In December 2020, a quietly significant editorial appeared in PubMed, the database of biomedical literature. It stated a simple, yet crucial fact: the daily reports of COVID-19 cases, the numbers that gripped the world in fear, were overwhelmingly based on PCR tests – tests designed to detect the genetic material of the virus.
But the very inventor of the PCR test, Nobel laureate Kary Mullis, had years earlier cautioned that his invention “can find almost anything in anybody.” These statements were swiftly dismissed as lacking context, often framed as relating only to HIV. Experts insisted the PCR tests were accurate and reliable for detecting COVID-19, a narrative reinforced by major news outlets.
Now, a groundbreaking study from Germany challenges that widely accepted truth. Published in Frontiers in Epidemiology, the peer-reviewed research casts a harsh light on the infection claims that dominated headlines and fueled public anxiety.
The German study meticulously analyzed PCR and antibody test data, revealing a startling discrepancy. Researchers found that the cumulative results of PCR-positive tests closely mirrored the development of IgG antibodies – the markers of actual infection. However, the critical finding was that only 14% of those initially testing positive via PCR actually developed these antibodies.
This means that a vast majority of those counted as “cases” were likely never truly infected with SARS-CoV-2. Furthermore, the study suggested that as many as 25% of the German population already possessed antibodies from prior, natural infections before the end of 2020.
The study’s conclusion is damning: the “7-day incidence” – the daily reports of new infections that drove policy decisions – was a scientifically meaningless figure. It was entirely dependent on the *number* of PCR tests performed, not on actual infection rates, and therefore reflected political will rather than epidemiological reality.
This flawed metric was not merely a statistical anomaly; it was enshrined in German law, becoming the basis for sweeping and restrictive public health measures. The researchers call for a critical re-evaluation of these decisions, and a restoration of trust in evidence-based governance.
The implications extend far beyond Germany. The PCR numbers, the study suggests, were profoundly misleading, used to instill fear and justify lockdowns that exacerbated existing societal inequalities. While corporations saw record profits – a staggering 37% increase in 2021 – small businesses shuttered and millions lost their jobs.
The media and “experts” amplified these flawed numbers without question, silencing dissent and creating an atmosphere of pervasive anxiety. Social media platforms and news networks actively participated in the suppression of alternative viewpoints.
The crisis was also leveraged to enact significant changes to electoral processes, with mail-in voting and ballot drop boxes becoming widespread despite previous legislative failures. These changes, implemented under the guise of public safety, fundamentally altered the landscape of elections.
Even now, the lingering effects of this period are visible – a lone driver in a car, still masked, a stark reminder of the fear that gripped the world. The German study demands accountability for what many now believe was a global injustice, a manipulation of data with far-reaching consequences.
