🚨1/Large peer-reviewed German study in Journal of Infection reiterates what I've said since May 2020 based on other peer-reviewed studies. PCR test deeply flawed: "cases" don't equal infections
PCR results are unsuitable as basis for any imposed measures
journalofinfection.com/article/S0163-…
PCR results are unsuitable as basis for any imposed measures
journalofinfection.com/article/S0163-…
2/ "In light of our findings that >1/2 of individuals with +PCR test results are unlikely to have been infectious, RT-PCR test positivity should not be taken as an accurate measure of infectious SARSCoV2 incidence. Our results confirm findings of others that..."
3/ "...the routine use of 'positive' RT-PCR test results as the gold standard for assessing and controlling infectiousness fails to reflect the fact 'that 50-75% of the time an individual is PCR positive, they are likely to be post-infectious'..."
4/ "Although PCR Ct (cycle threshold) values have been shown to be inversely associated with viral load & infectivity, there is no international standardization across laboratories, rendering problematic the interpretation of RT-PCR tests when used as a tool for mass screening."
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
