"Dead" Virus Cells Frequently Trigger "False Positives" In Most Common COVID-19 Test, New Study from Oxford University Finds

In the past, our reports raising questions about the accuracy of COVID-19 tests have been met with accusations of 'fearmongering' and spreading 'misinformation'.

But not today.

That's because new research from the University of Oxford’s Center for Evidence-Based Medicine and the University of the West of England has found that the swab-based technique used for most COVID-19 testing is at risk of returning "false positives" since copies of the virus's RNA detected by the tests might simply be dead, inactive material from a weeks-old infection. Although patients infected with COVID-19 are typically only infectious for a week or less, tests can be triggered by virus genetic material left over from a weeks-old infection.

The team's research involved analyzing 25 studies on the widely used polymerase chain reaction test. PCR tests use material collected with a swab - the most common type of test around the world, and especially in the US - then utilize a "genetic photocopying" technique that allows scientists to magnify the small sample of genetic material collected, which they can then analyze for signs of viral RNA.

What the researchers here have effectively found is that these PCR tests just aren't sensitive enough to distinguish if the viral material is active and infectious, or dead and inert.

For those who desire a more comprehensive understanding of how these tests work, the chart below can be helpful.

Professor Carl Heneghan, one of the authors of the study, said there was a risk that a surge in testing across the UK was increasing the risk of this sample contamination occurring and it may explain why the number of Covid-19 cases is rising but the number of deaths is static.

"Evidence is mounting that a good proportion of ‘new’ mild cases and people re-testing positives after quarantine or discharge from hospital are not infectious, but are simply clearing harmless virus particles which their immune system has efficiently dealt with," he told the Spectator.

Professor Heneghan added that international scrutiny might be required to avoid "the dangers of isolating non-infectious people or whole communities."

As Sherlock Holmes so famously said, “How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”

The pandemic reaction kept law-abiding Americans locked down, which allowed rioters — conveniently masked to hide their identities — free-reign on city streets, and in addition offered the obviously-impaired Joe Biden a ready excuse to stay in his basement rather than be out on the campaign trail.

Just astonishingly convenient how all that worked out for the Democrats.

Holmes would simply be shaking his head at the gullibility of humanity.

"Dead" Virus Cells Frequently Trigger "False Positives" In Most Common COVID-19 Test, New Study from Oxford University Finds

Viruses are not comprised of cells

That's because new research from the University of Oxford’s Center for Evidence-Based Medicine and the University of the West of England has found that the swab-based technique used for most COVID-19 testing is at risk of returning "false positives" since copies of the virus's RNA detected by the tests might simply be dead, inactive material from a weeks-old infection

PCR is a test for a specific sequence of nucleotides, not for intact virus. Strictly speaking, it’s not a false positive, but a misinterpretation of a positive result as meaning more than it does.

then utilize a "genetic photocopying" technique that allows scientists to magnify the small sample of genetic material collected, which they can then analyze for signs of viral RNA

PCR doesn’t indiscriminately amplify all the DNA/RNA present, leaving the scientists to “analyze for signs of viral RNA.” It amplifies only the viral RNA. It’s a present/not present test.

increasing the risk of this sample contamination

It’s not contamination, the test is working as designed. Again, it’s not a test for viable virions, just for the presence of viral genetic material, which doesn’t imply viable infective particles.

What the researchers here have effectively found is that these PCR tests just aren't sensitive enough to distinguish if the viral material is active and infectious, or dead and inert.

Ugh. The problem is the exact opposite- PCR is too sensitive for use as a test for presence of active infection.

This article raises a very real issue (positive PCR test does not automatically mean active infection), but I just want people here on FR to understand that the author of this article clearly does not understand the issue/technology in question and is giving false explanations. I just want people here to be properly informed.

For anyone wondering why I care /know: until a couple years ago I used to do PCR DNA/ RNA amplification and sequencing for a living.

Not exactly. Literature reports a 3 - 6 week antibody period that is pretty narrow to catch IgG. After that e antibodies fade and there is T cell immunity. T cells are the memory of the immune system for lack of better words and when an antigen comes by that the T cell recognizes it cranks our antibodies quite quickly which confers immunity. This is the fallacy of the argument that antibodies disappearing mean reinfection is possible. Totally fake news

We need to stop this neurotic testing and get back to fundamentals of medicine. If sick and mild stay home. Of progressive get evaluated and treated.

It’s really pretty simple but we have collectively lost our minds.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.