Yet they had to change/adjust guidelines lol

It is implicitly stating that if your positive PCR test does not correlate with the clinical picture of the patient, it could well be because the cycle threshold was too high for the viral load of the patient.

Your calm persistence and defense of your arguments is admirable in the face of relentless attacks on your character.

Benny... WTF is it with you libs and your reverse psychology? It's predictable AF lol..

- Say you want to keep trannies away from children and somehow that makes you a "closet ped0."

- Say you object to gender neutral bathrooms and somehow that makes you a closet homo.

...Now here we are having a good LOL at J.F.C and his covid addiction and that means we love him lol.

Try this... no. We think its weird AF for anybody to be addicted to something like this and we are simply exercising our right to LMAO at him.

Whoa... looks like a little covid addicts man crush developing here! Didn't see that coming at all!

When it's all the opposition has to offer, it says a lot

Except the fact that the narrative you push say something quite different than the actual facts.

Now back to topic..

You see this piece of text:

Users of IVDs must read and follow the IFU carefully to determine if manual adjustment of the PCR positivity threshold is recommended by the manufacturer.

What do you think that manual adjustment refers to?

Simply put you can make better use of your time.
Let him be .
We get it, you think he is overreacting, but we understood that 3 months ago in your first reply to his data driven studies.

No man crush I like HTC athletic women.

I am amazed at his persistence, that's it.
It takes a lot of time and energy to reply to hundreds of post from his haters.

Different assays have different limits of detection (max Ct)

And you refuse to debate him because?

It's adorable when backtracking Benny comes to the rescue of posters like Pat, Bodhy, and JLC.......

I dunno if calling people names can really be considered debating.

Well let's see, those of us with common sense see people still wearing masks as ignorant, you make excuses for them, or still wear one yourself.

Posters are pointing out how the latest booster is recommended for those fifty five and older, or are great risk. You on the other hand believe children should get it.

You create numerous threads about Covid, about how 10-20% of those who get it, interesting how you can't determine if it's 10 or 20, will suffer long term complications, I point out that would mean hundreds of millions, possibly a billion people are suffering long term complications, and you go, "Hurr Durr, where did I say that?"

Now, you're either pretending to act retarded or legit retarded.

So more name calling.

But, similar to Paul, your lack of understanding doesn't invalidate research, data, nor technology.

Why do you still make excuses for people wearing a mask? Why are you using for children to get the fourth booster shot?

And the wrong ones were being used..hence the memo sent out by the WHO.

I don't make excuses for anyone.

I don't recall using for children. I'm not really even sure what means, tbh.

Someone might have mentioned it already but notice the contrast:

-CDC recommending boosters for everyone over 6 months old
-UK recommending boosters only for people 65 yrs and older

Yep, different countries have different recommendations.

New vaccines recommended for everyone in Canada. Our healthcare system is struggling.

I don't think so, but if you do, that's cool.

The LoD is stated in the kit.

If the wrong ones weren’t being used, there would be no need for the memo stating adjustments to be made.

Either way, PCR test are not what should be used to detect viral load.

RT-PCR is a reliable index of viral load.

Nope. Friend works in a FDA regulated viral qPCR analysis position and have to deal with manual threshold adjustments all the time. Even in super well established assays that they have been running for 10+ years we still get false positives, which you cannot identify based on ct values alone, these are often unusually high positives based on ct. If you look at the amplification curve, it is clear that there is non-specific amplification. So a manual threshold is performed to set the baseline above the false positives but still within the 2-fold amplification phase
With a newly developed PCR assay such as for Covid, the likelihood of these false positives is higher. Therefore it is logical and common to either do re-extractions or a manual adjustment, which are likely to give false-positives.

Using this PCR test on a massive scale to diagnose a disease, is neither logical nor precedented. In the clinical setting a PCR test is used to confirm a diagnosis for patients that present with symptoms. The most liberal use, not connected with a diagnosis, is screening for MRSA, but even in those cases there are narrow criteria of who should be swabbed, and evidence has emerged that isolating just colonized patients has no clear benefits.
With covid, not only do we have a massive industry, testing healthy people, but they test EVERYONE that comes into acute care, regardless of presenting complaints. Chest pain? Covid test! GI Bleed? Covid test! CVA? Covid test! What follows from this is a very hyper-inflated case count, and a hyper-inflated-death count. All the while they are placing patients with no symptoms of a respiratory virus that test positive in the same departments as real covid patients with respiratory disease.

This is why skeptics struggle to get traction, imo.

You reference a friend, then say "we". It smacks of copy/paste/propogation.

The gotchas demonstrate lack of understanding, training, and/or experience.

Amplification of what? RNA that isn't present in the sample?

Nothing stated was incorrect though..and plenty of traction has been gained..no one trusts Big Pharma, the governments pushing vaccines, nor mainstream media telling everyone the narratives you push lol. But hey keep trying, maybe one day you’ll post something intelligent

Maybe

But, blasting social media with announcements of ignorance isn't likely to change much

But that’s all you do. I’m still waiting for you to show me what was incorrect in anything I posted though.

And I'm still waiting for you to come back and show how all vaccines are worse than the diseases for which they confer acquired immunity.

But, how does PCR amplify something that isn't present in the sample?

His persistence at what Benny? Lol have you even bothered to ask yourself that?

Is it not evident to you that his "persistence" is maintaining the narrative that covid is the host horrific black plague zombie apocalypse virus of DOOM in the history of mankind? Despite daily evidence that it's really... not?

Wait nvm.. you think that too. No wonder you've developed a man crush on him lol.

The only person making those claims is you