Over the last few months through pcrclaims, a core group of lawyers, scientists and other experts have been campaigning hard for an end to PCR data inaccuracies. #PCR #PCRGATE #PCRTest

As a team, we have received nearly 1,000 stories of hardship, disappointment and tragedy. And been moved by the many people out there who are really under pressure as a result of Government policies enacted through PCR data.
So what are we doing?

Through our pro bono network or law firms and individual lawyers, we have been collating witness statements relating to personal harms, harms to children and harms to businesses for ongoing judicial reviews.
We have collectively put thousands of hours into researching, making FOI requests, talking and writing to potential claimants, writing legal letters, researching claim options and interviewing claimants and expert witnesses.
Our team behind the scenes receives and reviews filings and judgments from courts around the world - all offer us all some hope for future cases here in England. So why the delay?
We know that we need an end to this now. We would love the legal option to be a fast one. But this is a marathon, not a sprint. It is unlikely to yield results this year. We have explored many options. But any case suited to the English courts must be timed and crafted correctly
There are also some key hurdles to overcome:

By outsourcing testing to private labs the government has created an almost impenetrable wall around the data needed in relation to PCR. We still don’t know the origin of the sequence they are using.
We cannot rely on the Fuellmich case. The Drosten protocol is not used in the UK. That is not to say that a good decision will not impact England in terms of greater disclosure, but it is not a “slam dunk”.
Injunctions against institutions are ideal, but we’re finding that when the council, NHS trust or schools are challenged, they tend to back down and that individual is spared a test. Case closed.
And then we could get distracted by trolls with unhelpful accusations of “not being real” or “not moving quickly enough”. That is truly exhausting. The abuse is enough to mean that most of our team now remains incognito, but even more resolute to get a result.
So know this:
We do not give up. You are not alone. Our collective effort is not wasted. As a team, we continue to campaign because we know more lives can be saved through a change in PCR testing policy. And we will keep letting that be known! #PCR

More from Society

This is a piece I've been thinking about for a long time. One of the most dominant policy ideas in Washington is that policy should, always and everywhere, move parents into paid labor. But what if that's wrong?

My reporting here convinced me that there's no large effect in either direction on labor force participation from child allowances. Canada has a bigger one than either Romney or Biden are considering, and more labor force participation among women.

But what if that wasn't true?

Forcing parents into low-wage, often exploitative, jobs by threatening them and their children with poverty may be counted as a success by some policymakers, but it’s a sign of a society that doesn’t value the most essential forms of labor.

The problem is in the very language we use. If I left my job as a New York Times columnist to care for my 2-year-old son, I’d be described as leaving the labor force. But as much as I adore him, there is no doubt I’d be working harder. I wouldn't have stopped working!

I tried to render conservative objections here fairly. I appreciate that @swinshi talked with me, and I'm sorry I couldn't include everything he said. I'll say I believe I used his strongest arguments, not more speculative ones, in the piece.

You May Also Like

My top 10 tweets of the year

A thread 👇

https://t.co/xj4js6shhy


https://t.co/b81zoW6u1d


https://t.co/1147it02zs


https://t.co/A7XCU5fC2m