Follow up: COVID-19 positive cases down 62% since World Health Organization updated PCR guidance
February 28, 2021


Our January 26 article, “World Health Organization’s updated guidance for PCR COVID-19 testing will likely lower positive cases” is coming to fruition.  The WHO changed its policy for utilizing the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) technique for COVID-19 testing. Make certain to read the foregoing article in its entirety for more context.

The following is a direct quote from the article:

The World Health Organization recently updated its guidance for utilizing PCR for COVID-19 testing. Some are calling it a politically-motivated move. The update came just hours after President Biden was inaugurated.

“The cycle threshold (Ct) needed to detect virus is inversely proportional to the patient’s viral load,” the January 20, 2021 Information Notice says. “Where test results do not correspond with the clinical presentation, a new specimen should be taken and retested using the same or different NAT technology.” In other words the WHO said that the more cycles in PCR, the less reliable the test (inversely proportional). The CDC was still recommending 40 cycles as recently as December 1, 2020.

(See link for article)



Epidemiologist Dr. Mina, stated that upwards of 90% of positive tests with a 40 cycle threshold would have been negative at 30.  Fauci is on record stating anything over 36 is a false positive and “just dead nucleotides.”  The UK has used thresholds as high as 45.

The WHO changed the cycle threshold on Inauguration Day and positive cases have declined ever since, but the media is attributing this decline to the mRNA injections – yet Fauci, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla, and Moderna Chief officer Tal Zaks are all on record stating the injections to not stop the spread of COVID-19.

The article also rightly points out that if altruism was the goal, then the media would be reporting on the successful treatments of Ivermectin and HCQ (among many others) but have labeled these treatments “conspiracy theories,” despite peer reviewed studies and experts stating otherwise.

Please see:


%d bloggers like this: