Read the Beforeitsnews.com story here. Advertise at Before It's News here.
Profile image
By John Rolls (Reporter)
Contributor profile | More stories
Story Views
Now:
Last hour:
Last 24 hours:
Total:

Science Fail: Portuguese Court Rules PCR Tests Are Unreliable, Unlawful “Evidence” of Alleged Covid-19 Infections

% of readers think this story is Fact. Add your two cents.


Image: SCIENCE FAIL: Portuguese court rules PCR tests are unreliable, unlawful “evidence” of alleged Covid-19 infections

By:  / Natural News 

Quarantining people based solely on a “positive” PCR test is no longer lawful in Portugal, thanks to a court decision ruling the test to be inherently unreliable, and thus fraudulent for policy-making purposes.

Citing Jaafar et al. 2020, the court determined that the PCR test produces varying results depending on an individual’s viral load, as well as on the number of cycles used. In its conclusion, the court wrote that:

“… if someone is tested by PCR as positive when a threshold of 35 cycles or higher is used (as is the rule in most laboratories in Europe and the U.S.), the probability that said person is infected is less than 3%, and the probability that said result is a false positive is 97%.”


***Support BeforeItsNews By Trying HerbAnomic Natural Health Building Products Including Humic & Fulvic Liquid Trace Mineral Complex, Immusist Beverage Concentrate & UltraCur Bio-Available Curcumin! Click Here For More Information & To Order!***


In other words, people who get tested with a PCR test will more than likely receive an inaccurate result, usually a false positive. This would suggest that the official Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) numbers are majorly skewed, making the plandemic seem worse than it actually is.

Amazingly, nobody seems to know which cycle threshold for the PCR test was being used in Portugal up until this point. Consequently, there is no way to know how many people who tested “positive” actually had the Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19).

In India where the standard cycle threshold is between 37 and 40, the reliability of the PCR test there is similarly less than three percent, with a false positive rate as high as 97 percent.

You will find more of the latest news about the Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) at Pandemic.news.

PCR test never intended to detect whole viruses

The case in Portugal came about after four people were forcibly quarantined by the Regional Health Authority (RHA). One of these individuals received a PCR test, while the other three were deemed to have undergone “a high risk of exposure.”

The RHA decided that all of them were “infectious” based on the circumstances, mandating that they go into forced isolation for the prescribed two-week period that most governments seem to be utilizing.

These individuals sued for fraudulent science and won, setting a precedent for the PCR test to hopefully be discarded as pseudoscientific quackery, which is exactly what it is.

Even The New York Times told the truth by revealing that most people who test “positive” using a PCR test are actually negative and healthy.

Testing data collected from Massachusetts, New York, Nevada and elsewhere show that upwards of 90 percent of people who test “positive” with a PCR test are perfectly normal and disease-free.

“Given how much scientific doubt exists – as voiced by experts, i.e., those who matter – about the reliability of the PCR tests, given the lack of information concerning the tests’ analytical parameters, and in the absence of a physician’s diagnosis supporting the existence of infection or risk, there is no way this court would ever be able to determine whether C was indeed a carrier of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, or whether A, B and D had been at a high risk of exposure to it,” the Portuguese court corroborated about the faulty nature of the PCR test.

It is important to keep in mind that the PCR was never intended to be used as a method of trying to copy genetic material, which is how it is being used in Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) testing.

“It was never intended to be a diagnostic tool,” Great Game India reports.

In essence, if a PCR test is conducted on an immune person and turns up “positive,” what it is actually pulling up is perhaps a “shattered part of the viral genome.”

“Even if the infectious viruses are long dead, a corona test can come back positive because the PCR method multiplies even a tiny fraction of the viral genetic material enough [to be detected],” Great Game India further notes.

Sources for this article include:

GreatGameIndia.com

NaturalNews.com

https://www.naturalnews.com/2020-11-19-portugal-rules-pcr-tests-unreliable-unlawful-covid19.html

***Support BeforeItsNews By Trying HerbAnomic Natural Health Building Products Including Humic & Fulvic Liquid Trace Mineral Complex, Immusist Beverage Concentrate & UltraCur Bio-Available Curcumin! Click Here For More Information & To Order!*** 



Before It’s News® is a community of individuals who report on what’s going on around them, from all around the world.

Anyone can join.
Anyone can contribute.
Anyone can become informed about their world.

"United We Stand" Click Here To Create Your Personal Citizen Journalist Account Today, Be Sure To Invite Your Friends.

Please Help Support BeforeitsNews by trying our Natural Health Products below!


Order by Phone at 888-809-8385 or online at https://mitocopper.com M - F 9am to 5pm EST


Order by Phone at 888-809-8385 or online at https://www.herbanomic.com M - F 9am to 5pm EST


Humic & Fulvic Trace Minerals Complex - Nature's most important supplement! Vivid Dreams again!

Ultimate Clinical Potency Curcumin - Natural pain relief, reduce inflammation and so much more.

MitoCopper - Bioavailable Copper destroys pathogens and gives you more energy. (See Blood Video)
Oxy Powder - Natural Colon Cleanser!  Cleans out toxic buildup with oxygen! 
Nascent Iodine - Promotes detoxification, mental focus and thyroid health.
Smart Meter Cover -  Reduces Smart Meter radiation by 96%!  (See Video)

Immusist Beverage Concentrate - Proprietary blend, formulated to reduce inflammation while hydrating and oxygenating the cells.

Report abuse
Loading...
Loading...

Comments

Your Comments
Question   Razz  Sad   Evil  Exclaim  Smile  Redface  Biggrin  Surprised  Eek   Confused   Cool  LOL   Mad   Twisted  Rolleyes   Wink  Idea  Arrow  Neutral  Cry   Mr. Green

Total 8 comments
  • residentp

    Why then isn’t this court ruling seen as a legitimate rejection of the reasoning of other bribed countries also, that sheeple can be tested to subject them to abuse, all based on a faulty test. Countries with their governments using this test method were negligent not having it verified by scientists and now they can be sued for all the economic damages caused. They allowed a pandemic to be declared that is false. If the world is in this ‘pandemic’ together, then court cases must be held in all countries to be uniform in the legal declaration of a pandemic, to either declare it legal or not. Are the judges in this court case fools and idiots?….DEFINITELY NOT, so why are governments like fools and idiots just following what they are ordered to follow by a group trying to make money from vaccines and at the same time declare that depopulation must be done and governments and sheeple must pay fortunes for the privilege to be ‘saved’ by a ‘vaccine’?

  • beLIEve

    PORTUGESE APPEALS COURT DEEMS……. :idea: PCR TEST…..UNRELIABLE :idea:

    Mon 10:07 am +00:00, 16 Nov 2020

    posted by Weaver

    A PORTUGESE PROFESSOR and LOCKDOWN SCEPTIC has sent me a long and INFORMATIVE EMAIL ABOUT A RECENT RULING BY the PORTUGUESE COURT of APPEAL which CASTS DOUBT ON the RELIABILITY OF the PCR TEST.
    It it a great tribute to the integrity of the Portuguese legal system that the Court seems to understand in considerable detail the SHORTCOMINGS OF the PCR TEST AS a DIADNOSTIC TOOL…..particularly when not used in combination with a clinical diagnosis. :idea:
    I think this is the best news I’ve had all week. What follows is NOT the WHOLE EMAIL. The PROFESSOR DOES NOT WANT TO BE IDENTIFIED, so I’m only publishing an extract.

    With Spain and Greece, PORTUGAL IS ONE OF the FEW COUNTRIES in the so-called West WHERE enough PEOPLE are still alive to KNOW WHAT A DICTATORSHIP LOOKS LIKE. :idea:
    Our numbers are dwindling, as you have to be at least 60 to have experienced the 1974 revolution in any meaningful manner. I was a teenager at the time, and I remember very well what DAILY LIFE was like UNDER CENSORSHIP…..MA$$IVELY LYING MASS MEDIA :lol: …… …….POLICE BRUTALITY……ARBITRARY DETENTION IN the NAME OF the …”NATIONAL INTEREST”, etc. — all those things that I hoped never again have to experience but that the current Covid climate has brought very, very vividly to the fore.
    Yet, it may well be…

    • beLIEve

      ……Continued……..

      Yet, it may well be exactly ………because of SUCH THINGS HAVE HAPPENED IN LIVING MEMORY…… that OUR GOVERNMENT HAS BEEN LESS HEAVY-HANDED about the pandemic than most others in Europe.
      And, now to the point, maybe that’s also why OUR…HIGH COURTS HAVE ISSUED RULINGS OF………
      POTENTIALLY DEVASTATING CONSEQUENCES FOR THE current COVID NARRATIVE.
      Portugal is a small country but is part of the EU and so what happens here still is of some international significance.
      That’s why I thought you’d be interested in learning about some recent developments.

      In a RECENT DECISION….dated November 11, 2020, a PORTUGESE APPEAL COURT RULED AGAINST the Azores Regional Health Authority concerning A LOWER COURT DECISION…TO DECLARE UNLAWFUL the QUARANTINING OF FOUR PERSONS.
      Of these, ONE HAD TESTED POSITIVE FOR Covid using a PCR TEST; the OTHER THREE were deemed to have undergone A HIGH RISK OF EXPOSURE.
      Consequently, the Regional HEALTH AUTHORITY DECIDED that all four were infectious and a health hazard, which required that THEY GO INTO ISOLATION.
      The LOWER COURT had RULED AGAINST the HEALTH AUTHORITY…and…..the APPEAL COURT UPHELD THAT RULING……WITH ARGUMENTS THAT EXPLICITLY ENDORSE the SCIENTIFIC CASE…..FOR the LACK OF RELIABILITY OF the PCR TESTS (e.g., as extensively explained in LOCKDOWN SCEPTICS by…..Dr. Mike Yeadon, Dr. Clare Craig and others). :idea:

      The COURT’S RULING is a long text. I provide below a…

      NOV…

      • beLIEve

        …..Continued………

        The COURT’S RULING is a long text. I provide below a………… SUMMARY of the key passage.

        The court’s main points are as follows:

        A MEDICAL DIAGNOSIS IS A MEDICAL ACT THAT ONLY a PHYSICIAN IS LEGALLY QUALIFIED TO UNDERTAKE…AND….FOR WHICH SUCH PHYSICIAN WILL BE SOLELY and ENTIRELY RESPONSIBLE.

        NO OTHER PERSON or INSTITUTION….INCLUDING “government” AGENCIES OR the COURTS….HAS SUCH AN AUTHORITY.

        It is not up to the Azores Regional Health Authority to DECLARE SOMEONE ILL…OR a HEALTH HAZARD.
        ONLY A PHYSICIAN CAN DO THAT.
        NO ONE CAN BE DECLARED ILL OR a HEALTH HAZARD …BY DECREE OR LAW….. NOR AS THE automatic, administrative consequence of the OUTCOME OF A LABORATORY TEST, no matter which. :idea:
        From the above, the court concludes that “IF CARRIED OUT WITH NO PRIOR MEDICAL OBSERVATION OF the PATIENT…..WITH NO PARTICIPATION OF A PHYSICIAN CERTIFIED…….by the Ordem dos Médicos who would have assessed symptoms and requested the tests/exams deemed necessary, any act of diagnosis, or any act of public health vigilance (such as determining whether a viral infection or a high risk of exposure exist, which the aforementioned concepts subsume) WILL VIOLATE [a number of LAWS and REGULATIONS] and MAY CONFIGURE A CRIME OF usurpação de funções [UNLAWFUL PRACTICE OF a PROFESSION] in the case said ACTS are carried out or DICTATED BY SOMEONE DEVOID OF the CAPACITY TO DO SO i.e., BY SOMEONE WHO IS NOT A CERTIFIED…

        • beLIEve

          …..Continued……..

          BY SOMEONE WHO IS NOT A CERTIFIED…… PHYSICIAN [to practice medicine in Portugal a degree is not enough, you need to be accepted as qualified to practice medicine by undergoing examination with the Ordem dos Médicos, roughly our equivalent of the UK’s Royal College of Physicians].”

          In addition, the court rules that the Azores HEALTH AUTHORITY…VIOLATED….ARTICLE 6 OF…The UNIVERSAL DECLARATION ON BIOETHICS and HUMAN RIGHTS…as IT FAILED TO….PROVIDE EVIDENCE THAT the INFORMED CONSENT :idea: MANDATED :idea: BY SAID DECLARATION….HAD BEEN GIVEN BY the PCR-tested PERSONS……WHO HAD COMPLAINED ABOUT the FORCED QUARANTINE MEASURES….IMPOSED ON THEM. :idea:
          From the facts presented to the COURT, it CONCLUDED that NO evidentiary PROOF OR even INDICCATION EXISTED THAT the FOUR PERSONS in question HAD BEEN SEEN BY A DOCTOR….EITHER BEFORE OR AFTER….UNDERTAKING the TEST.
          The above would SUFFICE TO DEEM the FORCED QUARANTINE of the four persons UNLAWFUL. :idea:

          The COURT thought it necessary, however, to ADD SOME very INTERESTING CONSIDERATIONS ABOUT the PCR TESTS: :idea:

          “Based on the currently available scientific evidence this test [the RT-PCR TEST] is in and of itself UNABLE TO DETERMINE beyond reasonable doubt THAT POSITIVITY in fact CORRESPONDS TO INFECTION by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, for several reasons, among which two are paramount (to which one would need to add the issue of the gold…

          • beLIEve

            ……Continued……

            ….among which two are paramount (to which one would need to add the issue of the gold…… standard, which, due to that issue’s specificity, will not be considered here): the TEST’S RELIABILITY DEPENDS ON the NUMBER OF CYCLES USED; the test’s reliability DEPENDS ON the VIRAL LOAD PRESENT.”

            Citing Jaafar et al. (2020; https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciaa1491), the court concludes that “IF SOMEONE IS TESTED BY PCR AS POSITIVE WHEN A THRESHOLD OF 35 CYCLES OR HIGHER IS USED (AS IS the RULE in most laboratories in Europe and the US), the probability that said person is infected is 3%, and THE PROBABILITY THAT SAID RESULT IS A FAL$E POSITIVE is 97%.” :idea:

            The court further notes that the CYCLE THRESHOLD USED for the PCR tests currently being made in Portugal is unknown [N.B. – I know from acquaintances that in at least SOME PORTUGUESE LABS the threshold IS 35 CYCLES].

            Citing Surkova et al. (2020; https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanres/article/PIIS2213-2600(20)30453-7/fulltext), the court further states that ANY DIAGNOSTIC TEST MUST BE INTERPRETED IN the CONTEXT OF the ACTUAL PROBABILITY OF DISEASE…AS ASSESSED….PRIOR TO THE UNDERTAKING OF the TEST ITSELF…….AND…….EXPRESSES the OPINION THAT……..

            “IN the CURRENT EPIDEMIOLOGICAL LANDSCAPE OF…….the UNITED KINGDOM…….the LIKELIHOOD IS INCREASING THAT……….
            COVID 19 TESTS ARE RETURNING FALSE POSITIVES………WITH MAJOR IMPLICATIONS FOR…

          • beLIEve

            ……Continued..,…..

            ….COVID 19 TESTS ARE RETURNING FALSE POSITIVES………WITH MAJOR IMPLICATIONS FOR………… INDIVIDUALS……the health system and society.”
            The court’s summary of the case to rule against the Regional Health Authority’s appeal reads as follows:

            “Given how MUCH SCIENTIFIC DOUBT EXISTS — AS VOICED BY EXPERTS, i.e., THOSE WHO MATTER — ABOUT the RELIABILITY OF the PCR TESTS, given the LACK OF INFORMATION CONCERNING the tests’ ANALYTICAL PARAMETERS, and in THE ABSENCE OF A PHYSICIAN’S DIAGNOSIS…SUPPORTING the EXISTENCE OF INFECTION OR RISK………THERE IS NO WAY THIS COURT WOULD EVER BE ABLE TO DETERMINE WHETHER C WAS indeed A CARRIER of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, OR WHETHER A, B and D HAD BEEN AT a HIGH RISK OF EXPOSURE to it.”

            I anticipate this RULING TO HAVE MASSIVE LEGAL IMPLICATIONS in my country.
            Note that it comes in the back of A PREVIOUS RULING by the Constitutional Court, our highest court, DECLARING AS AN UNLAWFUL DEPRIVATION OF LIBERTY……a decision by the Regional Government of the Azores….TO FORCE INTO A 14-DAY QUARANTINE…EVERY PASSENGER LANDING IN AN AIRPORT OF the TERRITORY. :idea:

            Stop Press: A reader has got in touch to say he’s looked at the NHS DEFINITIONS for the terms used in the monthly data analysed by my doctor friend yesterday and uncovered the following gem:

            For all relevant data items: a confirmed COVID-19 patient is any patient admitted to the trust who has…

          • beLIEve

            …..Continued……..

            For all relevant data items: a confirmed COVID-19 patient is any patient admitted to the trust who has…….. recently (ie in the last 14 days) tested positive for COVID-19 following a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test.

            Patients who have been diagnosed via X-ray and assessment rather than a positive test should be counted as suspected (and not confirmed) COVID-19 patients.

            So patients that have a test but no diagnosis are confirmed COVID patients. Anyone with a firm clinical diagnosis but no positive test are “suspected”.

            By Toby Young

            https://lockdownsceptics.org/ :idea:

            ARTICLE was POSTED ON…..http://tapnewswire.com/2020/11/portuguese-appeals-court-deems-pcr-tests-unreliable/

MOST RECENT
Load more ...

SignUp

Login

Newsletter

Email this story
Email this story

If you really want to ban this commenter, please write down the reason:

If you really want to disable all recommended stories, click on OK button. After that, you will be redirect to your options page.