For over a year, we have been in varying states of lockdown. Depending on which city and state you live in, some of the lockdowns have been relatively mild while most have been outright draconian. And through it all, we have had to deal more than just an oppressive government. The conflict many people have had with each other over issues like face masks, social distancing, and being stuck at home have caused hardship on top of the economic turmoil most Americans have faced.
Fear is the driving factor behind policies (at least initially) and compliance. The primary cause of this fear has been the rise in “cases” of Covid-19. It seems that whenever we appear to be getting ahead of the pandemic, a new surge or strain pops up to drive us back into a state of perpetual terror. But what if we learned that PCR tests used to determine who is considered a “case” aren’t accurate indicators of who is or is not infected with Covid-19? What if we learned the tests weren’t really even tests at all?
That’s the message attorney Anthony Raimondo is trying to get out to the public. He’s not a doctor or a scientist, so some may question his credentials to declare that results from the PCR Assay do not properly indicate infections. To this, he turns to the inventor of the PCR Assay, Kary Mullis, who felt there were different uses for his machine.
“Well, one of the things that I’ve learned is how shocking it is that this PCR test is really not even a test,” he said. “Its inventor was a guy name Kary Mullis who was a Nobel Prize winning scientist, and he himself actually tangled quite a bit with our good friend Dr. Fauci. He called Fauci a fraud. And he was persistent that his invention, the PCR Assay, is not a test. It is not a diagnostic tool and was never intended to be used as a diagnostic tool.”
This seems to run contrary to the accepted narrative that the PCR Assay can diagnose Covid-19 cases. I went through various fact-check sites to see their verdict and invariably they said this claim about Mullis wasn’t true. But here’s the thing. In ZERO “fact-checks” was I able to find a direct answer to the question. They would say that Mullis was being misrepresented, but would not show the quotes that were allegedly being twisted. The last time I saw fact-checks that were so obscure while declaring definitively that something was true or untrue was during the Russia investigation. Just as with these PCR test “fact-checks,” the same sites were claiming that there was evidence of collusion during the 2016 election without actually noting what that evidence was.
As usual, the fact-checkers were only effective at offering confirmation bias for those who want to be told the mainstream narrative was correct.
Digging deeper, I learned that what Raimondo was reporting was correct. These “tests” use technology that is very easy to manipulate. They “spin” and identify genetic material within a sample. Standard operating procedure says they should go through 10-15 cycles, but the labs handling the Covid-19 tests typically run their samples through 40+ cycles.
Last year, some mainstream media outlets reported on this fallacy. You won’t hear them talking about it anymore. Now, there’s a narrative of fear to push. According to MSN last August:
Up to 90 percent of people tested for COVID-19 in Massachusetts, New York and Nevada in July carried barely any traces of the virus and it could be because today’s tests are ‘too sensitive’, experts say.
Health experts say PCR testing – the most widely used diagnostic test for COVID-19 in the US – are too sensitive and need to be adjusted to rule out people who have insignificant amounts of the virus in their systems because they’re likely not contagious.
Today the PCR test, which provides a yes or no answer if a patient is infected, doesn’t say how much of the virus a patient has in their body.
PCR tests analyze genetic matter from the virus in cycles and today’s tests typically take 37 or 40 cycles, but experts say this is too high because it detects very small amounts of the virus that don’t pose a risk.
The question that must be asked is, why? If scientists and doctors believe the “tests” lose accuracy while inflating “cases,” why do the testing centers continue to engage in this frustrating practice? Many conspiracy theorists will point to the government. Others will say it’s Big Pharma and the politicians they own. Some will say it’s the globalists who are pushing for The Great Reset. But one does not have to be a conspiracy theorist to look at the facts and realize this all stinks.
Raimondo isn’t just out there talking about this on shows. He’s putting his money—and his business—where his mouth is. He works with businesses across California who have been fined for opening. His first word of advice: Don’t pay the fines. He encourages everyone to invoke their rights as American citizens to receive due process. He has helped many beat their fines and get their businesses open.
Can the PCR test facts be used in court today?
“I haven’t seen successful battles fought in the United States but we’re seeing cracks in the foundation elsewhere in the world,” he said. “In November of 2020, an appeals court in Portugal threw out all of their government policies that were based on the PCR tests for the reasons that I described. They found that the PCR test was completely unreliable as a diagnostic tool. A positive PCR test doesn’t mean that a person is sick. It doesn’t mean that a person is contagious.”
On the latest episode of NOQ Report, Raimondo gave us tons of data to digest. In fact, there was so much useful information that we plan on having him back on the show very soon. The Two Mikes gave us another news update as well.
PCR “tests” are finding Covid when testing fruits. They are extremely sensitive and should not be used as the basis for determining cases. Authorities know this. Why, then, do they continue to inflate the numbers? The answer is troubling.
Watch this show on Locals or listen to it on Apple Podcasts.