The figures for deaths in COVID-19 are wrong. The figures for infected are incorrect.

The numbers of deaths in COVID-19 are again increasing alarmingly media says.

According to WHO regulations for the updated death certificates, all deaths must be registered as COVID-19 if there is evidence or suspicion that the SARS CoV-19 virus may be involved. 

Doctors around the world are thus encouraged to write COVID-19 in every death certificate wherever possible! No wonder "deaths in COVID-19" increase when sampling increases. 

You can see facsimile of the Swedish death certificates on this page (in Swedish):  https://www.justidag.info/bilaga-om-corona-sars-cov-2-och-covid-19

 

The spread of infection is alarming media says. 

The test method used to identify SARS CoV-2 is based on the so-called PCR method. PCR stands for Polymer Chain Reaction and was developed by Kary Mullis who received the Nobel Prize in 1993 "for the invention of the PCR method". The PCR method has enabled enormous advances in cell research. 

It provides the ability to clone cells for scientific purposes. By an extremely complicated procedure, a single original DNA segment can be doubled in cycles. After 40 doubling cycles, about 100 billion clones can be produced. 

Many researchers have questioned the test method. It is excellent for increasing the number of DNAs so that you can study them. But it does not work for diagnosis, they say.

The scientific article that formed the basis of the WHO's call for universal testing with PCR – test, test test - was written already in January 2020. https://www.eurosurveillance.org/content/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.3.2000045  

The authors point out that to enable a quick intervention, the research was carried out in one single week, while it would normally have taken several months and, as they say, "not be finished until the outbreak had already reached its peak". 

The report was published within 24 hours after it was submitted to the editors. There was not much time for reflection or review by independent experts. According to the researchers, the report was not based on actual experiments with viruses but on theories from Chinese researchers.

Time was short. The research article was written in a hurry and certainly with the best of intentions. Unfortunately, it has not been reviewed or updated since. 

For a long time, there have been unverified reports that the tests result in many false positive results. (Don’t forget the President of Tanzania who found that the PCR tests gave a positive result on papaya and goat https://www.justidag.info/covid-19-denier-in-tanzania/  and therefore fired the head of the test institute.)

Now there is an assessment of this original article that questions the entire test business. The new report came on 27 November 2020. It will certainly lead to a very hot debate in the research world. At we least we can hope it does! 

Note that the authors do not say it would not be impossible to identify the virus with a test. What they point out is that incorrect test routines have been established. And that the tests therefore may become "positive" because of many other reasons than the presence of the SARS VoV-2 virus it is meant to detect. 

They list ten different scientific mistakes that they believe make the method unreliable as a diagnostic method. Unfortunately, they have not suggested a better method. But it is now up to others to design. https://cormandrostenreview.com/report/  

Many researchers have already argued that a positive result in the test does not mean that the person in question is ill or infected or contagious. This report also shows that since the probability of a false positive is high, a positive test may not have any bearing on the disease at all. 

The headline is: External peer review of the RTPCR test to detect SARS-CoV-2 reveals 10 major scientific flaws at the molecular and methodological level: consequences for false positive results.  If this report is correct, then most news about the spread of infection is wrong. It should be worth investigating carefully.