Literally finding the smallest most microscopic presence of RNA/DNA particulate in order to claim 'Positive for the presence of Convid19'. total gaslighting sham.
EDIT: RT-PCR tests should also have always included the cycle at which the material first became detectable - and even then it still does not quantify if one is 'sick'.
dassar 0 points 1.5 years ago
Yeah, here in nz they were at 40.
https://www.health.govt.nz/system/files/documents/information-release/h202100070_26_jan_2021_covid-19_cycle_threshold_value_for_pcr_testing_0.pdf#:~:text=This%20signal%20is%20measured%20as%20the%20cycle%20number,DNA%20product%20to%20be%20detected%20by%20the%20instrument.
Pertinent part -'The PCR reaction will continue to run for its full 40 cycles to allow for exponential amplification
of the RNA targets using repeated thermal cycling to allow for enough amplified DNA product to
be detected by the instrument.'
Literally finding the smallest most microscopic presence of RNA/DNA particulate in order to claim 'Positive for the presence of Convid19'. total gaslighting sham.
EDIT: RT-PCR tests should also have always included the cycle at which the material first became detectable - and even then it still does not quantify if one is 'sick'.