Your Coronavirus Test Is Positive – But What Does That Mean?


The mainstream media and Government Covid-19 reporting has recently shifted from deaths and hospitalisations and moved on to “cases” – but what determines a case and how accurate are the PCR test kits determining those “cases” – time to delve a bit deeper.

What we have come to find out is that scientists who have been looking at Covid-19 the entire time are now stating, through their research, that many of the Covid-19 cases might not be infectious at all they are talking about elevated cycle thresholds and the PCR Tests. 


A growing body of research suggests that a significant number of confirmed Covid-19 infections, possibly as many as 9 out of every 10, may not be infectious at all with much of the testing equipment picking up mere fragments of the disease rather than full blown infections.  

For many tests the cycle threshold is set very high – the cycle threshold is the number of amplification cycles a PCR test goes through before a target pathogen is detected.   A lower cycle threshold means that a higher amount of the virus was present in the sample, a higher threshold means the machine had to work harder to detect the virus in the sample indicating a lower viral load and more likely a non-infectious patient.  

According to a run down of PCR tests compiled by the Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics many manufacturers of PCR test set the cycle threshold cut off for a positive sample at up to 40 cycles, a level numerous public health officials believe is guaranteed to return what are effectively false positives results detecting fragments of the virus which means that you will not give this infection to someone else.

Cycle Threshold (Column Headed – Supplier Recommended Ct cut-off

Mass population testing is a flawed idea in search of science to back it up.

Kary Mullis the award winning Inventor of the PCR Test stated this test should never be used as a tool in “the diagnosis of infectious diseases.”

The BBC have reported that the PCR test used to diagnose coronavirus is so sensitive it could be picking up fragments of dead virus from old infections. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54000629

Tests authorized by the F.D.A. provide only a yes-no answer to infection, and will identify as positive patients with low amounts of virus in their bodies….Johnny Milano for The New York Times

Professor Carl Heneghan of the Centre for Evidence Based Medicine at Oxford University,  said instead of giving a “yes/no” result based on whether any virus is detected, tests should have a cut-off point so that very small amounts of virus do not trigger a positive result.


Tests are diagnosing huge numbers of people who may be carrying relatively insignificant amounts of the virus, yet this has profound effects upon their lives (and the lives of many others) when they enter the Government’s track and trace system.  

When drastic (costly) draconian measures are introduced they should always be based upon clear evidence and in the case of Covid-19 “testing” it quite clearly is not.

It is imperative that state broadcasters and media commentators ask the crucial questions of policy makers right now – but I will not be holding my breath! 





Leave a Reply