The NYT article I have referenced before, is behind a paywall, and in case anyone didn't dive into the tweets from the reputable sources I posted above, here is a free article that gives in depth and other study info as to why the current covid testing is a joke, and the CDC needs to publicly come out and instruct all labs to change their cycle threshold.
https://rationalground.com/why-mass-...er-productive/
If TLDR for you , here is key takeaway imo
[I][In a review of data from three labs, the New York Times found that “up to 90 percent of people testing positive carried barely any virus,” meaning that only about 10% of people who test positive may actually need to isolate and submit to contact tracing. The recommended solution was to reduce the threshold to 33 cycles, based on CDC calculations.
A literature review of studies on infectiousness based on PCR testing found two studies showing that the odds of live virus culture reduced by 33% for every one unit increase in cycle threshold and that thresholds over 30 cycles were associated with non-infectious samples.
The FDA’s Instructions for Use for the CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel currently recommends a threshold of 40 cycles for a specimen to be considered positive, well above the recommendations of the studies cited above.
The bottom line is that 70%-90% 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/I]
Last edited by Pork Fri Rize; 09-13-2020 at 07:33 PM.