Read on Twitter
OUR ENTIRE TESTING METHODOLOGY IS FLAWED:
Testing is being used to drive policy. Whilst PCR accurately detects RNA, it DOES NOT detect infectious individuals (proof below). PCR testing without clinical observations has never been used as a diagnostic tool yet is driving policy
Testing is being used to drive policy. Whilst PCR accurately detects RNA, it DOES NOT detect infectious individuals (proof below). PCR testing without clinical observations has never been used as a diagnostic tool yet is driving policy
"Complete live viruses are necessary for transmission, not the fragments identified by PCR."
"Two studies reported odds of live virus culture reduced approx 33% for every one unit increase in Ct."
Ct (sensitivity) > ~27 to 34 does not detecting live virus
http://academic.oup.com/cid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/cid/ciaa1764/6018217
"Two studies reported odds of live virus culture reduced approx 33% for every one unit increase in Ct."
Ct (sensitivity) > ~27 to 34 does not detecting live virus
http://academic.oup.com/cid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/cid/ciaa1764/6018217
"The test cannot discriminate between the whole virus & viral fragments. The test cannot be used as a diagnostic for intact (infectious) viruses, making the test unsuitable as a specific diagnostic tool & make inferences about the presence of an infection
http://cormandrostenreview.com/report/
http://cormandrostenreview.com/report/
"At Ct = 35, the value we used to report a positive result for PCR, <3% of cultures are positive."
https://academic.oup.com/cid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/cid/ciaa1491/5912603
https://academic.oup.com/cid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/cid/ciaa1491/5912603
“24% of staff/patients remained PCR-positive at ≥6 weeks post-diagnosis. in study at Oxford main hospital”
“but infectious potential declines after day 8 even among cases with ongoing high viral loads.”
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7486122/
“but infectious potential declines after day 8 even among cases with ongoing high viral loads.”
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7486122/
The fact sheet for the Quest Diagnostics SARS-CoV-2 rRT-PCR:
“Laboratory test results should always be considered in the context of clinical observations and epidemiological data in making a final diagnosis and patient management decisions.”
https://www.fda.gov/media/136229/download
“Laboratory test results should always be considered in the context of clinical observations and epidemiological data in making a final diagnosis and patient management decisions.”
https://www.fda.gov/media/136229/download
The bottom line is that VAST MAJORITY of positive results from COVID-19 PCR tests are currently inaccurate because they detect virus at levels that are either too small to transmit to others or simply a remnant of recent exposure.
"A cut-off Ct > 30 was associated with non-infectious samples."
"Two studies report a strong relationship between Ct value and ability to recover infectious virus and that the odds of live virus culture reduced by 33% for every one unit increase in Ct."
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.08.04.20167932v4
"Two studies report a strong relationship between Ct value and ability to recover infectious virus and that the odds of live virus culture reduced by 33% for every one unit increase in Ct."
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.08.04.20167932v4
"The C.D.C.’s own calculations suggest that it is extremely difficult to detect any live virus in a sample above a threshold of 33 cycles."
"With a cutoff of 35, about 43 percent of those tests would no longer qualify as positive." https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/29/health/coronavirus-testing.html
"With a cutoff of 35, about 43 percent of those tests would no longer qualify as positive." https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/29/health/coronavirus-testing.html
