucial Update Sept 8th: the Science, Logic and Data Explained! (38 mins)

Ivor Cummins

statistics & analysis

[mark 24:12] “casedemic”


New $5, 15-Minute Coronavirus Test Makes a Case for Rapid Testing

Kristen Fischer


Lockdown Sceptics

How Likely is a Second Wave?

Kirkham, Yeadon, Thomas


Youtube / Cabin Talk

Dr. Reiner Fuellmich starting litigation! (20 mins)

Dr. Reiner Fuellmich, lawyer

-   testing @ mark 7:35

-   AO What do Doctors say?


New York Times

Your Coronavirus Test Is Positive. Maybe It Shouldn’t Be.

Apoorva Mandavilli


Overview of Testing for SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19)

Diagnostic testing categories edited


Bitchute/David Icke

“Virus” Test Revelations With David Icke and Andrew Kaufman (54 mins)

David Icke / Andrew Kaufman


AO What do Doctors say?


New guidelines say coronavirus antibody tests are pointless

Chris Smith


Our Pharmaceutical Emperors Have No Clothes

Saeed A. Qureshi PhD


COVID-19: Vaccine ‘Not Possible’ For A Virus Not Yet Quantifiable

Saeed A. Qureshi PhD


Centre for Evidence-Base Medicine (CEBM)

Are you infectious if you have a positive PCR test result for COVID-19?

Jefferson, Heneghan, Spencer, Brassey


Youtube / BrightCanNews

No Mandatory Testing for Ontario Teachers Due to 50% False-Positive Rate (1 min)

Dr. Yaffe, government of Ontario

AO What do Doctors say?


Collective Evolution

OPINION“COVID-19 PCR Tests Are Scientifically Meaningless” Says Bulgarian Pathology Association

Arjun Walia


COVID19 PCR Tests are Scientifically Meaningless

Torsten Engelbrecht, Konstantin Demeter


Youtube / Spiro Skouras

Dr. Tenpenny:  This is The Biggest Scam Ever Perpetrated on the Human Race (mark 24:25)

Dr. Sherri Tenpenny

AO What do Doctors say?


Fox News

Coronavirus has mutated into at least 30 different strains new study finds

Christopher Carbone

-   Prof Li Lanjuan

-   study


CBC News

Thousands of contaminated test kits delivered to New Brunswick

Shane Magee


Seattle Times (USA)

UW Medicine halts use of coronavirus testing kits airlifted from China after some had contamination

Evan Bush


Letter from Dr. Sin Hang Lee to the World Health Organization and Dr. A. Fauci dated March 22, 2020 (.pdf)

Dr. Sin Hang Lee


Chinese testing kit exports soar as COVID-19 spreads

Liu Zhihua

- Real-Time Fluorescent RT-PCR kits

- Wondfo SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Test


Motley Fool

Faulty COVID-19 Test Kits Tilt Scales in Coronavirus's Favor

Cory Renauer




For more information:


AO COVID-19 – What do Doctors Say?




Link to AWARE-Ontario COVID-19 News


Link to Home Page


List of Ontario’s Issues


What Can I Do?



Disclaimer: This information has been compiled through private amateur research for the purpose of allowing the reader to make an informed and educated decision.  However, while the information is believed to be reliable, completeness and accuracy cannot be guaranteed.







AO News – COVID-19 Testing




Scientifically the SARS-CoV-2 virus has never been isolated, does not have a gold standard, does not meet Koch’s postulates and does not pass peer-review. PCR testing is known to be unreliable and inaccurate with significant false positives. "Cases" does not mean illness or death and therefore means nothing. Increasing the number of tests equals an increased number of cases equals a "casedemic" and not a "pandemic". All is not as it seems in the mainstream.


APPENDIX C (Kary Mullis)


Dr. Kary Mullis (December 28, 1944 – August 7, 2019), the inventor of  polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test (Wikipedia) was an American biochemist who died of pneumonia a few months before COVID-19 became a problem.


“PCR .. it’s just a process that’s used to make a whole lot of something out of something.  That’s all it is. It doesn’t tell you that you’re sick and it doesn’t tell you that the thing you ended up with really was going to hurt you or anything like that”.  (video)