{"id":15142,"date":"2020-11-24T10:59:01","date_gmt":"2020-11-24T06:59:01","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/geworld.ge\/en\/?p=15142"},"modified":"2020-11-24T10:59:01","modified_gmt":"2020-11-24T06:59:01","slug":"portuguese-court-rules-pcr-tests-unreliable-quarantines-unlawful","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/geworld.ge\/en\/portuguese-court-rules-pcr-tests-unreliable-quarantines-unlawful\/","title":{"rendered":"Portuguese Court Rules PCR Tests \u201cUnreliable\u201d & Quarantines \u201cUnlawful\u201d"},"content":{"rendered":"
Important legal decision faces total media blackout in Western world<\/strong><\/h5>\n

<\/p>\n

An appeals court in Portugal has ruled that the PCR process is not a reliable test for Sars-Cov-2, and therefore any\u00a0enforced quarantine based on those test results is unlawful.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

Further, the ruling suggested that any forced quarantine applied to healthy people could be a violation of their fundamental right to liberty.<\/p>\n

Most importantly, the judges ruled that\u00a0a single positive PCR test cannot be used as an effective diagnosis of infection<\/em>.<\/p>\n

The specifics of the case concern four tourists entering the country from Germany \u2013 all of whom are anonymous in the transcript of the case \u2013 who were quarantined by the regional health authority. Of the four, only one had tested positive for the virus, whilst the other three were deemed simply of \u201chigh infection risk\u201d based on proximity to the positive individual. All four had, in the previous 72 hours, tested negative for the virus before departing from Germany.<\/p>\n

In their ruling, judges Margarida Ramos de Almeida and Ana Param\u00e9s referred to several scientific studies. Most notably\u00a0this study by Jaafar et al.<\/strong><\/a>, which found that \u2013 when running PCR tests with 35 cycles or more \u2013 the accuracy dropped to 3%, meaning up to 97% of positive results could be false positives.<\/p>\n

The ruling goes on to conclude that, based on the science they read, any PCR test using over 25 cycles is totally unreliable. Governments and private labs have been very tight-lipped about the exact number of cycles they run when PCR testing, but it is known to sometimes be\u00a0as high as 45<\/strong><\/a>. Even fearmonger-in-chief Anthony Fauci has publicly stated anything over 35 is\u00a0totally unusable<\/strong><\/a>.<\/p>\n

You can read the complete ruling in the original Portuguese\u00a0here<\/strong><\/a>, and translated into English\u00a0here<\/strong><\/a>. There\u2019s also a good write up on it on\u00a0Great Game India<\/strong><\/a>, plus a Portuguese professor sent a long email about the case to\u00a0Lockdown Sceptics<\/strong><\/a>.<\/p>\n

The media reaction to this case has been entirely predictable \u2013 they have not mentioned it. At all. Anywhere. Ever.<\/p>\n

The ruling was published on November 11th, and has been referenced by many alt-news sites since\u2026but the mainstream outlets are maintaining a complete blackout on it.<\/p>\n

The reddit Covid19 board actually\u00a0removed the post<\/strong><\/a>, because it was \u201cnot a reliable source\u201d, despite relying on the official court documents:<\/p>\n

Lookout for a forced and disingenuous \u201cfact-check\u201d on this issue from HealthFeedback or some other \u201cnon-partisan\u201d outlet in the near future. But until they find some poor shlub to lend their name to it, the media blackout will continue.<\/p>\n

Whatever they say, this is a victory for common sense over authoritarianism and hysteria.<\/p>\n

https:\/\/off-guardian.org\/<\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Important legal decision faces total media blackout in Western world<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":15143,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[3],"tags":[],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/geworld.ge\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15142"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/geworld.ge\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/geworld.ge\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/geworld.ge\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/geworld.ge\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=15142"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/geworld.ge\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15142\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":15144,"href":"https:\/\/geworld.ge\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15142\/revisions\/15144"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/geworld.ge\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/15143"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/geworld.ge\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=15142"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/geworld.ge\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=15142"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/geworld.ge\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=15142"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}