top of page

Evidence Indicates CDC Manipulating Covid-19 PCR Testing, Provide False Evidence of Vaccine Efficacy

Updated: May 11, 2021

*Note: Peer review from the International Consortium of Science by 22 relevant experts found 10 severe flaws with Sars CoV2 RT PCR testing (the main test for diagnosis of Covid-19 infections) and concluded:

The Highlights:

-the CDC is utilizing vastly different standards in attributing Covid-19 infections in vaccinated and unvaccinated populations.

-CDC has announced it will soon only report post Covid-19 vaccination Covid-19 cases that result in hospitalization and death while continuing to report all unvaccinated cases under standard method

-CDC is utilizing vastly lower cycle threshold rates of 28 in research studies for 'breakthrough post vaccination Covid-19 infections. FDA recommends cycle threshold levels for Sars CoV-2 RT PCR testing at 40. State labs run tests as high as 45 cycles, a rate that will produce up to 100% false positives due to cycle amplification error

-up to 90% of PCR tests in studies in three states, when corrected for Cycle threshold error last July, were found to be effective false positive tests on this one error alone

-Dr Anthony Fauci admitted in an interview on July 16, 2020, a cycle rate over 35 would pick up 'dead nucleotides' period (dead, non infectious material).

-CDC is utilizing severely flawed test results post vaccination to attribute morbidities to Covid-19 infection without a standard post-mortem review protocol. A positive test result is not proof individual died from Covid-19 infection.

-Public health officials last week attributed death of woman to Covid-19 infection despite independent autopsy evidence and coroner & treating ER physician attributing the woman's death to complications of Pfizer Covid-19 vaccination. Health officials did not review autopsy results, and there was no positive test....Full story HERE

-all Covid-19 testing is non-specific to Sars CoV2, with tested developed with in-stock assays and not virus isolate - on page 40 of the Emergency Use Guidelines the CDC states

-a positive test result for Covid-19 infection is not sufficient or definitive proof of infection with Sars CoV2, non-specificity of test and severe errors result in positive from unknown determination

-evidence indicates severely flawed testing not 'asymptomatic transmission or silent spreaders' responsible for majority of individuals testing positive on PCR with no Covid-19 core symptoms of infection.

-CDC is refusing to answer questions inquiring into the justification of opposite testing standards for vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals

The Summary:

There is significant and credible evidence of severe Covid-19 testing flaws and protocol errors. This evidence is documented by the government public health organizations own data and confirmed through review of CDC Emergency Use and test manufacturers guidelines. Covid-19 testing is non-specific to Sars CoV2, (virus attributed to cause symptoms of Covid-19 infections). Despite the problems being publicly reported in major publications such as the New York Times, and numerous FDA & WHO updates documenting the issue, both public health officials and the media continue to report a positive test results from Covid-19 testing as a 'case'. It unequivocally is not.

Additionally, the timing and changes public health organizations are making to test cycle recommendations and reporting standard indicate public health officials may be acting to drive numbers based on political rather than health objective goals. By varying PCR test recommendation protocols, and cycle threshold rate levels, results can be skewed to produce higher or lower numbers of positive tests that do not represent true infections.

The Story:

The CDC announced that on May 14, 2021, vaccination 'breakthrough' cases will be measured by a completely different standard than unvaccinated Covid-19 infection cases with the agency withholding data from May 7, 2021 for public review:

Additionally, CDC has announced research studies that utilize entirely different cycle threshold protocol standards for determination of Covid-19 case determination, current FDA guidelines direct testing labs running PCR tests to run cycle rates up to 40 CT, CDC test guidelines for 'breakthrough studies direct tests to be run at 28:

"Respiratory specimen for SARS-CoV-2 sequencing • Specimen selection o Clinical specimens for sequencing should have an RT-PCR Ct value ≤28. o If a Ct value is not available, specimens that are positive for SARS-CoV-2 RNA or antigen by another testing modality may be sent"

Implementing Sars CoV2 testing at high cycle threshold rates will create false positive cases with studies finding anything over 30 producing false positive cases majority of the time:

In other words, a Cycle Threshold rate at 30 expected results of PCR test would be false positive 80% of the time.

A Cycle Threshold above 35, would be expected false positives 97% of the time.

MAJORITY of positive Covid-19 tests were found to be false positives in studies correcting for the issue last summer.

The New York Times reported on medical studies last July that demonstrated PCR tests produced majority false positive when corrected for high cycle threshold rates. In Massachusetts 85 to 90% of test results last July were due to this simple test recommendation error.

The CDC is effectively cooking the books. The agency is manufacturing majority false positive cases through setting the RT PCR rates at levels will result in false positive cases by default of the test setting. In running the PCR test rate lower for unvaccinated individual testing, the CDC is creating will detect far fewer positive cases, thus fabricating false data the agency can then use to point to vaccine efficacy.

Public health officials are fully aware of this issue. Dr. Anthony Fauci admitted in an interview last July 16, 2020 that PCR tests run at this cycle rate would produce 'dead nucleotides' period. Video may be viewed here, player starts at Fauci quote.

This is not, the first time, public health organizations have made changes to testing protocol recommendation settings which result in large Covid-19 case numbers.

Dr Fauci was disingenuous was when answering yes to the interviewers question asking if the cycle threshold rate was included in lab data given to care providers, According the the New York Times report on this story, the cycle threshold data was never included in the lab report.

The inclusion of the cycle number, central for providers ability to correct for false positive error due to high cycle settings, was not recommended for inclusion in provider lab report until December 7, 2021.

This occurred one week before the Pfizer Covid-19 vaccination received its Emergency Use authorization. This timing is suspect as it was predicted that health professionals adjusting for Cycle Rate error would dramatically drop Covid-19 infection 'cases'. Many health officials had been asking for correction of this error for months, and the World Health Forum withholding the change until release of the Pfizer vaccination indicates a strategy to drop cases numbers, in tandem with the rollout of the mass vaccination program.

The expected case decrease occurred as predicted, and many news outlets point to this drop in numbers as evidence of Covid-19 efficacy in reducing infections, despite the drop precisely correlating to a testing protocol change that was predicted to result in vastly lower number of state reported 'cases'.

However, even the resulting drop in case number from this partial correction by the WHO PCR testing, does not tell the full story.

The use of PCR tests have a history of manufacturing false cases of illness, a whooping cough epidemic was created on the erroneous tests when used in a Boston Children's hospital, and a thousand health care workers were furloughed. Not a single case was confirmed through a definitive test:

Faith in Quick Test Leads to Epidemic That Wasn’t - New York Times (

"For months, nearly everyone involved thought the medical center had had a huge whooping cough outbreak, with extensive ramifications. Nearly 1,000 health care workers at the hospital in Lebanon, N.H., were given a preliminary test and furloughed from work until their results were in; 142 people, including Dr. Herndon, were told they appeared to have the disease; and thousands were given antibiotics and a vaccine for protection. Hospital beds were taken out of commission, including some in intensive care.

Then, about eight months later, health care workers were dumbfounded to receive an e-mail message from the hospital administration informing them that the whole thing was a false alarm.

Not a single case of whooping cough was confirmed with the definitive test, growing the bacterium, Bordetella pertussis, in the laboratory. Instead, it appears the health care workers probably were afflicted with ordinary respiratory diseases like the common cold.

Now, as they look back on the episode, epidemiologists and infectious disease specialists say the problem was that they placed too much faith in a quick and highly sensitive molecular test that led them astray"

Evidence indicates that this is now occurring with Covid-19 cases, with the testing driving case numbers, not Sars CoV2 infections.

The majority of individuals with a positive Sars CoV2 test do not express symptoms of the illness with one study estimating up to 86.5% PCR have no systems of infection.

This is not due, as stated in the above article, to 'silent spreaders'. But, rather faulty testing methods set to cycle threshold recommendation errors that produce majority false positive by default. The numbers of false positive tests is approximate to the number of individuals diagnosed through PCR as positive with no symptoms. The reason for individuals testing positive without symptoms is simple, they are simply not sick or contagious.

Despite no substantive evidence or credible data to support the asymptomatic theory,

policy makers have adopted non-symptomatic spread as the rationalization for distancing and masking policies.

Proponents of the 'asymptomatic' transmission rely on studies that measure viral load, not transmission method. And, these studies utilize the same faulty PCR testing deemed useless for detection of Sars Cov2 to measure for viral load, corrupting and invalidating the study results.

Further, antigen and antibody testing are equally as inaccurate for assertation of Sars CoV2 infection, with antigen testing being administered against FDA warnings for use in low infection rate populations and antibody testing non-specific to Sars CoV2 and detecting the common cold.

The second wave Covid-19 case numbers seen last fall were largely generated on the use of rapid antigen test that will generate false positives when utilized in low incidence populations. Massachusetts ordered 2 million of these antibody tests at the end of October, right before the FDA issued a statement warning of false positives due to this issue. Incidence rates was approximately .5% based on surveillance data at the time, a rate with an expected false positive outcome of 86%. Right after Massachusetts began the testing, positive test soared while hospitalization and rates remained flat, indicating the testing was generating majority of cases.

Members of Health Care Professionals for Covid 19 Policy correction have outreached to appropriate policy makers, state health boards, and testing providers. The efforts to flag serious and credible concerns around credibly documented flaws and protocol errors have been largely ignored or stone walled. Many officials have acknowledged problems but have made no effort to enact measures to correct for the problems. Outreach to media outlets to flag concerns have been met with interest by news directors but has not resulted in a change in reporting standards to meet the current data and credible evidence around case number reporting. Media outlets should be reminded of FCC licensing rules forbidding news organizations to push inaccurate and disproven data that could result in harm to public health. Evidence now overwhelming shows the official case numbers and morbidity rates are not accurate, and an ethical press would launch immediate independent investigations into this scandal.

The public needs to demand that public health officials and policy makers implement health policy on credible and substantial evidence, not speculative and unsupported theory.

At this point, it appears that public health officials are wagging the dog to sustain unnecessary Covid-19 policy protocols and health directives unsupported by the scientific evidence. Medical leadership is abdicating its duty to independently review widely available data indicating immediate need for course correction. And, the media needs to engage in objective review of fact instead of funneling Covid-19 narratives through the mouth of politicians and political punditry.

Fortunately, there is growing public awareness of the problems with many health care professionals now coming together to speak out against flawed testing and vaccine safety issues. For more information, go to Home | Fact Checking the Fact Checkers (

Recommended Additional Reading:

4,129 views1 comment

1 Comment

Great job, Rose. Very comprehensive report!

bottom of page