• Alan Stevens - AWAH - Libertarianism, Freedom.

Coronavirus ‘Cases’ are Garbage-in Garbage-out (GIGO)

Updated: Nov 6, 2020

Most western governments are heading towards reinstating lockdowns despite the very great suffering and loss already caused by the first lockdowns last spring. Their claim to be heading off a second wave of coronavirus cases is based on GIGO projections.

Most western governments are heading towards reinstating lockdowns despite the very great suffering and loss already caused by the first lockdowns last spring. Their claim to be heading off a second wave of coronavirus cases is based on GIGO projections.

What we have now is a bogus ‘casedemic’ based on the ill-considered use of the unfit-for-purpose PCR test. There is no second wave of coronavirus. Reported deaths are mainly reclassified flu deaths.


The argument that we are not facing a real second wave of coronavirus cases and deaths rests on these points:

1) The PCR test has a false positive rate. Every medical test has. A false positive test rate is the proportion of all the people being tested who are reported to have a particular ailment when in fact they do not. If you test millions of people you will get tens of thousands of false positives, depending on what the actual false positive rate for that test actually is.

2) But the UK government refuses to publish its estimate of the false positive rate. This is totally inconsistent with normal scientific procedure. Given how much harm has been caused by the government’s measures, it has a duty to reveal this information. Its failure to do so may result from incompetence (for example it simply does not know what the false positive rate is) or be sinister (they know that there is a high false positive rate and they wish to mislead the public).

People who believe the UK Government is acting correctly should explain why it has not followed normal practice and published the PCR test's false positive rate.

3) Independent estimates of the false positive test rate for the coronavirus test mentioned by Dr Yeadon (see attached link to podcast below), run from 0.8% to over 2%. If you test a million people a day, then false positive rates of 0.8% - 2% will give you 8,000 to 20,000 fake cases daily.

4) In addition to normal false positive results, there is the additional problem that, if the PCR test actually finds bits of one of the corona virus, this doesn’t meant that a person is a ‘case’. Most results from the PCR test are meaningless. The PCR was not intended to be a medical test. It was hastily tried out on the original Sars-1 coronavirus and hastily pressed into service.

5) The PCR test picks up fragments of RNA sequences from any of the handful of established coronaviruses which account, for example, for about a fifth or so of winter colds. These RNA fragments can be months old and are collected from the throat, which is an exterior surface of the body. There need never have been any virus in those persons' bloodstream. Nor is there reason to suppose that these people had a heavy enough viral load to have been ill. These people are not cases, and never were.

6) The PCR test replicates all genetic material it finds many times over in order to find enough trace material to analyse. It is generally accepted that after more than 30 iterations the results are meaningless. The tests are now being run past 40 iterations. If the iterations were limited to 30 times, less than 10% of the reported positives would be counted.

7) I have heard of two cases of people who signed up for the test but who could not attend. They both received letters telling them that they had tested positive! I know this is mere anecdote. But the Yeadon podcast (see link below) also indicates there is chaos in the testing centres. It would push up the reported positive rate, especially if the bureaucracy feels that finding positives in doubtful cases will meet with approval from their superiors.

8) The CDC has announced that in the US flu deaths have declined by two thirds compared with the US five-year average. This is too big an effect to be true. In America there are financial incentives to allocate flu cases and deaths to the coronavirus. There has been a similarly improbable fall in flu deaths in the UK. Unjustified transfer of flu deaths into the coronavirus category, and the likelihood that PCR positive cases who subsequently die are being listed as coronavirus deaths, suggest that hardly any real coronavirus deaths are actually occurring.

9) Sweden’s figures support the likelihood that this second wave is largely fake. National systems everywhere seem to be reacting to political steers from their respective state establishments. In Sweden the government has decided against a lockdown, again, saying that people have suffered enough.

Reporting fake coronavirus deaths has no bureaucratic or financial reward in Sweden. As a result Its figures therefore show the correct, expected Gombertz curve for deaths from a novel respiratory virus up to the point where herd immunity is achieved. Then deaths from the new virus go to nearly zero and stay there. As Dr Yeadon explains, there is never a second wave with a respiratory virus once herd immunity is achieved.

10) With the minor exception of Germany in, I think, August, European countries are experiencing normal or below normal overall death rates. This is not consistent with the governments’ narratives that coronavirus remains a real problem


Well the bureaucracies in the various states seem to support alarmist representations based on already discredited computer forecasts produced by specialists in modelling rather than in the necessary scientific disciplines. In fact, they are relying on new lurid projections of future deaths produced by the very same Niall Ferguson who in March produced the wholly discredited forecast of 500,000 coronavirus deaths.

These are simply Garbage-in Garbage-out computer projections. The state bureaucracy senses an opportunity to meddle still more in citizens’ lives. The Mainstream Media looks to reinforce panic to attract viewership. Government ensures only the ‘right’ scientific voices get public money, and indeed threatens dissident outlets.

In SAGE and the government coterie of advisers you have bought-and-paid-for (by Bill Gates, Big Pharma and HMG) behavioural scientists and mathematical modellers. There seems to be one high grade epidemiologist in the coronavirus alarmist camp in the form of the ambitious Sir Patrick Vallance, who reportedly has a clear conflict of interest.

On the other hand, you have real scientists who have reported in, by now, many studies, that lockdowns, masks and social distancing globally have had no effect on reducing corona virus deaths. The ‘pandemic’ is in fact not really different from many flu seasons we have lived through. There are, as far as I know, no studies suggesting that these measures worked in their stated objective of reducing coronavirus mortality. Though of course they have caused great and pointless suffering and loss, and will cause much more.

(Evidence is now coming out that masks, and indeed flu vaccinations, are harmful and more likely to result in respiratory illness.)

Indeed, the government is in the ridiculous position of claiming that a second lockdown is justified, even though the previous one evidently didn’t work.


In a free society it would not matter that people have such widely varying reactions to perceived threats, for example to the perceived threat of coronavirus. Everybody would be free to self-isolate or take such other measures as they thought appropriate in respect of their own persons or property.

There would be no state propaganda or attacks on holders of contrary viewpoints. The government launched a vicious propaganda assault on the population in March. Maybe it thought this was justified in order to get people to take the alleged threat seriously. I think a lot of people have been permanently traumatised by it.

Instead, in a free society there would be many independent sources of information generated by independent, competent hierarchies in the healthcare sector. This panic would have been headed off by experienced, authoritative experts with serious reputations to protect and no expectation of government employment. And, in fact, it has been just a fairly bad flu season. We have them every few years.

There would be no lockdowns, compulsory social distancing or mask mandates. Of course, people would be free to adopt these approaches themselves. In Sweden, where there is no mask requirement, it seems about 10% of the population wear them.

My guess would be that a free society, even if panicked initially, would have adjusted quickly to the real impact of the virus. Businessmen who closed shop would re-open as they saw less risk averse competitors clean up.

The fact that in a free society we would not have had this terrible year at all should incline quite a few people in the direction of liberty.


Ivor Cummins on the statistical background to coronavirus outbreaks and the inefficacy of state countermeasures:

Dr Mike Yeadon on the nature of respiratory viruses, the absence of a second wave and the false positives from the PCR test:

Worldometer statistics on Swedish coronavirus deaths, including the absence of a second wave:

Graham Hutchinson, former senior chief biomedical scientist, Public Health UK, on reducing virulence of Covid-19, misdiagnosis of flu as covid deaths, and the adverse effects of mask wearing and flu jabs:

4 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

People assume that without the state there would be chaos – high levels of insecurity and criminality. But being a predator, animal or human, is harder than it looks, and customary law systems, typic

Globalist WEF/deep-state elites behind the Covid wrecking ball are also behind the chaos in the Ukraine. Davos must break Russia and China to achieve Global totalitarian control. Instead, it may mer

Western prosperity resulted purely from quasi-libertarian principles embraced under ‘Classical Liberalism’. The state for the first time credibly promised only to steal a fixed and moderate share of