reSee.it - Related Video Feed

This video discusses the PCR test used for COVID-19 and raises concerns about its accuracy and potential misuse. It explains that the test amplifies a small amount of DNA to detect the virus, but if amplified too much, it can result in false positives. The inventor of the PCR test, Kary Mullis, stated that it was not meant for diagnosing viruses. The video suggests that the high cycle thresholds used in testing lead to inflated case numbers and a false sense of a pandemic. It also mentions the potential dangers of the test, such as the use of sterilizing solutions and the possibility of containing the vaccine. The video encourages critical thinking and research to understand the true nature of the situation.

Dr. Kary Mullis, the inventor of the PCR test, explains that the test can detect almost anything in anyone if done properly. However, it was not designed to test for viruses. The official protocol for COVID-19 PCR testing has led to a high number of false positives, resulting in misleading results. Mullis also questioned the HIV-AIDS connection, stating that there was no evidence to support it. He believed that powerful individuals, including Anthony Fauci and Robert Gallo, were involved in a cover-up. Mullis was outspoken about his concerns, but his warnings were largely ignored. He passed away in August 2019.

This video discusses the PCR test used to diagnose COVID-19 and raises concerns about its accuracy and potential misuse. The test amplifies a small amount of DNA to detect the virus, but when run for too many cycles, it can produce false positives. The inventor of the PCR test, Kary Mullis, stated that it was not meant for diagnostic purposes. The CDC itself acknowledges the limitations of the PCR test and will be changing its method in 2022. The video also explores claims about the test containing sterilizing solutions, storing DNA, and even acting as a vaccine. It urges viewers to question the information presented and seek out alternative sources.

The PCR test, commonly used for COVID-19, involves a nasal swab. According to Kary Mullis, the Nobel Prize-winning scientist who created the test, it can detect almost anything if amplified enough. However, Mullis himself stated that the PCR test should not be used to diagnose diseases, as it only detects fragments of illness. Many laboratories worldwide run the test at high amplification levels, leading to a high rate of false positives. Even Anthony Fauci acknowledged that results beyond 33 cycles are likely not infectious material. The New York Times reported that 90% of PCR tests were not indicative of active illness. Lowering the amplification cycles resulted in significant reductions in case numbers. In the past, PCR tests have caused false positives, such as in a whooping cough pseudoepidemic. Some criticize Fauci for misleading the public.

Dr. Kary Mullis, the inventor of the PCR test, explained that the test can find almost anything in anyone if done well. However, he believed it was a misuse to claim it as meaningful. The official protocol for COVID-19 PCR testing created false positives, skewing the results. Mullis also questioned the HIV-AIDS connection and criticized Anthony Fauci and Robert Gallo. He wanted to expose them and their actions, but not many people listened. Mullis passed away in August 2019, just months before the COVID-19 pandemic began, raising questions about the timing.

The test for COVID-19 cannot differentiate between live and dead matter, only detecting fragments of viruses, leading to guaranteed false positives. This was used to create cases for a public health emergency, enabling the use of untested vaccines. There are claims that true isolates of viruses, including SARS-CoV-2, do not exist; the viral genomes are only computer-generated. Historical evidence from the 1918 influenza pandemic shows no proof of transmission, as attempts to infect volunteers failed. Current symptoms attributed to COVID-19 may arise from various factors, including environmental toxins and EMF exposure, rather than a specific virus. The idea of a virus causing disease is questioned, and the evidence for SARS-CoV-2 remains unproven.

Speaker 0 argues that the test cannot distinguish live from dead matter, only analyzes fragments and is set up to guarantee false positives, which the speaker claims was used to create case numbers for declaring a public health emergency of international concern and to enable untested drugs or vaccines to be used on people. Speaker 1 adds that the biggest lie may be that true viral isolates are unavailable, noting that the claimed genome of SARS-CoV-2 exists only in silico as a computer-programmed genome. The speaker says fear is created to control people, describing “fake mythical flying unicorns” that make us sick and asserting that disease is constructed rather than evidenced by visible agents. They claim that there is no evidence of transmission or isolations supporting the idea of a pathogen causing disease in the usual sense. The speaker references Andrew Kaufman, Doctor Cowan, Stephen Lunk, and others to support the claim that, after a year of pandemic conditions, there is no virus proven through traditional means, including in the 1918 influenza pandemic. They state that volunteers were exposed to sputum from infected individuals, or to the sputum directly, without becoming ill; some experiments involved injecting processed material, which also did not cause illness. They note that horses did not consistently transmit illness when exposed to similar materials, and conclude that influenza does not originate from a Latin term for a virus but means “influence,” suggesting historical transmission evidence is weak. The speakers discuss that we do not have approved evidence of transmission, a virus, a test, or autopsies; what exists is a syndrome of symptoms—flu-like symptoms without pathognomonic signs. They propose several alternative causes for COVID-19–like illness, including transmissibility that appears real but isn’t, radiation effects, and other non-disease explanations. Speaker 1 references Dr. Cowan’s book Contagion to illustrate how radiation exposure in mines could mimic disease transmission, where illness is not truly infectious. They argue that non-ionizing electromagnetic fields (EMF) and exposure to graphene oxide toxicity (claimed to be present in vaccines and referred to as viral-based genetic therapies by the FDA) could produce COVID-like symptoms. They also acknowledge an artificially created spike protein in a lab as a known factor. However, they reiterate that there is no evidence for the mythical SARS-CoV-2 virus as a causative agent. In summary, the dialogue challenges the existence of proven SARS-CoV-2 isolates, questions the validity of tests and transmission evidence, and proposes alternative explanations for the illness, including EMF toxicity, graphene oxide toxicity, and lab-made spike proteins, while highlighting a lack of definitive proof for traditional viral causation.

The existence of the virus is questioned due to the initial PCR test methodology being based on a computer model virus, not a purified isolate from real patients. China did not have a pure isolate, so they used elements of a genetic code to create a computer model sequence. This sequence became the basis for the PCR test. The WHO document states that the diagnosis of SARS CoV-2 should not rely on isolating the virus. The virus has never been purified, and the disease is based on generic symptoms that could be anything.

Misusing PCR isn't quite accurate; it's more about how results are interpreted. PCR can detect almost anything in a sample, leading to the belief that everything is present in the body. While PCR amplifies a single molecule for measurement, the implications of finding something like HIV are less straightforward. The measurement for HIV isn't precise, unlike measuring tangible items like apples. Tests for HIV rely on invisible components, making results inferred rather than definitive. PCR itself is a method for amplification and doesn't indicate illness or the potential harm of what is detected.

Dr. Kary Mullis won the Nobel Prize for inventing the PCR test, which can find almost anything in the body if amplified. The PCR test for COVID-19 has led to false positives due to high amplification levels. Mullis discovered there was no proof linking HIV to AIDS, exposing a sham in the medical community. He criticized the CDC for profit-driven motives and called out Anthony Fauci and Robert Gallo. Despite his efforts to expose the truth, Mullis passed away in 2019, leaving many questions unanswered.

Dr. Kary Mullis, the inventor of the PCR test, explained that the test can find almost anything in anyone if done well. However, he believed it was a misuse to claim it as meaningful. The official protocol for COVID-19 PCR testing created false positives, skewing the results. Mullis also questioned the HIV-AIDS connection and criticized Anthony Fauci and Robert Gallo. He wanted to expose them and their actions, but not many people listened. Mullis passed away in August 2019, just months before the COVID-19 pandemic began, raising questions about the timing.

Dr. Kary Mullis, the inventor of the PCR test, explained that the test can find almost anything in anyone if done well. However, using it to claim meaning or diagnose a virus is a misuse. The official protocol for COVID-19 PCR testing has led to false positives, labeling asymptomatic individuals as infected. 30 years ago, Dr. Anthony Fauci pushed for higher doses of the drug AZT for AIDS patients, despite lacking evidence. Mullis discovered there was no proof of HIV causing AIDS. He questioned the CDC's profit motives and the involvement of high-level officials. Mullis wanted to expose Fauci and Gallo but faced little attention. He passed away in 2019, just before the emergence of COVID-19, leaving many questioning the timing.

Dr. Kary Mullis, inventor of the PCR test, believed the test could find anything if amplified enough. He criticized the misuse of PCR for COVID-19 testing, claiming false positives were skewing results. Mullis questioned the HIV-AIDS connection pushed by Anthony Fauci and CDC for profit. Despite his willingness to expose Fauci, Mullis passed away at 74, sparking mystery.

This video discusses the PCR test used to diagnose COVID-19 and raises concerns about its accuracy and potential misuse. The test amplifies a small amount of DNA to detect the virus, but if it is amplified too much, it can result in false positives. The inventor of the PCR test, Kary Mullis, stated that it was not meant for diagnostic purposes. The video also questions the use of the PCR test for diagnosing COVID-19 when the CDC itself states that it should not be used for this purpose. Additionally, there are claims that the PCR test contains sterilizing solutions and may even contain the vaccine. The video encourages critical thinking and further research.

The speaker discusses the issue of cycle thresholds in PCR testing. They explain that the original protocol used a cycle threshold of 45, which amplifies the results by 10. This means that even unlikely findings, such as particles from Mars, could be detected. The speaker suggests that by using a high cycle threshold, it is possible to create a pandemic by testing healthy individuals and spreading the myth of asymptomatic spread. This is how cases are created, according to the speaker.

This video discusses the PCR test used to diagnose COVID-19 and raises concerns about its accuracy and potential misuse. It explains that the test amplifies DNA to detect the virus, but when amplified too much, it can result in false positives. The inventor of the PCR test, Kary Mullis, stated that it was not designed for diagnostic purposes. The video also questions the use of the PCR test for diagnosing COVID-19 when the CDC itself states that it should not be used for this purpose. It suggests that the high cycle thresholds used in testing contribute to false positives and that the test may contain harmful substances. The video encourages critical thinking and research to uncover the truth.

Speaker 0 discusses a so-called “PCR test rabbit hole” and asserts that the Rockefeller family has owned the medical system since 1910. The speaker claims that every time someone walks in the door, they are “paying John D. Rockefeller,” and that the PCR test is a tool used to manipulate or control outcomes. They assert that the PCR test can be used to fake pandemics, citing swabs and nasal swabbing as part of that manipulation. The speaker further claims the PCR test can be used to convict people for crimes they didn’t commit in forensic contexts. They also say it can be used to sue small farmers by claiming GMOs fell onto their land, implying PCR tests are used in agricultural disputes. Additionally, the speaker asserts PCR tests are used in gene testing to determine someone’s origin or lineage and to label illnesses that may not exist, including pushing cancer testing to promote chemotherapy. Paternity testing is mentioned, with the claim that the PCR test can determine “you are not the father” by manipulating outcomes. The speaker also asserts that mRNA vaccines are real and links this to PCR tests, suggesting that PCR tests are involved in pushing vaccines. A broader claim is made that vaccines containing heavy metals are being administered through this system, implying poisoning via vaccines. The speaker connects the use of PCR testing to animal culling, stating that a PCR test is used to declare bird flu and thereby justify killing all chickens. They argue that the PCR test is a tool for control and manipulation of people. The discussion notes that the PCR test has even received a Nobel Prize, and reiterates the claim that the Rockefellers own the medical system as well as education, agriculture, electric vehicle technology, gas technology, dentists, veterinarians, and doctors since 1910, framing this as a long-standing monopoly of deception. As supporting material, the speaker cites Murder by Injection by Eustace Mullins as a powerful book about lies, deceit, and the monopoly of the medical system, describing it as an umbrella under which all aspects of the medical system are organized around John D. Rockefeller. Overall, the narrative portrays the PCR test as a central instrument of control across diverse domains—healthcare, forensics, agriculture, genetics, vaccines, and education—tied to a long-standing Rockefeller-led monopoly beginning in 1910.

The speakers discuss the misuse of PCR in estimating viral RNA. They explain that PCR can detect almost anything in the body, making it easy to find even rare viruses like HIV. However, they argue that testing for HIV specifically is unnecessary because individuals with HIV are likely to have other viruses as well. They emphasize that PCR is a quantitative tool that provides measurable information, but it does not determine sickness or the potential harm of a virus. The speakers also mention that PCR cannot differentiate between virus particles and active live viruses. Overall, they highlight the limitations and misinterpretations of PCR testing.

PCR is a process that can amplify molecules in the body, making it possible to find almost anything in anyone. However, this doesn't necessarily mean that the presence of a molecule indicates illness or harm. The measurement for HIV, for example, is not exact and is based on invisible factors. PCR itself is just a method to create more of something. It doesn't determine sickness or potential harm.

In the early pandemic, 2020–2021, eighty six percent of PCR-confirmed COVID cases were not real infections. The speaker asserts that all of the lockdowns, all of the vaccine mandates, and all of those policies that destroyed livelihoods and the economy were based on a completely fraudulent metric. A study is described that compared PCR positive rates by week to the actual antibody testing in the same weeks, noting that the antibody test indicates whether you got antibodies to COVID. The speaker states that only fourteen percent had actual antibodies among those PCR positive cases. It is claimed that it may even be up to ninety percent weren't real infections. The speaker concludes that this fraud is confirmed and calls for accountability for all the people who lost their jobs and were forced to take injections based on this fear campaign, which was based on this false test.

The speaker discusses the PCR test used by the medical system to diagnose illness, asserting that technicians “crank up that machine” to confirm illness and then “crank it down” to show the opposite, implying the test is manipulated. They claim the PCR test is used to sell treatments and to poison people for illnesses they do not have, referencing Lyme disease as an example. The discussion broadens to the pandemic, noting that the Tanzanian president observed a link between a pawpaw fruit and COVID and that this connection was explored further. The speaker then reports that they looked up what the inventor of the PCR technology has said, stating that the inventor insisted time and time again that PCR tests “do not prove causation and cannot diagnose illnesses.” They acknowledge potential pushback but maintain that “the system lies to you to poison you and make money off you,” suggesting that PCR tests are used for multiple deceptive purposes. According to the speaker, these tests are also used to fake pandemics, convict people who aren’t guilty, and put people in jail. They claim PCR testing is used to say things about individuals or to enable GMO practices so small farmers can be sued. The speaker further asserts that gene testing, paternity testing, and culling animals are controlled by these mechanisms to influence the food supply. The overarching claim is that whenever someone suggests you might have an illness, you should question the professional and their motives, and consider why they might be “dancing.” To support these ideas, the speaker directs listeners to read Murder by Injection by Eustace Mullens, implying that the book explains the lies being described in the discussion. A number of provocative connections are presented as part of the argument: the manipulation of PCR tests, the exploitation of diagnostic claims for financial gain, the alleged use of tests to influence legal and agricultural outcomes, and the suggestion that public messaging around illness is part of a broader scheme. The reference to the Tanzanian president’s observation about pawpaw fruit and COVID is used to illustrate how seemingly unrelated elements were brought into consideration in evaluating the pandemic. In closing, the speaker reiterates that the inventor of PCR has stated that PCR cannot prove causation or diagnose illness, and they urge listeners to scrutinize the claims of professionals who discuss illnesses, the pandemic, and related technologies, while endorsing the book Murder by Injection as a deeper explanation of the purported lies.

The PCR test, used to detect the presence of the SARS CoV-2 virus, has come under scrutiny for its reliability and potential for false positives. The test amplifies RNA fragments to identify the virus, but it can also detect traces of dead virus or remnants from other coronaviruses. Testing at high cycle thresholds can result in false positives, especially in populations with low COVID-19 prevalence. Scientists recommend not testing over 30 cycle thresholds to reduce false positives. Lowering the cycle thresholds has led to significant reductions in reported cases. The misuse and misinterpretation of the PCR test has contributed to inflated case numbers and unnecessary panic.

Dr. Kary Mullis, Nobel Prize winner for inventing the PCR test, explains how the test can find almost anything if amplified enough. The PCR test for COVID-19 has been misused to create false positives. Mullis discovered there was no proof linking HIV to AIDS, exposing a sham in the medical industry. He criticized CDC's profit motives and called out Anthony Fauci and Robert Gallo. Mullis wanted to expose the truth on TV but faced little support. Despite his efforts, his voice was not widely heard before his passing at age 74.

Three Nobel laureates have expressed doubts about the official thesis. They are biologist Barbara McClintock, the late Professor Walter Gilbert of Harvard, and Karim Ulrich, the 1993 Nobel laureate in chemistry. Ulrich, the inventor of PCR, a process that isolates and amplifies genes, became interested in the question of HIV and AIDS. However, when searching for scientific publications to support the claim that HIV causes AIDS, Ulrich couldn't find any references. He asked specialized researchers about their conviction, but they couldn't provide the references either. Ulrich needed the reference to renew a grant for his laboratory, but he couldn't find any evidence that HIV is the probable cause of AIDS.

PCR is not misused, but its interpretation can be. PCR can find almost anything in anybody by amplifying a single molecule. Testing for HIV and claiming it has special meaning is the problem, because someone with HIV likely has other viruses. PCR is quantitative and makes minuscule amounts measurable, but this can lead to misinterpretations. HIV measurements are not exact. HIV tests are based on invisible things and inferred results. PCR makes a lot of something out of something, but it doesn't indicate sickness or harm. Even if you believe in HIV, PCR can't differentiate between virus particles or active live virus.