Home>Articles>CDC Pulls PCR Tests Because they Can’t Differentiate Between COVID and Flu; California News Silent

Coronavirus. (Photo: Center for Disease Control)

CDC Pulls PCR Tests Because they Can’t Differentiate Between COVID and Flu; California News Silent

California Globe reported inconsistencies with Gov. Newsom’s $100 million COVID-19 testing lab in December

By Katy Grimes, July 26, 2021 7:37 am

The Center for Disease Control is finally pulling the flawed PCR tests because they can’t differentiate between COVID and the Flu. But it appears California news outlets are too busy fear mongering the Delta Variant to notice or care.

The Southern California News Group reported in the Orange County Register that masks are mandatory again in OC Superior Court “after two people in the building tested positive for COVID-19.” Two people tested positive. Are they sick? Are they hospitalized? Have they died?

“So far, more than 260,000 people in the county have contracted the disease,” the SCNG reported. Imagine if the sentence said, “more than 260,000 people in the county have contracted the flu.”

“The disease.” What happened to the virus? What the SCNG article doesn’t say is the more than 260,000 people who contracted the “disease” is the total number for the last 16 months.

Orange County’s population is 3,175,130. In April, Dr. Clayton Chau, director of the Orange County Health Care Agency and acting county health officer proposed a pilot program for “vaccine passports” in Orange County – a “show-me-your-papers” or “digital passport” program to provide COVID vaccination evidence.

Orange County COVID-19 dashboard. (Photo: occovid19.ochealthinfo.com/coronavirus-in-oc)

Here is what the CDC says:

After December 31, 2021, CDC will withdraw the request to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) of the CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel, the assay first introduced in February 2020 for detection of SARS-CoV-2 only. CDC is providing this advance notice for clinical laboratories to have adequate time to select and implement one of the many FDA-authorized alternatives.

A source from Gov. Newsom’s $100 million lab explained to the Globe in February about the high number of false positive PCR tests:

“Results from a positive PCR test should be considered as a preliminary result only and doesn’t determine an active infection or  hospitalization rates. Doctors typically order these tests when a patient shows symptoms and the doctor suspects the patient has a high probability of having the disease. Once a result comes back positive, it must be confirmed with another test in order to be considered definitive.

The concern with Covid screening is that none of these steps are taken. A positive PCR has little clinical significance and increases our case numbers without confirming the presence of an active infection. Without the expertise of a physician and a confirmatory assay there is no way to determine if this is a true positive result.”

The Globe also reported on three doctors in Contra Costa County who were concerned with the excessive COVID PCR testing leading to high numbers of false positive results. Dr. Michael deBoisblanc, Dr. Pete Mazolewski and Dr. Brian Hopkins explain:

“PCR testing has proven to be seriously flawed when used to track disease prevalence, and the number of false positive tests has contributed to fear, panic and unnecessary quarantine of many. The peer review of the original Corman-Drosten PCR paper points out the serious flaws and conflicts of interest in the original article describing the PCR test (Peter Borger Et al., 11/27/2020). This paper is the basis for the PCR test used in the United States. On January 21, 2021 the World Health Organization published direction on the interpretation of a positive PCR test. They now caution about calling a test “positive” without symptoms, a confirmatory test, and physician oversight. They also cite the serious problems with high cycle thresholds leading to a high number of false positives. In short, they agree with what we argued last month.”

“With this information, your COVID positive case numbers are highly suspect and using this data to determine which tier the population falls into has been, and continues to be, completely unreliable and arbitrary. Our recommendation is to move forward quickly with rapid antigen testing. These tests are less expensive, and more appropriately sensitive to detect people with active, contagious disease.”

Dr. Michael deBoisblanc, Dr. Pete Mazolewski and Dr. Brian Hopkins followed up with Contra Costa County. In their last letter, the doctors again asked for answers they did not receive, including about the PCR tests’ false positives.

“We write this letter in follow up to our previous letter dated December 10, 2020. In that letter we asked several questions regarding the following issues: PCR testing, and how the county was accounting for false positives?”

Six months later, the CDC pulls the PCR tests.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Spread the news:


32 thoughts on “CDC Pulls PCR Tests Because they Can’t Differentiate Between COVID and Flu; California News Silent

  1. Oh man. Love your stuff, but this is totally fake. California Globe should pull the article down immediately.

    The CDC is pulling the emergency use authorization request to the FDA for this, the first RT-PCR test assay used for COVID-19. Nearly 200 others remain authorized[1].

    They also provide guidance that future assays should include the ability to detect both COVID as well as flu strains. This seems practical advice going into flu season as we pivot away from being so COVID-centric.

    There is no info one why this particular assay is being pulled. It could be some grand conspiracy, but it could also because it’s no longer widely used or is inefficient relative to the hundreds of other tests available to labs now. Occam’s razor probably guides.

    [1] https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/coronavirus-disease-2019-covid-19-emergency-use-authorizations-medical-devices/in-vitro-diagnostics-euas-molecular-diagnostic-tests-sars-cov-2#individual-molecular

    1. You wrote:
      “There is no info one why this particular assay is being pulled.”
      You contradict yourself. After stating why the CDC is pulling it’s EUA, “the ability to detect both COVID as well as flu strains,” you then say there is “no info” on why.

      So what’s the purpose of your comment and criticizing Katy and the Globe??

    2. The main thing is to get the word out so that WE THE PEOPLE know that the test is fake so people will STOP participating in it. All the evidence about the “tests” has been out there to find-starting with the inventor-Kerry Mullis-calling Fauci out on using them in the 80’s. If the CDC did pull the test it is only to avoid the tsunami of lawsuits for recommending it in the first place because people are (daring) to ask questions. “WHAT DID THE CDC KNOW, AND WHEN DID THEY KNOW IT?” Fauci used this test to trick people into believing they were HIV positive in the 1980’s-to sell the toxic AZT drug. People are finally allowing themselves to accept the harsh reality of the deep deception from “health institutions” and so called “doctors” that we previously put on pedestals. What other tests out there are used as a lure to get people to fall prey to other dangerous and experimental treatments? and why is Bill Gates tied to funding so many of them?
      Stephan Lanka* writes about the fake pcr test being recommended by the WHO 3 days before Wuhan even presented their version of evidence for the “new virus”. How is that possible? It isn’t. This was a big screw up on their part. They could not wait to spring this on the un-suspecting public.

  2. Bariant is wrong. Kary Mullis pointed out that the PCR couldnt tell the two apart because they also could nt identify an infection and there is film out there with him saying so! Kary Mullis created this PCR!

    1. Kary Mullis also spent decades as a leading denialist of HIV causing AIDS. Not the best choice for the argument from authority.

  3. A Portugal court and a Vienna Court have already come to this conclusion. There is a court inGermany about to rule the same.

  4. Comrades
    Tonsil removal in ole days included your arms and legs being held down to a cold steel table by four white coat Brutes……have we turned our lives and futures over to similar primitives?

      1. California news is silent because they’re not as dumb as you. It couldn’t differentiate between covid and flu because it didn’t test for flu. The CDC withdrew its EUA request because there are now tests out there that do. Learning to read is an important first step to learning how to write.

        1. Read the whole article. This test is being pulled because they used it to confirm cases when it is only a preliminary test and not reliable enough to conclude a positive result without further testing.

  5. Can we get some specific links to so called “main stream sites” with this information? Or the CDC?


    1. You’re BACK early, Queeg. You said a MONTH off. I guess the allure of these HIGHLY informative discussions just could not keep you away…LOL.

  6. Kary Mullis, inventor of PCR test, warned it could be manipulated to produce any desired results, based on cycles of test (false positive). That is what the masks and lockdowns were based on… Kary Mullis died (just prior to this psyop) in August 2019, after exposing Fauci and his ilk.
    Question? How can Newsom mandate vax for state workers that does not have FDA approval? Is that even legal?

    1. No it is not legal. Look at the Nuremburg Code/Protocol of 1947. We, the USA, have signed on and adopted the protocols as law. The gov’t cannot force us to take any experimental medication. Once the FDA removes the EUA and gives final approval for the vaccine the courts are going to be busy ruling on who can and cannot be forced to accept vaccination.

  7. Okay then! I guess we know what happened to the Mystery of the Vanishing 2020-21 seasonal annual flu season NOW, don’t we? They called it all COVID, just as The Globe speculated was happening —- early in the shutdown in 2020 I think it was —- but because the Feds were paying the hospitals and the doctors EXTRA for COVID cases it made sense to them to call the flu COVID. And bonus points for the endless benefits (for them) of scaremongering forever.

  8. In the US, PCR testing is the most widely used diagnostic test for CONvid-19. PCR tests analyze genetic matter from the virus in “cycles”, and typically take 37-40 cycles. Many experts say this is too high because it deems a patient positive, picking up fragments that are leftovers from infection and no longer pose a risk, plus the PCR test only gives a yes or no answer and does not determine how much of the virus a person has in their body, (viral load). A reasonable cut off for the virus would be 30 cycles. In already processed PCR tests, set at the standard 37-40 cycles, were re-analyzed at the threshold value set at 30 cycles, 85-90 percent of those tests that were positive came back negative. The current PCR high threshold set at 37-40 is “like finding a single piece of hair, when someone has a left a room”. The CDC said it’s own calculations suggest it’s extremely hard to detect a live virus in a sample above 33 cycles. (Credit Dr. Michael Mina; Juliet Morrison, Virologist at the University of California, Riverside; Angela Rasmussen, Virologist at Columbia University, New York)

    1. Thank you for sharing this important piece of evidence of the manipulation that has created this dystopian nightmare that we’re now dealing with…

  9. So will the next new test also include graphene oxide particles to deposit the nanoparticles deep into the respiratory system and in close proximity to the brain???

    Asking for a friend…

  10. It’s very simple:
    Misuse a test counting flu and non-viable COVID DNA fragments to drive the numbers up, up, up.
    ORANGE MAN BAD, killing us all!
    ORANGE MAN GONE, happy happy joy joy.
    Uncle Gropy now the boss, must drop the numbers down to prove the Biden Miracle.
    Reissue guidance on how the tests are administered and how interpreted.

  11. “During the early months of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, clinical specimens [of the virus] were not readily available to developers of IVDs [in vitro diagnostics] to detect SARS-CoV-2. Therefore, the FDA authorized IVDs based on available data from contrived samples generated from a range of SARS-CoV-2 material sources (for example, gene specific RNA, synthetic RNA, or whole genome viral RNA) for analytical and clinical performance evaluation. While validation using these contrived specimens provided a measure of confidence in test performance at the beginning of the pandemic, it is not feasible to precisely compare the performance of various tests that used contrived specimens because each test validated performance using samples derived from different gene specific, synthetic, or genomic nucleic acid sources.”

    Translation: We, at the CDC, did not have a specimen of the SARS-CoV-2 virus when we concocted the PCR test for SARS-CoV-2. Yes, it’s unbelievable, right? And that’s the test we’ve been using all along. So we CONTRIVED samples of the virus. We fabricated. We lied. We made up [invented] synthetic gene sequences and we SAID these sequences HAD TO BE close to the sequence of SARS-CoV-2, without having the faintest idea of what we were doing, because, again, we didn’t have an actual specimen of the virus. We had no proof THERE WAS something called SARS-CoV-2.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *