Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Nifster

I just read the WHO revised guidance and I don’t see where they directly mention a reduction in the cycle count.

They do say to be careful about manually adjusting the positivity threshold. Maybe that’s an indirect way of saying something about the cycle count.

To me what’s important is that they advise not to accept a positive result if it’s inconsistent with the “clinical presentation.” IOW, if the patient isn’t showing symptoms, don’t just mark them down them as positive. Instead they say to give another test using a different method. It’s easy to see how this could *substantially* reduce false positives.


21 posted on 01/21/2021 3:09:49 PM PST by Yardstick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]


To: Yardstick

“I just read the WHO revised guidance and I don’t see where they directly mention a reduction in the cycle count.“

They say to go with the way pcr was meant to be used. Which means diagnostic only and a replication rate around 20. In the 40’s during Trump time.

So you are technically correct, they do not say to reduce but they do say to use manufacturers methods which is never above 20 iirc.


23 posted on 01/21/2021 3:24:10 PM PST by walkingdead (We are sacrificing American youth's future on the altar of our own fear. And it is a travesty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]

To: Yardstick

Manually readjusting is changing an acceptable cycle count


34 posted on 01/21/2021 11:56:46 PM PST by Nifster (I see puppy dogs in the cloudso)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson