If you are in the UK, this is the serial dilution of the test being run on you for C19.

For each 10 fold drop in Copies/ml, you should see a 3.3 increment in Ct.

What do you see?
Why does a 5000 copies/ml sample have a lower Ct than a 10,000 cp/ml sample?

The paper does speak to a spike in MS-2 control but this isn't a true internal control like RNaseP.
Spike-in internal controls are important for measuring assay drop out. They prove the PCR was functional.

But RNaseP controls which amplify human DNA/RNA harvested on the Swab..

These ICs are more important as you really cant quantitate viral load and make claims about S gene knock outs being higher copy number if you don't normalize the Swab collection and sample prep issues. These can vary 10-16 Cts according to Dahdouh et al.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.12.24.20248834v1.full.pdf

The paper omits the MS-2 Cts and doesnt really address Dahdouh et al concerns regarding the large Ct variance in swab to swab sample prep.

If you don't normalize for the sample prep variance, and go on to make panic inducing statements about viral load...
you are a hack.

But given the serial dilutions they just published... we already knew this.

Let me clarify.
ORF1ab
If
LOG6 is 15.3
LOG5 should be 18.6.
Pretty close.

LOG4 should be 21.9.
Off by a Ct @ 22.8

LOG3.7 should be higher than LOG4!
But it’s 3Cts off at 19.5??

Likewise LOG3 and LOG2.7 are nearly the same?
The serial dilutions linearity is off.