Category: RT-PCR Testing (Page 2 of 2)

RT-PCR Test Amplification Cycle Threshold [C t] Information

Information Regarding RT-PCR Test For SARS-CoV-2 virus

Further information is available in BGB “Fact Sheet” available at this LINK.

The most recent scientific evidence is also available at this LINK; this being an external peer review, published 27 November 2020, undertaken by a highly respected group of 23 international virologists, microbiologists and related scientists. This calls into question the validity of the test for the reasons outlined. This brief article by BGB aims to provide further technical information, specifically regarding the test “Amplification Cycle Threshold” [C t] value.

The following information has been received by BGB on this subject following a request for information directed to Public Health Wales [PHW] and Public Health England [PHE]. The original correspondence is available in BGB’s Correspondence Journal (volumes 1 & 2)

Information received from Public Health Wales [PHW]

Confirmation was received in August 2020 that commercial assays used in Wales for the clinical diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection are all CE marked. The number of amplification cycles in tests can vary with different platforms used. Most platforms use threshold cycles that range from 27 to 43. The threshold cycle is determined by the platform used and is not something the laboratory service has control over. Confirmation was also received from PHW in October 2020 that samples from Royal Glamorgan Hospital for Covid testing may be tested in the laboratory in Royal Glamorgan Hospital or laboratories in the Public Health Wales network. The real-time PCR assays in use in Wales for Covid 19 diagnostics all run for 45 cycles; however, the cycle number where the sample is defined as “RNA not detected” varies by platform and target gene detected by the system. This is defined by the manufacturer. One platform (Hologic) is isothermal, this means it does not cycle through temperature changes in the same way as the real-time PCR systems, therefore CT values are not reported by this system.

Information received from Public Health England [PHE]

Confirmation received 13 November 2020 that PHE does not hold information on testing kits used by non-PHE laboratories. These laboratories have a statutory duty to report “positive cases” to PHE but they are not obliged to advise PHE which tests they are using.

Comment by BGB

It is important to note that amplification cycles increase exponentially as set out on the table below.

C t





1125 Trillion



35,184 Billion



1099 Billion



1099 Billion



34 Billion



1 Billion



1 Million



32 Thousand



1 Thousand







A C t threshold value of 45 (recommended rate for of cycles originally recommended by the W.H.O.) amplifies the fragment of RNA by 35,184 billion times. The test actually measures the presence of partial RNA sequences present in the intact virus, which could be a piece of dead virus which cannot make the subject sick, and cannot be transmitted, and cannot make anyone else sick. A true positive test result does not necessarily indicate the presence of viable virus. In limited studies to date, many researchers have shown that some subjects remain PCR-positive long after the ability to culture virus from swabs has disappeared. They term this a ‘cold positive’ (to distinguish it from a ‘hot positive’, someone actually infected with intact virus). The key point about ‘cold positives’ is that they are not ill, not symptomatic, not going to become symptomatic and, furthermore, are unable to infect others.

The information received from PHW and PHE regarding C t values supports the findings of the external peer review, that the RT-PCR test is not fit for purpose. The Portuguese appeal court, on 11 November 2020, arrived at a similar conclusion. Confirmation from PHW and PHE that kit manufacturers have control over the threshold cycles used in the tests rather than the client; Public Health Authorities, the National Health Service, Welsh Government and UK Government, is a matter of grave concern. It suggests a total lack of control by the client.

I hope this information is helpful to readers. BGB will continue to draw these facts to the attention of decision makers in Government as we have done consistently since the beginning of this ‘pandemic’ scare. See our Correspondence Journal).

More Information Is Available In This Video:

The Legal Challenge To The Use of RT-PCR Testing To Corruptly Promote The ‘Pandemic’:

SUBSCRIBE for free to receive automated notifications of new posts from BGB in your e-mail inbox – as they’re published. You can unsubscribe at any time you choose.

Please enter your details below and click 'Subscribe'

The Sham PCR Testing Used For The Covid-19 ‘Pandemic’ Scam

From The Horse’s Mouth

The PCR technique for amplifying microscopic fragments of viruses until they can be seen under an electron microscope was invented by the late Dr. Kary Mullis PhD.  In recognition of his invention of the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) technique, he shared the 1993 Nobel Prize in Chemistry with Michael Smith.

Here Is Dr. Mullis’ Background:

Kary Banks Mullis (December 28, 1944 – August 7, 2019) was an American biochemist. In recognition of his invention of the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) technique, he shared the 1993 Nobel Prize in Chemistry with Michael Smith and was awarded the Japan Prize in the same year. His invention became a central technique in biochemistry and molecular biology, described by The New York Times as:

highly original and significant, virtually dividing biology into the two epochs of before PCR and after PCR”

  1. Born December 28, 1944 at Lenoir, North Carolina, U.S.
  2. Died August 7, 2019 (aged 74) at Newport Beach, California, U.S.
  3. Alma mater Georgia Institute of Technology (BS, 1966)
  4. University of California, Berkeley (PhD, 1973)
  5. Known for Invention of polymerase chain reaction


  • William Allan Award (1990)
  • Robert Koch Prize (1992)
  • Nobel Prize in Chemistry (1993)
  • Japan Prize (1993)

Scientific career Fields:

Molecular biology

Schizokinen: structure and synthetic work (1973)
Doctoral advisor: J. B. Neilands

Outrage At The Way His PCR Technique Was Misused In The Diagnosis Of An Apparent AIDS Causing HIV Virus

Kary Mullins was livid about the way that his PCR technique was hijacked and totally misused by the W.H.O. and people like Dr. Anthony Fauci in the HIV caused AIDS disease scam –  that was spearheaded by Fauci. The corruption, lies and false information used to promote the detection of an AIDS causing HIV virus, and the a vaccine pushed to falsely claim HIV could be controlled was later exposed as a scam. Foremost in their fight against this unethical behaviour were people like Dr. Judy Mikovits.

Today, the Covid-19 so called ‘pandemic’ has followed a similar pattern to the HIV/AIDS scam – which failed. This time around, those behind the scam have better prepared themselves, and the fear surrounding Covid-19 has taken root, and we all know the consequences.

The common denominator has been the misuse of Mullis’ RT-PCR test, which he categorically stated was NOT for diagnosis purposes, and that it was wholly inappropriate for that function that it is currently being used for. The more tests carried out means more false positive results. In turn those false positive results are being recorded as ‘cases’ making this a ‘casedemic’ and NOT a deadly pandemic. The corrupt mainstream media – being in on the act, and who are controlled by the same people as the W.H.O. are pumping out Niagara Falls like false information day and night, convincing the medically uneducated public, that the number of (false) positive PCR test results show that this indicates that the number of infected people has risen dramatically. In turn, this gives governments free range to continually screw down the tyrannical agenda, and take away our freedoms and rights.

Here is a film that explains what has been wilfully done with the PCR technique in more detail:

Here is another short film from YouTube this time (until it might be censored) – showing an interview with Kary Mullis on the same subject as he talks about in the above video:

Sadly Kary Mullis died suddenly in August 2019 a few short months before the declaration by the W.H.O. of a coronavirus induced Covid-19 disease outbreak. Dr. Mullis must be spinning in his grave. If he was still alive, there is little doubt that he would be campaigning vociferously to expose this misuse of his PCR technique. Unfortunately he was removed from intervention by his (timely for some) sudden death (what a lucky coincidence?) Personally I’m certainly cynical about the convenient timing of his death; as I was when Dr. David Kelly the weapons inspector who died in mysterious circumstances way back in July 2003. That was the strange death of the Welsh scientist – Dr David Kelly – amidst the swirl of events surrounding the Bush and Blair invasion and occupation of Iraq. Kelly, a former government scientist at the Porton Down Chemical and Biological Weapons facility in England and a weapons inspector in Iraq, was found dead in the woods – as he predicted he would be if Iraq was invaded.

I will be found dead in the woods…. there are many dark actors milling around”

– Dr David Kelly CMG (2003)

A formal Coroners Inquest was denied and a hand-picked Government inquiry instituted instead, which duly concluded he had committed suicide. “Nothing to see here”  it said, but promptly locked up all the evidence for 70 years just in case. The MSM quickly buried the story and moved on. But I won’t digress – that is a story for another day.

More Information From Dr. Sam Bailey:

There’s a little bit of ambiguity about the spelling of her surname. In places it’s shown as ‘Baile’ – especially in American circles. Anyway regardless of how her name is spelt; she’s a talented doctor from New Zealand (some of her content is included in the first film above). Here she gives us more detailed information on the PCR testing itself:

The Bottom Line

The truthful understanding about PCR testing is not complicated to understand. Whilst a lot of the material contains unfamiliar words to the majority of the public it is in essence extremely easy to understand.

  • PCR tests are NOT fit for purpose in a diagnostic environment. That is the reason why the warning that the RT-PCR test is NOT designed for diagnostic use is written on all the test kit equipment.
  • The government continues to use the ‘positive’ results to inappropriately broadcast that each ‘positive’ test is evidence that the tested persons are infectious and are recorded as cases. This is blatantly wrong and purposely misleading.
  • The mainstream media is complicit in fuelling misinformation and disinformation. They are also the main protagonists when it comes to generating fear and false perceptions regarding this viral infection amongst the public at large.
  • Governments are encouraging censorship of any information that goes against their official narrative. Social media platforms are complicit in censorship, thereby blocking off accurate information from the public.

BGB urgently implores everyone to do their own research and not to listen to the mainstream news media. The government sponsored media has been proven to be unreliable and untrustworthy over a very long time – based on their track record. Anyone who gleans their information from that ONE source are:

  • Statist minded – they only believe what authority has trained them to believe.
  • Having a problem with a lack of open mindedness, and a lack of confidence to come to their own conclusions based on evidence provided for them from all sources.
  • Suffering with cognitive dissonance, where the painful mental process of coming to terms with information that they are confronted with makes them feel uncomfortable as it goes against what they have been led to believe in the past.

For the sake of your children and future generations, listen to what renowned experts have to say, and not the bought and paid for technocrats that advice our governments.

SUBSCRIBE for free to receive automated notifications of new posts from BGB in your e-mail inbox – as they’re published. You can unsubscribe at any time you choose.

Please enter your details below and click 'Subscribe'


The Truth About False Positives and the Drosten PCR Test

Corona Virus Scandal Breaking In Angela Merkel’s Germany

Below is an article based on a previous article written by  F. William Engdahl for Global Research in Canada. It deals with false positives and the Drosten PCR test.

The original RT-PCR test was invented by the Nobel prize winner for chemistry –  Dr. Kary Mullis, with a variation to the original by  Dr. Christian Drosten, along with several colleagues from the Berlin Virology Institute at Charite Hospital, along with the head of a small Berlin biotech company. TIB Molbiol Syntheselabor GmbH, published a study claiming to have developed the first effective test for detecting whether someone is infected with the ‘novel’ (although this so called new virus has never been isolated, identified or it’s genome compiled from a filtered sample) coronavirus, first (apparently) identified only days before in Wuhan.

Dr. Drosten is now feeling the heat – as the net closes in on his work, and others with him, as the spotlight focuses on the RT-PCR test he claimed could detect SARS-Cov-2. That testing equipment has been adopted world wide to enhance the lie that anyone who tests positive is a ‘case’ and ‘infected”.

Assaulting Science in the Name of Science

A previous article was published by BGB on October the 12th 2020 outlining the case background please click on the above graphic.

As more eminent scientists, doctors, researchers and others in the legal profession have turned the spotlight on the test, the Dr. Drosten things are starting to fall apart in Germany – as the fraud is increasingly exposed. A point to note is that the German-based Coronavirus Investigation Committee  led by Dr. Reiner Füllmich (PhD in Law and called to the Bar in both Germany and the USA) have filed lawsuits in both countries, to deal with the false pandemic and specifically the RT-PCR test which is at the heart of the scam. Dr. Füllmich has an impressive track record, winning huge cases against Volkswagen in their fraudulent diesel emissions scandal and Deutsche Bank for corruption.

First An Explanation About PCR

Before delving into the article proper, here’s a BGB reproduced video from Dr. Sam Bailey in New Zealand. She does an excellent job of explaining to lay people what the RT-PCR test is about, and the false positive results that have kept the fear-mongers in the media perpetuating the myth that the virus is out of control and increasingly killing people – when in fact what they are doing is confusing the public about ‘cases’ of ‘infected’ people, as opposed to false positive results, from the known highly unreliable PCR test equipment promoted by Dr. Drosten. More tests – more false positive results. See this Fact Sheet.

I know, I know – technical medical information like this is equivalent to eating a ball of cotton wool for dinner for most people, and they get turned off – before they start, but stick with it, because everyone needs to know the truth about PCR testing. They also need to know what’s driving this scam.

Main Article


The widely-praised German model of the Angela Merkel regime to deal with the COVID-19 pandemic is now engulfed in a series of potentially devastating scandals going to the very heart of the testing and medical advice being used to declare draconian economic shutdowns and next, de facto mandatory vaccinations. The scandals involve a professor at the heart of Merkel’s corona advisory group. The implications go far beyond German borders to the very core of the World Health Organisation (WHO) itself and their global recommendations. Similar to our very own disgraced Professor Neil Ferguson with his hideously flawed computer modelling programmes – but it served the purpose of kicking off the panic and fear in the UK, USA and other countries round the world. 

How An Unproven Test – Not Designed For Diagnostic Purposes Triggered Draconian Lockdowns.

The entire case for WHO – mandated emergency lockdown of businesses, schools, churches and other social arenas worldwide is based on a test introduced, amazingly early on, in the Wuhan, China coronavirus saga.

On January 23, 2020, in the scientific journal Eurosurveillance, of the EU Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, Dr. Christian Drosten, along with several colleagues from the Berlin Virology Institute at Charite Hospital, along with the head of a small Berlin biotech company, (TIB Molbiol Syntheselabor GmbH), published a study claiming to have developed the first effective test for detecting whether someone is infected with the novel coronavirus only first detected days before in Wuhan. The Drosten article was titled, “Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR” (Eurosurveillance 25(8) 2020).

The news was greeted with immediate endorsement by the corrupt Director General of WHO, Tedros Adhanom, the first non-medical doctor to head WHO. Since then the Drosten-backed test for the virus, called a real-time or RT-PCR test, has spread via WHO worldwide, as the most used test protocol to determine if a person might have COVID-19 – the illness.

Click on the PDF icon to view the peer reviewed paper

On November 27 a highly-respected group of 23 international virologists, microbiologists and related scientists published a call for Eurosurveillance to retract the January 23, 2020 Drosten article. Their careful analysis of the original piece is damning. Theirs is a genuine “peer review.”

They accuse Drosten and cohorts of “fatal” scientific incompetence and flaws in promoting their test.

To begin with, as the critical scientists reveal, the paper that established the Drosten PCR test for the Wuhan strain of coronavirus that has subsequently been adopted with indecent haste by the Merkel government along with WHO for worldwide use–resulting in severe lockdowns globally and an economic and social catastrophe–was never peer-reviewed before its publication by Eurosurveillance journal. The critics point out that,

. . . the Corman-Drosten paper was submitted to Eurosurveillance on January 21st 2020 and accepted for publication on January 22nd 2020. On January 23rd 2020 the paper was online”.

Incredibly, the Drosten test protocol, which he had already sent to WHO in Geneva on 17 January, was officially recommended by WHO as the worldwide test to determine presence of Wuhan coronavirus, even before the paper had been published!

As the critical authors point out, for a subject so complex and important to world health and security, a serious 24-hour “peer review” from at least two experts in the field is not possible. The critics point out that Drosten and his co-author Dr. Chantal Reusken, did not disclose a glaring conflict of interest. Both were also members of the editorial board of Eurosurveillance. Further, as reported by the BBC and Google Statistics, on January 21 there were a world total of 6 deaths being attributed to the Wuhan virus. They ask:

Why did the authors assume a challenge for public health laboratories while there was no substantial evidence at that time to indicate that the outbreak was more widespread than initially thought?”

Another co-author of the Drosten paper that gave a cover of apparent scientific credibility to the Drosten PCR procedure was head of the company who developed the test being marketed today, with the blessing of WHO, in the hundreds of millions, Olfert Landt, of Tib-Molbiol in Berlin, but Landt did not disclose that pertinent fact in the Drosten paper either.

Certainly nothing suspicious or improper here, then??? It would be relevant to know if Drosten, the Merkel chief scientific advisor for COVID-19, Germany’s de facto ‘Tony Fauci,’ gets a percentage for each test sold by Tib-Molbiol in their global marketing agreement with Roche.

False Positives?

Since late January 2020, world mainstream media has inundated us all with frightening hourly updates on “the total number of coronavirus infected.” Usually they simply add each daily increase to a global total of “confirmed cases,” presently over 66 million. Alarming, but for the fact that, as Pieter Borger and his fellow scientific collaborators point out, “confirmed cases” is a nonsense number. Why?

The Borger report identifies what they call “ten fatal problems” in the Drosten paper of last January. Here we take up the most glaring that can easily be grasped by most laypeople.

Drosten & co. gave confusing unspecified primer and probe sequences. The critics note,

This high number of variants not only is unusual, but it also is highly confusing for laboratories. These six unspecified positions could easily result in the design of several different alternative primer sequences which do not relate to SARS-CoV-2… the confusing unspecific description in the Corman-Drosten paper is not suitable as a Standard Operational Protocol. These unspecified positions should have been designed unequivocally.”

They add that

RT-PCR is not recommended for primary diagnostics of infection. This is why the RT-PCR Test used in clinical routine for detection of COVID-19 is not indicated for COVID-19 diagnosis on a regulatory basis.”

Amplification Cycles

But even more damning for Drosten is the fact that he mentioned nowhere of a test being positive or negative, or indeed what defines a positive or negative result! The Borger report notes,

These types of virological diagnostic tests must be based on a SOP (Standard Operational Protocol), including a validated and fixed number of PCR cycles (Ct value) after which a sample is deemed positive or negative. The maximum reasonably reliable Ct value is 30 cycles. Above a Ct of 35 cycles, rapidly increasing numbers of false positives must be expected… scientific studies show that only non-infectious (dead) viruses are detected with Ct values of 35.”

The WHO and Drosten recommend a Ct of 45 cycles and, reportedly, presently the German health officials do as well. Little wonder that as the number of tests is ramped up in the onset of winter flu season, PCR “positives” in Germany and elsewhere explode. As the critical authors point out, were the health authorities to specify 35 cycles maximum, the number of corona positive would be only less than 3% the present number! They note,

. . . an analytical result with a Ct value of 45 is scientifically and diagnostically absolutely meaningless (a reasonable Ct-value should not exceed 30). All this should be communicated very clearly.

It is a significant mistake that the Corman-Drosten paper does not mention the maximum Ct value at which a sample can be unambiguously considered as a positive or a negative test-result. This important cycle threshold limit is also not specified in any follow-up submissions to date.”

The authors add,

The fact that these PCR products have not been validated at molecular level is another striking error of the protocol, making any test based upon it useless as a specific diagnostic tool to identify the SARS-CoV-2 virus”.

In simple English, the entire edifice of the Gates foundation, the Merkel government, the WHO and WEF as well as the case for de facto forced untested vaccines, rests on results of a PCR test for coronavirus that is not worth a hill of beans. The test of Drosten and WHO is more or less, scientific crap.

Missing Doctor proof too?

This devastating critique from twenty three world leading scientists, including scientists who have patents related to PCR, DNA Isolation and Sequencing, and a former Pfizer Chief Scientist, is damning, but not the only problem Professor Dr. Christian Drosten faces today. He and the officials at Frankfurt’s Goethe University, where he claims to have received his medical doctorate in 2003, are being accused of degree fraud.

According to Dr. Markus Kühbacher, a specialist investigating scientific fraud such as dissertation plagiarism, Dr. Drosten’s doctor thesis, by law must be deposited on a certain date with academic authorities at his University, who then sign a legal form, Revisionsschein, verified with signature, stamp of the University and date, with thesis title and author, to be sent to the University archive. With it, three original copies of the thesis are filed.

Kühbacher charges that the Goethe University is guilty of cover-up by claiming, falsely, Drosten’s Revisionsschein, was on file. The University spokesman later was forced to admit it was not filed, at least not locatable by them. Moreover, of the three mandatory file copies of his doctor thesis, highly relevant given the global importance of Drosten’s coronavirus role, two copies have “disappeared,” and the remaining single copy is water-damaged. Kühbacher says Drosten will now likely face court charges for holding a fraudulent doctoral title (use the translation feature in your browser to translate into English)

Whether that is to pass, it is a fact that a separate legal process has been filed in Berlin against two people responsible for a German media site,, for slander and defamation, brought by a well-known and critical German medical doctor, Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg. The court case demands of the defendants €250,000 in damages for defamation of character and material damages to Wodarg by the accused in their online site, as well as in other German media, claiming they viciously and without proof, defamed Wodarg, calling him a “covid-denier,” falsely calling him a right-extremist (he is a life-long former parliament member of the Social Democratic Party) and numerous other false and damaging charges.

The attorney for Dr Wodarg is the well-known German-American attorney, Dr. Reiner Fuellmich (mentioned earlier in this post). In his charges against the defendants, Fuellmich cites in full the charges against the Drosten test for coronavirus of Dr. Pieter Borger et al noted above. This is in effect forcing the defendants to refute the Borger paper. It is a major step on the way to refute the entire WHO COVID-19 PCR testing fraud. Already an appeals court in Lisbon, Portugal ruled on 11 November that the PCR test of Drosten and WHO was not valid to detect coronavirus infection and that it was no basis to order nationwide or partial lockdowns.

If the stakes were not so deadly for mankind it would all be material for a comedy of the absurd. The world health Czar, WHO chief Tedros is no medical doctor whose WHO is financed massively by a college dropout billionaire computer manager, Gates, who also advises the Merkel government on COVID-19 measures.

The Merkel government uses the Drosten PCR test and Drosten as an “all-wise” expert to impose the most draconian economic consequences outside wartime. Her Health Minister, Jens Spahn, is a former banker who has no medical degree, only a stint as a lobbyist for Big Pharma. The head of the German CDC, called the Robert Koch Institute, Lothar Wieler, is not a virologist but an animal doctor, Tierarzt. With this crew, Germans are seeing their lives destroyed by lockdowns and social measures never before imagined. There is science and then there is science. Not all “science” is valid however.

BGB would like to thank F. William Engdahl for the core material in this article and all credit is attributed to him for the original article material that has been used here

SUBSCRIBE for free to receive automated notifications of new posts from BGB in your e-mail inbox – as they’re published. You can unsubscribe at any time you choose.

Please enter your details below and click 'Subscribe'

‘No Room At The Inn’ For 18 Months For First Minister Drakeford – Is This ‘Pandemic’ Hoax Worth It Minister?


Wales’ First Minister has been barred from more than 100 pubs in North Wales following his announcement of strict new rules for the industry. This may be the first step – it may just be the start. To date 300 hospitality businesses have said they would lend their support to the move. .

The West Conwy Pubwatch group said Mark Drakeford would be banned from entering their members’ premises for at least 18 months.

North Wales Regional Representative Frank Marnell presents Garry Plumb with NPW Star Award at Conwy Pubwatch AGM. Garry who is the Manager of the Maelgwyn Public House in Llandudno Junction was nominated by Samantha Jones of Conwy Council. He was one of the original founders and member of the Conwy Pubwatch which was launched 16 years ago and he has been chair of for 10 years.

It comes after Drakeford unveiled new rules for the hospitality industry in a bid to stem the rising tide of coronavirus in Wales (how he and his band of merry cabinet ministers and a handful of dubious medical and scientific ‘expert’ advisors calculate that is covered below).

Their new ‘rules’ include a ban on alcohol sales in hospitality settings, and a 6pm curfew. Unsurprisingly, the decision has sparked fury from business owners within the industry, and now the West Conwy Pubwatch group has taken matters further.

He has been banned from scores of premises, with Pubwatch organisers saying more than 300 hospitality businesses have said they would lend their support to the move.

I’m not sure how often he makes it up North, but reports from the Daily Post – The West Conwy Pubwatch said Wales’ First Minister will not be allowed into their pubs for at least 18 months.

Open Letter

In an open letter, they said:

All licensees have a legal duty under the Licensing Act of 2003 to ensure that disorderly, argumentative, violent behaviour and antisocial behaviour does not occur on or around their premises and to prevent the occurrence of criminal offences.

As a result of your behaviour on November 30th 2020 at the Senedd Cymru your actions class as antisocial behaviour for the damage caused to our members’ premises.

The licensees of the West Conwy Pubwatch have jointly decided that in order to discharge their duty as referred to above they are exercising their right not to allow you entry to their premises.

They added:

Should you attempt to ignore this notice and enter any of the licensed premises listed on our website the assistance of police will be sought, if necessary to eject you from the premises and an extra six months will be added to your ban.

 Like opening a butcher’s and asking them not to sell meat

This ban is effective from the date of this letter and will remain in force until the 30th of May 2022 or until your review which will be at our meeting in the first week of August 2021. If your review is successful we will be in touch to inform you. If at any time your [sic] request to reconsider this decision you can do so on our website under our appeals section.

The Pubwatch group also wrote a separate open letter to the First Minister, in which they warned that thousands of jobs were at risk due to the new restrictions. They claimed the industry was being:

Singled out for exceptionally harsh and unjustified treatment” and warned that the move would push people to drinking in each other’s homes.

Phillip Ashe, vice-chairman of the West Conwy Pubwatch group, said people in the hospitality industry were:

Angry and devastated”

about the decision. He said:

I know about seven or eight premises that will not be here [next year]. They rely on Christmas to get through January and February.

The evidence isn’t there. Between all our members, which is around 180 premises in the county of Conwy, we would have found that evidence but we didn’t and now we’re asking him to produce it.

“We have had an [infection rate of] 19 per 100,000 people but people will now go to Chester or have house parties and the rate will shoot up.”

He added:

We have had around 380 premises put their name to what we’ve said.

“If he wasn’t a politician and he had done as much damage to our premises as he has, then we would have done the same thing, so it’s not a publicity stunt.

I don’t think he would be coming up in the next 18 months anyway.”

BGB Comment

So it is quite feasible to assume that the ban on Drakeford visiting pubs and restaurants could spread throughout Wales. let’s hope that is the case. If it spreads over the border to England and further afield throughout the UK it could prove to be quite an embarrassment to our beleaguered ‘great leader’. One wonders if he is augmenting these madcap measures in a wild attempt to get removed from office. It certainly appears that he is under great pressure and perhaps would welcome an escape.

Genius Plan

This latest move by the Pubwatch organisation is an ingenious response it is a strategy of genius proportions. It shows some lateral thinking, and at last we find a group that is prepared to bite back and target individual politicians as a response to those politicians’ ridiculous diktats based on pseudo science and false premises – some of which have dubious backing from a lawful perspective. That is a separate subject, but it should be noted that there are many extremely competent lawyers, barristers and judges who are looking into this from many directions. The lawsuits are either being prepared or have been filed globally. What politicians should take special heed of, is that they will be held PERSONALLY liable for their actions or lack of action in allowing this Coronavirus hoax pandemic reaction situation to get out of hand.

Writing To Your MP

Whilst groups like the Pubwatch organisation can react in innovative ways, and experts in the  legal and medical fields can apply pressure, we, the public, also have a huge part to play. While politicians can ignore a small number of complaints, when those complaints reach a threshold level, they invariably have to listen. They may not be very good at counting small numbers of letters, they are very good at counting lost votes, and that is what is important to them – their future careers. If they become so unpopular with the electorate, that they may lose their seats, and access to the gravy train.

Writing  to your MP is something all of us who have seen the injustices and lack of empathy that politicians have displayed throughout this hoax ‘pandemic’. Let them know the truth and how you feel about this never ending loss of freedom and rights. To ease the task of writing such a letter, BGB has published a template that you can download and edit for your own use. To view it and download the template please click HERE.

Our Correspondence Journal

BGB has incessantly written to various organisations, government departments and individual politicians throughout this period of madness. These have included Freedom of Information requests. What is becoming increasingly evident is that politicians in positions of power and influence seldom reply with straight answers to straight questions. They invariably delegate the task to some office minion or don’t respond at all. Mark Drakeford is a classic example. You can view our latest correspondence to him by clicking HERE. You can also view the nearly 100 individual items of correspondence (including replies) by going to our Correspondence Journal page.

What Do These Politicians Base Their Diktats On?

In a word TECHNOCRATS. In the guise of ‘expert advisors’ the technocrats now run the UK’s governments. Policies and actions are not constructed by politicians – they carry out their diktats in total compliance with what the technocrats tell them. They seldom think for themselves, they don’t question anything and they certainly don’t do much research, choosing instead to just go along with the flow in ignorance of the true facts. There is a Latin term used in law Audi Alteram Partem which means “hear the other side”. This is exactly what our politicians have FAILED to do. Worse still the ‘other side’ has been gagged through mainstream media blackout, censoring on social media and instead they have just followed guidelines suggested by the World Health Organisation (WHO) and the United Nations (cabal controlled) organisation.

However this is not an excuse for ignorance. Unfortunately our politicians are just as clueless and under educated in health matters as your average man in the street.

Our task is to open their eyes, before they cause any more damage. The problem is:

  • Politicians are ignorant and undereducated in medical general knowledge.
  • They are stubborn – refusing to act with an open mind to ALL the evidence, facts and data available to everyone.
  • They are arrogant. Believing that they have a superior right to information that they believe is correct. They do not listen, and do not respond due to their God complex.

However it is unfair to generalise in this way. There ARE politicians who are waking up thankfully. With a concerted effort on our part, many more will hopefully wake up and will insist on parliamentary scrutiny when a small dictatorial element in the cabinets of all UK governments decide to behave like tin pot dictators, armed with a limited knowledge, but the ability to create mayhem. Sadly the First Minister of Wales – Mark Drakeford is one of those who are totally clueless and out of his depth.

He seriously needs to study the RT-PCR and Face Coverings fact sheets that BGB has published, and realise that the number of cases reported is nothing more than a reflection of the numbers of false positive results being churned out, – and will continue to be churned out  indefinitely – from this junk test.

RT-PCR tests that show (false) positive results for an unidentified and unisolated strain of Coronavirus does NOT equal Covid-19 CASES as reported daily by the mainstream (false) news media – like the BBC.

The whole continued fear promoting campaign and government policies foundation is based on this flawed test and not established science – as tens of thousands of doctors and scientists are keen to point out, but their voices are being viciously censored and drowned out.

SUBSCRIBE  for FREE to receive notifications of new posts in your e-mail inbox. You can unsubscribe at any time.

Please enter your details below and click 'Subscribe'



Portuguese Court Rules PCR Tests “Unreliable” & Quarantines “Unlawful”


An appeals court in Portugal has ruled that the PCR process is not a reliable test for Sars-Cov-2 (the purported cause of the Covid-19 disease – which has not been isolated or identified with a compiled genome available ), and therefore any enforced quarantine based on those test results is unlawful.

Further, the ruling suggested that any forced quarantine applied to healthy people could be a violation of their fundamental right to liberty.

Most importantly, the judges ruled that a single positive PCR test cannot be used as an effective diagnosis of infection.

Click on this graphic to view our RT-PCR Fact Sheet

(Ed. note: the RT-PCR test is NOT recommended for diagnostic purposes and should ONLY be used for laboratory work. In practice – in the UK – positive results [false or otherwise] are  recorded as ‘Cases’ despite the fact that no clinical diagnosis by a qualified doctor  may have been conducted, and the person tested presents with no symptoms and is generally healthy and not therefore infectious. Deaths are also attributed to Covid-19, based solely on a likely  false RT-PCR test result in the previous 28 days.)


The specifics of the case concern four tourists entering the country from Germany – all of whom are anonymous in the transcript of the case – 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 “high infection risk” based on proximity to the positive individual. All four had, in the previous 72 hours, tested negative for the virus before departing from Germany.

In their ruling, judges Margarida Ramos de Almeida and Ana Paramés referred to several scientific studies. Most notably this study by Jaafar et al., which found that – when running PCR tests with 35 cycles or more – the accuracy dropped to 3%, meaning up to 97% of positive results could be false positives.

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 as high as 45. The World Health Organisation initially recommended a 45 cycle threshold for tests. In Ireland the test cycle threshold was INCREASED to 45 cycles, driving false positive rates up and by extension false claims that CASES were exponentially increasing, this was a highly suspect move by the Irish government. Even fearmonger-in-chief in the US – Anthony Fauci – has publicly stated anything over 35 is totally unusable.

You can read the complete ruling in the original Portuguese here, and translated into English here. A Portuguese professor sent a long email about the case to Lockdown Sceptics.

The media reaction to this case has been entirely predictable – they have not mentioned it. At all. Anywhere. Ever.

The ruling was published on November 11th, and has been referenced by many  non mainstream news sites since but the mainstream outlets are maintaining a complete blackout on it.

The reddit Covid19 board actually removed the post, because it was “not a reliable source”, despite relying on the official court documents.

Lookout for a forced and disingenuous “fact-check” on this issue from HealthFeedback or some other “non-partisan” paid for outlet in the near future. But until they find some poor fool to lend their name to it, the media blackout will continue.

Whatever they say, this is a victory for common sense over authoritarianism and hysteria.

Actual Ruling

Portuguese appeal court ruling 11 November 2020

In a recent decision, dated 11 November 2020, a Portuguese 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

The court’s ruling is a long text. The court’s main points are as follows:

  1. 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.

  2. 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 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].”

  3. 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 mandated by said Declaration had been given by the PCR-tested persons who had complained against the forced quarantine measures imposed on them.

  4. From the facts presented to the court, it concluded that no evidentiary proof or even indication existed that the four persons in question had been seen by a doctor, either before or after undertaking the test.

  5. The above would suffice to deem the forced quarantine of the four persons unlawful. The court thought it necessary, however, to add some very interesting considerations about the PCR tests:

  6. “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 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.”

  7. Citing Jaafar et al. (2020;, 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 false positive is 97%.” The court further notes that the cycle threshold used for the PCR tests currently being made in Portugal is unknown.

  8. Citing Surkova et al. (2020;                       (, 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 individuals, the health system and society.”

  9. The court’s summary of the case to rule against the Regional Health Authority’s appeal reads as follows:

  10. “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.”


Any politicians, or those involved in any way with this hideous attack on humanity should take serious heed of what is developing. As we see above, courts are starting to get involved, and the truth is being gradually brought to the people’s attention.

This is not only happening in Portugal, but in many other European countries and also The USA, South Africa and Canada and many other countries across the world. There is a small army of top lawyers, barristers and others armed with expert witness statements from among the foremost medical and scientific circles that are amassing [Example]. They are preparing to take necessary actions to resolve this issue once and for all in the courts.  Some class lawsuits have already been filed in various countries. The ones sued should be prepared for heavy damage compensation costs that will be incurred.

What those who have been directly involved should seriously concern themselves with, is that INDIVIDUALS will be held PERSONALLY ACCOUNTABLE, for their actions or non actions, consequently, they will be sued along with organisations and governments.

SUBSCRIBE to receive notifications of new posts in your e-mail inbox

Please enter your details below and click 'Subscribe'


Newer posts »

© 2024 Big Gee's BLOG

Theme by Anders NorénUp ↑