COVID-19 case counts are incorrect: The problem is having falsely high COVID-19 case counts due to false positives can affect people’s perception of the dangers of infection and policy decisions

It is spoken across our land in constant refrain, "We are just following the science." Unfortunately, there has been only selective reporting of the science related to COVID-19 that has led to unnecessary fear and hysteria.

Major media outlets seem to pick the science that supports a narrative and ignores completely other important scientific findings. Some government health authorities seem to pick the science that supports their policies for masks, lockdowns, treatments, and testing and ignore other science that would lead to less onerous and destructive policies restricting our personal freedoms.

Having a rational discussion of ALL the science would lead to much less fear and more helpful policies aimed at balancing the need to protect the vulnerable and preserving our rights, freedoms, and means to make a living. This essay comments on COVID-19 case counts being artificially high due to errors in testing.

PCR testing that has been done for COVID-19 can be a faulty way, used by itself, to diagnose a case. PCR testing was mainly meant to be a research tool used to detect small amounts of a protein or chemical by amplifying the sample many times. PCR testing was not meant to be a stand alone test to define a case of COVID-19 infection. Doctors know the main diagnostic tool is to have a patient with typical symptoms and signs of the disease. Additional lab testing can confirm and support the diagnosis.

The answer to a PCR test is not yes or no -- the result can depend on how many amplification cycles are used. On any given set of samples, an amplification rate of 15(small) could be negative for all samples. If the amplification rate is 40 (high) then all the samples from the same set might be positive.

Your Coronavirus Test Is Positive. Maybe It Shouldn’t Be. The usual diagnostic tests may simply be too sensitive and too slow to contain the spread of the virus. - https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/29/health/coronavirus-testing.html

Also as regards counts, as of April 14, 2020, CDC case counts and death counts include both confirmed and probable cases and deaths. This change was made to reflect an interim COVID-19 position statement pdf iconexternal iconissued by the Council for State and Territorial Epidemiologists on April 5, 2020.

And which PDF states (added bold emphasis by me),

A probable case or death is defined by one of the following:

Meeting clinical criteria AND epidemiologic evidence with no confirmatory laboratory testing performed for COVID-19
Meeting presumptive laboratory evidence AND either clinical criteria OR epidemiologic evidence
Meeting vital records criteria with no confirmatory laboratory testing performed for COVID19

Not all jurisdictions report confirmed and probable cases and deaths to CDC. When not available to CDC, it is noted as N/A.

What Clinical Criteria and epidemiologic evidence means, respectively, is explained in the probable case or deathlink:

CSTE realizes that field investigations will involve evaluations of persons with no symptoms and these individuals will need to be counted as cases.

Clinical Criteria

At least two of the following symptoms: fever (measured or subjective), chills, rigors, myalgia, headache, sore throat, new olfactory and taste disorder(s)

At least one of the following symptoms: cough, shortness of breath, or difficulty breathing

Severe respiratory illness with at least one of the following:

Clinical or radiographic evidence of pneumonia, OR
Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).

AND

No alternative more likely diagnosis

Epidemiologic Linkage

One or more of the following exposures in the 14 days before onset of symptoms:

Close contact** with a confirmed or probable case of COVID-19 disease; OR
Close contact** with a person with:
- clinically compatible illness AND
- linkage to a confirmed case of COVID-19 disease.
Travel to or residence in an area with sustained, ongoing community transmission of SARS-CoV-2.
Member of a risk cohort as defined by public health authorities during an outbreak.

**Close contact is defined as being within 6 feet for at least a period of 10 minutes to 30 minutes or more depending upon the exposure. In healthcare settings, this may be defined as exposures of greater than a few minutes or more. Data are insufficient to precisely define the duration of exposure that constitutes prolonged exposure and thus a close contact.

Which among other scenarios, means that a person that may be listed as a COVID-19 case if the person simply has a cough (for that alone qualifies as Clinical Criteria if there is no other more likely diagnosis) and has simply traveled to an area with sustained, ongoing community transmission of SARS-CoV-2, for that alone qualifies as Epidemiologic Linkage, and only one of each meets the qualification listing a death as COVID-19. <

And with money being involved, then liberal attribution of COVID-19 cases and deaths should be presumed in this fallen world, the reaction to it is unprecedented in America.

For as even USA Today affirmed,

Hospitals and doctors do get paid more for Medicare patients diagnosed with COVID-19 or if it's considered presumed they have COVID-19 absent a laboratory-confirmed test, and three times more if the patients are placed on a ventilator to cover the cost of care and loss of business resulting from a shift in focus to treat COVID-19 cases. [https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/04/24/fact-check-medicare-hospitals-paid-more-covid-19-patients-coronavirus/3000638001/]

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.