China has 0 cases and those around it are clearly doing something wrong. Hell, entire world must be doing it wrong. We should install communism immediately. QED.

These people deserve the rope for their lies and evil, disingenuous ways. First and foremost - testing, if you can call it that, is typically being done based on the faulty PCR process. PCR is a process, not a "test". PCR stands for polymerase chain reaction. Each cycle is a doubling of the DNA inside the sample. The sample is heated to break the dna, then allowed to cool slightly which allows the DNA to be replicated then it's heated again to break it (one cycle). This is done over and over for typically 30-35 cycles. At 30 cycles you have roughly one billion DNA fragments.

The main reason why it is not suggested to use more than 35 cycles is because the standard polymerase used for PCR begins to degrade around 40-45 cycles. PCR should never be used to determine viral load for this very reason. Kary Mullis, PCR Inventor had this to say on the test:

”With PCR, if you do it well, you can find almost anything in anybody. It starts making you believe, in sort of the Buddhist notion, that everything is contained in everything else, right? I mean, if you can amplify one single molecule up to something that you can really measure, which PCR can do, then there’s just very few molecules that you don’t have at least one single one of them in your body, okay. So that could be thought of as a misuse, just to claim that it’s meaningful.”

“Those tests are all based on things that are invisible and the results are inferred in a sense. PCR as separate from that... is just a process that’s used to make a whole lot of something out of something. That’s what it is. It doesn’t tell you that you’re sick and it doesn’t tell you that the thing you ended up with was going to hurt you or anything like that.”

Kary Mullis: PCR https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=FHx059IqP_M

The PCR test, will pick up a virus, if it's present, within 10 cycles. There is a lot of doubt about it's accuracy and even the inventor said it shouldn't be used for infectious diseases. The French were criticised for using around 25 cycles earlier in the year as it was causing so many false positives. Remember, a virus will show in 10 cycles. More cycles and amplification will show things that aren't there.

The UK government is using... wait for it.. 45 CYCLES!! - https://twitter.com/FatEmperor/status/1304183943479074816

So in other words, each cycle amplifies the DNA to pick up the virus. Anything above 20 cycles and you are in absolute false positive zone. The NHS is using 45 cycles.

W.H.O on the other hand recommends using 50 cycles, let that sink in. - https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/real-time-rt-pcr-assays-for-the-detection-of-sars-cov-2-institut-pasteur-paris.pdf?sfvrsn=3662fcb6_2v The reasoning behind the WHO suggesting the 50 cycles is that this will give the sample the best chance of amplifying any viral content. So you have a better chance of false positives, but a lower chance of false negatives.

It’s a colossal con and they know it is. No one would get it this wrong and continue to do so by accident.

From NYT on PCR tests:

"In three sets of testing data that include cycle thresholds, compiled by officials in Massachusetts, New York and Nevada, up to 90 percent of people testing positive carried barely any virus. Most tests set the limit at 40, a few at 37. This means that you are positive for the coronavirus if the test process required up to 40 cycles, or 37, to detect the virus. Tests with thresholds so high may detect not just live virus but also genetic fragments, leftovers from infection that pose no particular risk — akin to finding a hair in a room long after a person has left, Dr. Mina said. Any test with a cycle threshold above 35 is too sensitive, agreed Juliet Morrison, a virologist at the University of California, Riverside. “I’m shocked that people would think that 40 could represent a positive,” she said.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/29/health/coronavirus-testing.html

This "test" was put out with no actual testing either. No double blind, no control groups, no months of testing. Just throw it out there and mass test and keep doing it over and over with no signs of stopping. No other virus has had this kind of testing done and none with such a new and untested method with no controls in place for the testing procedure and not even a global concensus on the number of cycles used state to state or province to province or country to country. One testing center can do 50 cycles and have 100% positive rates and another can do 30 cycles and have <1% positive rate.

Here's some Canadian data on PCR cycles:

https://westphaliantimes.com/international-experts-suggest-that-up-to-90-of-canadian-covid-cases-could-be-false-positives/

You can see a chart here showing pcr thresholds for many provincial labs in Canada.

Prov - cycles - lab

• QC - 45 - Le Laboratoire de sainté publique du Québec (LSPQ)
• MB - 40 - Government of Manitoba
• BC - 35-40 - Journal of Clinical Virology
• AB - 35 - Journal of Clinical Virology
• NB - 40 - Journal of Clinical Virology
• NL - 33 - Journal of Clinical Virology
• NS - 33-35 - Journal of Clinical Virology
• ON - 38-45 - Journal of Clinical Virology
• SK - 36 - Journal of Clinical Virology

All way above acceptable PCR test values. They are just pulling dead nucleotides. You could prove everyone had ebola at if you wanted to at this rate. Its a meaningless "test". I dont have a lot of American data, but heres one for Minnesota - https://www.startribune.com/broad-covid-19-testing-under-microscope/572396572/

A Harvard University epidemiologist recently suggested that positives produced with more than 30 cycles are unlikely to find infectious patients, but a leader of Minnesota’s public health lab said there is no convincing proof and that her lab is confident in the federally required cycle threshold (CT) of 38 for its COVID-19 test.

38 is a LOT. It's interesting this article actually went into a lot of concerns on PCR I'm mentioning above, including:

Criticism grew after Harvard’s Dr. Michael Mina told the New York Times last month about his concerns over test results with cycle levels of 30 or more. He argued for lower cycle thresholds but increased and more rapid testing, including of asymptomatic people who can spread the virus without knowing it.

A Canadian study this spring underscored his concerns, because researchers for the most part could not grow viral cultures from samples in COVID-19 patients whose positive PCR tests required more than 25 cycles or whose symptoms had occurred more than seven days prior to testing.

Actually studies show they cant grow the viral cultures from samples above 25! WHO, CDC, every country, state, province are doing 30+ and many in the 40s. You will find virtually ANY virus you want at 40 cycles - it will be dead nucleotides, etc. Just pure garbage results. The reason no one is sick and the narrative switched to """cases""" is they can basically call any positive PCR at any cycle load they want and if you up testing by over 10 times the number per day they were doing back at the height of the pandemic and the false positives will roll in. Canada did about 10-20k per day and are now doing 100k+. America is doing million+ per day tests. Its insanity. Anyone in medical field or chemistry/biology that has any experience with PCR cant possibly see this data and think its correct or sign off on it - its gross negligence and impossible to see it as correct. Most lab instructors are teaching about 20 cycles and max 30 in lab settings for university.