Stang: remember studies on RT-PCR test & false positives linked to high cycle counts & inability to transmit COVID, "The performance of the SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR test as a tool for detecting SARS-CoV-2"
SEMINAL study on PCR test: Only 40.6% of positive tests showed Ct values below the threshold of 25, indicating a likelihood of the person being infectious
Yet note that PCR is not a diagnostic test but a process of amplifying or increasing DNA.
"Although PCR Ct (cycle threshold) values have been shown to be inversely associated with viral load and infectivity, there is no international standardization across laboratories, rendering problematic the interpretation of RT-PCR tests when used as a tool for mass screening."
SOURCE:
https://www.journalofinfection.com/article/S0163-4453(21)00265-6/fulltext
“Of 162,457 tested individuals, 4,164 (2.6%) had a positive RT-PCR test. The positive rate was lower among children aged 0-9 years (2.2%) and among adults aged 70 or more (1.6%), compared to the intermediate group aged 10-69 years (2.8%). The positive rate was strongly linked to the national SARS-CoV-2 test strategy. During the first and third phase of national testing, predominantly symptomatic people were tested. During these phases, the positive rates were higher than during the intermittent second phase corresponding to the summer season, when predominantly asymptomatic individuals were tested. The positive rate during the third phase was considerably higher than during the first phase.
During the peak of testing asymptomatic individuals, only 0.4% tested positive with a mean Ct value of 28.8. Higher mean Ct values were observed among children aged 0-9 years (28.6) and adults above 70 years (27.0). Only 40.6% of positive tests showed Ct values below the threshold of 25, indicating a likelihood of the person being infectious (Table 1). In the small group of individuals for whom clinical information was available, symptomatic subjects had a markedly lower mean Ct value of 25.5 compared to asymptomatic subjects, who showed a mean Ct value of 29.6”
Setting aside the iffy PCR cycle rate and it's lack of certainty as a test, it must also be of note what sequence the currently used pcrs are attempting to amplify. In the beginning it was parts of the spike but when omicron appeared that was because of a dropout.i believe they are now selecting other parts of the virus, which are likely to have significant overlap with any variant within the coronavirus swarm. Given the sheer number of potential coronaviruses which might elicit a match, the whole endeavor is pointless.
By now we know that PCR tests are virtually useless! Many early tests were run at 40 cycles, and some at 44 were reportedly being done. But even at very low cycles, these tests are still totally incapable of DIAGNOSING the presence of any disease because they cannot differentiate between "live", "replication-competent" intact viruses and dead viruses or even just viral fragments, nor can they quantify how many viruses are present in a given sample. As it takes a certain threshold number of live viruses to initiate an infection, even if some are shown to be present, that doesn't mean that there are enough to cause illness. Likewise, the tests cannot determine if a person is contageous/infectious if they have, or if they have recovered from, COVID.
So what good ARE they? They do an excellent job of bamboozling ignorant members of the public, the media, and ignorant doctors and other medical personnel into believing that there is a certain "caseload" of COVID. By massively exaggerating the numbers, a "pandemic" magically gets created out of thin air, the government gets away with declaring an emergency, lockdowns and business closures (ONLY small businesses, of course: never the Walmarts!), school closures, and gets people scared into taking untested genetic modificatiin drugs with no informed consent, making many billions of dollars for the "vaccine" companies.