Petition Part 1: Summary Review, Severe Testing Errors, Flaws: Covid-19 PCR, Antigen, Antibody Tests
Updated: Mar 14, 2021
Petition Summary Review & Section 1.
Sars CoV2 (Covid 19) Testing Method & Protocol Errors:
Go to this page to sign petition, access and download full petition, Scroll down to the bottom of the linked page below to read the petition segments from 1 to 7. The full petition is extensive, it is easier to read and share from the individual sections:
Petition Summary Review
All Public Health Officials, Political Representatives, State Health Departments & Health Licensure Boards, Hospital Administrators, Health Professional Licensing Boards, Covid-19 Testing Labs, College Health Program Administrators, Hospital Administrators & All Relevant Health Professional Organizations and Journals:
There is significant evidence of severe issues with Covid-19 testing methods, directives, and protocols and serious safety concerns with Covid-19 vaccinations which are being actively ignored by health professional leadership, political representatives, and professional governing bodies.
Health professionals who attempt to engage leadership with these documented and evidence based concerns are being ignored, dismissed, or censored.
Evidence clearly indicates that implementation of current Covid-19 testing & Covid-19 vaccines and protocols is unnecessary and not serving the interests of individual and public health with significant documentation of harm resulting from these protocols.
We, the undersigned, request an IMMEDIATE suspension of public health directives pertaining to Sars Cov2, the virus attributed to cause Covid 19 infections, and a full independent review and investigation into pandemic policies created on the highly unreliable emergency approved PCR, Antibody, & Antigen testing which is not reliable or accurate to detect the virus it is employed to diagnosis and rationalized on research studies & trial designs that do not meet the minimum standards of scientific integrity to inform public disease, etc). health policy directives (peer review, control group, adequate population size, reliable testing measures for end outcome measurement and diagnosis of
Peer Review by 22 international experts of the scientific paper on which the PCR Testing for Sars CoV2) is based found ten severe flaws with the methods and concluded:
" 'In light of our re-examination of the test protocol to identify SARS-CoV-2 described in the Corman-Drosten paper we have identified concerning errors and inherent fallacies which render the SARS-CoV-2 PCR test useless'.
"The design errors described here are so severe that it is highly unlikely that specific amplification of SARS-CoV-2 genetic material will occur using the protocol of the Corman-Drosten paper".
PCR testing is the central test for diagnosis of Covid 19 infection.
The World Health Organization, FDA, and CDC have released statements and documents that affirm the Corman Drosten Review conclusions, as documented in detail in petition body below.
We further submit evidence demonstrating PCR tests have been set at high cycle threshold levels by government policy makers (CDC, FDA WHO) which will create mass false positives results for Covid-19 infections by default, and health officials, fully aware of the problem, failed to correct for the issue even after the issue was exposed on August 29, 2021 in the New York Times.
Additionally, Dr. Anthony Fauci, Chief Medical Advisor to President Joe Biden, admitted in an interview on July 16, 2020 that high cycle threshold settings would create false positive results by default& stated anything over a 35 setting would be 'dead nucleotides' period, a dead and non-infectious material (see full petition below) demonstrating a full awareness of the severity and implications of this issue.
Officials are using methods and evidence known to be highly unreliable and inaccurate to justify sweeping public health mandates, civil rights restrictions, and interventions on severely compromised data.
New York Times Article Published August 29, Updated on January 19, 2021, this text is archived to be included in the original NYT article release:
"In three sets of testing data that include cycle thresholds, compiled by officials in Massachusetts, New York and Nevada, up to 90 percent of people testing positive carriedbarely any virus" (full documentation in petition body)"
Additionally, the CDC has stated in the past, asymptomatic individuals should not be diagnosed with PCR testing or advised against utilizing the test for asymptomatic contacts of infected individuals due to serious potential for false positive results, as documented on November 11, 2011 in this CDC Best Use Guide For Pertussis Diagnosis with PCR testing:
(further documented below)
"Testing Patients with Signs and Symptoms of Pertussis: Early signs and symptoms of pertussis are often non-specific, making it difficult to determine clinically who has pertussis in the earliest stages (http://www.cdc.gov/pertussis/clinical/features.html). However, only patients with signs and symptoms consistent with pertussis should be tested by PCR to confirm the diagnosis. Testing asymptomatic persons should be avoided as it increases the likelihood of obtaining falsely-positive results. Asymptomatic close contacts of confirmed cases should not be tested and testing of contacts should not be used for post-exposure prophylaxis decisions".
Nothing has inherently changed about PCR method or protocol to explain this inexplicable change in guidance by the CDC for recommendation for PCR test application, interpretation, and use.
Further, there is extensive documented evidence of mass contamination with early PCR tests. The CDC admitted it knowingly released flawed testing for mass public use.
Millions of tests were recalled in the US & globally due to safety and contamination issues due to bacterial and viral contamination. There has been no accounting to the public by government health officials for the use of contaminated and unreliable tests last spring.
We assert these issues have created serious and potential individual and public health harm, and create legal liability issues for health professionals charged with implementing protocols that go against the evidence based standards required for safe, legal, and ethical practice.
Further, there is significant and credible evidence that a mass vaccination program with emergency approved vaccinations is unnecessary and will contribute to individual and public health harm.
Much of this evidence has been available for public review for months, some since before the Covid 19 pandemic policies were implemented. It is incumbent upon professional and public leadership to actively educate themselves, especially since Covid-19 testing and vaccinations are approved for emergency use only, and have not been vetted with the normal safety procedures.
Evidence has been organized into the following seven categories:
Serious Sars CoV2 (Covid 19) Testing Method & Protocol Errors:
Resulting in Covid-19 Health Policy Based on Severely Flawed Science and Data
No Asymptomatic Transmission:
Asymptomatic Presentation of Positive Covid-19 Test Result Due to Faulty Tests, Testing Methods & Protocols
Serious Contamination Testing Issues with Early Covid-19 Testing Kits
Mass Contamination & Recall of Millions Early PCR Tests & Other Covid-19 Test Kits Resulted in Mass Faulty Data & Public Health Safety Concerns:
Liability Concerns for Health Professionals:
Mass Public Evidence of Severe Issues with Covid-19 Health Directives Used in Litigation, Imperils Health Care Professionals Ordered to Implement Unsound Health Protocols:
Censorship & Political, Professional, Media Misinformation & Attack
Advancing Individual & Public Health Harms, Denigrating Health Professionals and Citizens
Sars CoV2 Covid-19 Emergency Approved Vaccines
Unnecessary & Unsafe: Post-Vaccine Injury and Deaths Go Uninvestigated and Unreported
Mass Individual & Public Health Harms
Result of Covid-19 Directives Based on Severely Flawed Science and Data
Sars CoV2 (Covid 19) Testing Method & Protocol Errors:
Resulting in Covid-19 Health Policy Based on Severely Flawed Science and Data
Severe Errors, Flaws, & Testing Recommendations Documented with Covid-19 PCR, Antigen, and Antibody Test Methods Render Tests Unreliable, Inaccurate, and Unsuitable for Diagnosis of Covid-19 infections:
RT PCR testing for the detection of Sars CoV2 (virus attributed to Covid 19 symptoms) was approved on an emergency use basis on January 22, 2020, one day after submission of paper out-lining the science for Emergency Approval without appropriate peer review, this occurred on Novemberr 22, 2020.
Peer review curated by the International Consortium of Scientists Life Science division by top twenty two expert researchers in relevant fields including Dr Michael Yeadon, former Vice President of Pfizer, found ten serious flaws with testing forcing the review committee to conclude:
'In light of our re-examination of the test protocol to identify SARS-CoV-2 described in the Corman-Drosten paper we have identified concerning errors and inherent fallacies which render the SARS-CoV-2 PCR test useless'.
The review committee has submitted a request for a full retraction of the scientific paper on which the RT PCR tests are based.
Cease and desist orders have been filed against the paper's author, Corman Drosten due to the severe individual and public health harm that has resulted due to the inaccuracies in his paper providing severely flawed protocols for diagnosis of Sars Cov2 Covid 19 infections.:
RT PCR tests work by detecting the presence of a shortened strand of RNA attributed to the Sars CoV2 virus through amplification of testing sample material. Every cycle that the test material is run through decreases the amount of available material, so when run through too many cycles, the material detected is nothing more than non-infectious dead matter.
Since Fauci's admission on 7/16/2020 , the public has been informed that the RT PCR tests were recommended by public health organizations (FDA, WHO, CDC) to be run at cycle threshold levels (40 cycles with some US labs running test up to 45 CT) which will produce mass false positive results by default.
According to the CDC, false positives have the potential to create significant harms:
"In the event of a false positive result, risks to patients could include the following: a recommendation for isolation of the patient, monitoring of household or other close
contacts for symptoms, patient isolation that might limit contact with family or friends and may increase contact with other potentially COVID-19 patients, limits in the ability to work, delayed diagnosis and treatment for the true infection causing the symptoms, unnecessary prescription of a treatment or therapy, or other unintended adverse effects.".
CDC FACT SHEET FOR HEALTHCARE PROVIDERS:
Additional public health harms not stated by the CDC include unnecessary implementation of public health protocol that are documented to be creating mass psychological and physical health harms. (See section below on public health harms)
The New York Times highlighted this issue last August when it revealed that studies adjusting for Cycle Threshold rates in RT PCR test samples taken from three US states returned false positive rates between 85 to 90%.on this ONE error alone.
"In three sets of testing data that include cycle thresholds, compiled by officials in Massachusetts, New York and Nevada, up to 90 percent of people testing positive carried barely any virus":
90% testing error rate on a single issue thus create significant individual health harms as stated by the CDC
Despite these shocking statistics, the official public health organizations responsible for directing Covid 19 response did NOT change recommendations to lower CT rates and every state except Florida, the CT rate was NOT recommended for inclusion in reports report at all until December 14, 2020.
Not all labs are yet following this recommendation:
Coronavirus Cases Plummet When PCR Tests Are Adjusted
Government & public health officials are fully aware of the issue:
Dr Anthony Fauci who was a lead member of President Donald Trump's Corona virus task force, & currently acts as Chief Medical Advisor to President Joe Biden stated in a video on July 16, 2020 that PCR Cycle Threshold rates above 35 are just 'dead nucleotides, period', i.e. a dead and non infectious material.
He also untruthfully answered interviewer when questioned if Cycle Threshold rate were included in lab reports stating 'yes'.
July 16 2020 episode of “This Week in Virology” science podcast hosted by Columbia University virologist Vincent Racaniello:
Quote from Fauci from above interview:
Interviewer: Is the threshold cycle, uh, is reporting that a pretty standard practice in doing a diagnosis now rather than just a positive or negative?
Dr Anthony Fauci; (nods head yes) Yeah.
Fauci goes on to admit in this interview individuals receiving PCR test report will not receive cycle threshold number with positive test result
Interviewer then asks: But, they've got it (referring to care provider responsible for diagnosis):
Dr. Anthony Fauci: They've got it...they've got it
Interview has been archived & may be viewed here:
However, the New York Times reported on 8/29/20:
" number of amplification cycles needed to find the virus, called the cycle threshold, is never included in the results sent to doctors and coronavirus patients, although it could tell them how infectious the patients are....
It was not until the World Health Organization partially addressed the RT PCR testing errors and issued a statement on 12/14/2020 adjusting criteria for positive diagnosis through PCR testing that Cycle Threshold rate should be included with lab reports although they failed to lower Cycle Threshold hold rate recommendations to levels which would prevent the problem entirely:
As the positivity rate for SARS-CoV-2 decreases, the positive predictive value also decreases. This means that the probability that a person who has a positive result (SARS-CoV-2 detected) is truly infected with SARS-CoV-2 decreases as positivity rate decreases, irrespective of the assay specificity. Therefore, healthcare providers are encouraged to take into consideration testing results along with clinical signs and symptoms, confirmed status of any contacts, etc"
The WHO statement of symptom inclusion as part of diagnostic criteria is stunning, as this criteria should be basic practice for any diagnostic review. Diagnostic tests are screening tools and should NEVER substitute for thorough review of all presenting clinical symptoms and lab test data. Citing asymptomatic infection on the sole basis of results from a Sars CoV2 PCR, antigen, or antibody test does NOT meet the minimum medical standards for competent diagnosis of disease or illness. This statement constitutes an open admission by the WHO that asymptomatic PCR tests are not adequate proof infection with Sars CoV2 and invalidates the argument for 'asymptomatic transmission'.
Additionally, since the high cycle threshold rate is only one of the ten flaws cited by International Consortium of Science curated peer review of PCR testing, ALL positive test should not be considered reliable for diagnosis of Covid 19 infections deemed 'useless' for this purpose.
WHO deleted original statement which has been archived by multiple sources and issued new statement on 1/14/21 omitting recommendation to include symptom criteria as part of diagnosis:
It was predicted that case rates and hospitalizations attributed to Sars CoV2 infection would drop with the new WHO recommendations and, this indeed has occurred since the official recommendation came out in December
Public health officials and media outlets are now stating that 'herd immunity' and 'vaccines' are responsible for this drop in cases that was forecast to occur due to simple change in testing protocol recommendations, failing to inform the public of a very critical information to understanding pandemic numbers.
Severe Flaws Antigen & Antibody Testing:
RT PCR testing is not the only severely flawed testing method that is being utilized for the detection of the Sars CoV2 virus.
The Rapid Antigen Testing has a very high false positive error return when used in populations with low infection prevalence according to the FDA:
"Remember that positive predictive value (PPV) varies with disease prevalence when interpreting results from diagnostic tests. PPV is the percent of positive test results that are true positives. As disease prevalence decreases, the percent of test results that are false positives increase.
'At 0.1% prevalence, the PPV would only be 4%, meaning that 96 out of 100 positive results would be false positives.'
The majority of communities who ordered and implemented the use of Rapid Antigen testing had very low infection prevalence at the time of implementation of mass Antigen testing for Sars CoV2.
According to the FDA, the subsequent positive results would return mostly false positives. There is no reliability in determining true positive rates through antigen testing due to use in low infection populations yet these positives are included in official numbers without caveat. Rapid Antigen continues to be implement and recommended in areas of low incidence (population) and this practice will result in very large number of false positive.
Right now, implementation of rapid antigen testing is being expanded around the United States and world despite FDA warning that false positives will be generated by implementing testing in this way.
Lastly, Sars CoV2 Antibody tests are also unsuitable for reliable diagnosis of Sars CoV2:
"A positive result for the SARS-CoV-2 antibody is indicative of an acute or recent infection. A positive result may also be due to past or present infection with non-SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus strains, such as coronavirus hKU1, NL63, OC43 or 229E that cause a mild illness like the common cold"
CDC Health Team Updates
Further, in both the case of positive Sars CoV2 Covid 19 antigen and antibody testing, it is recommended that individuals with positive tests receive a unreliable RT PCR test for confirmation.
In addition to individual public health harmed caused by utilization of tests unsuitable for diagnosis of Sars CoV2, it has created a potential liability situation for the health professionals, nurses and doctors charged with instituting mass testing programs with fundamentally flawed, unreliable methods. It is against ethical, professional, and legal standards for health professionals to implement protocols documented to be severely flawed and have potential to create individual and public health harms.