top of page
  • Foto van schrijverTony Stewart Tai Chi 4 You

Austrian court overturns judgment: PCR test not suitable for diagnosis

Austrian court overturns judgment: PCR test not suitable for diagnosis

Translation - In the name of the republic” a sensational judgment was issued on March 24 which slapped the Kurz government's panic policy. The court states in several places that a PCR test is not suitable for determining infectivity. This probably factually correct judgment indirectly rejects the entire corona policy in Austria, which is based on this test.

The Vienna Administrative Court has granted a complaint by the FPÖ against the prohibition of its meeting registered for January 31 in Vienna. “The prohibition was wrongly done,” it says on behalf of the republic. In the grounds for the judgment, the court stated on the basis of scientific studies that the grounds for the prohibition put forward by the Vienna State Police Department are completely unfounded. The court agrees with the statements in the complaint "on all points" and even goes far beyond the arguments put forward by the FPÖ itself. In particular, the criteria and definitions used to determine the number of corona sufferers are being massively questioned.

"PCR test not suitable for diagnostics"

It is expressly pointed out that, even according to the World Health Organization (WHO), “a PCR test is not suitable for diagnosis and therefore does not in itself say anything about the disease or infection of a person”. However, the Minister of Health uses a completely different, much broader case definition for Covid-19 diseases, which cannot be used to justify the prohibition of a meeting, because: Should the Corona Commission have based the case definition of the Minister of Health and not that of the WHO; so any determination of the numbers for "sick / infected" is wrong.

The court came to the conclusion that the “information” from the Vienna City Health Service, on which the prohibition by the Vienna State Police Department was based, “ did not contain any valid and evidence-based statements or findings on the epidemic ”

The court literally: Based on the definitions of the Minister of Health, "Case definition Covid-19" from December 23, 2020, a "confirmed case" 1) is any person with evidence of SARS-CoV-2-specific nucleic acid (PCR test, note), regardless of clinical manifestation or 2) any person with evidence of SARS-CoV-specific antigen that meets the clinical criteria or 3) any person with evidence of SARS-CoV-specific antigen that meets the epidemiological criteria. Thus none of the three "confirmed cases" defined by the Minister of Health meet the requirements of the WHO concept of "sick / infected". The WHO refuses to rely solely on the PCR test (confirmed case 1) (...)

- Court judgement (in German) - Here the original judgment on the side of the vote of the day: Administrative Court Vienna -

59 weergaven0 opmerkingen

Recente blogposts

Alles weergeven

A DISCUSSION WITH ANDREW BRIDGEN ( Very important short interview with MP Andrew Bridgen. Excess deaths in the UK was 100.000 in just 2023 !!! Andrews brave actions to he


bottom of page