What is the value of 21 21

on Tuesday, October 27, 2020 at 9:06 pm
changed on 10/27/2020 21:15:11

Scientific data show that the evaluation of the number of new infections is incorrect

In the case of a positive PCR test with more than 24 replication cycles, there is no longer any risk of infection - despite this, the results of measurements with 30 cycles and more are used today.

According to the official figures of the Swiss BAG or the RKI, the number of new Covid 19 infections is increasing rapidly - which in turn is politically argued when it comes to the introduction of a new lockdown. But a study published in May 2020 in the renowned specialist journal Clinical Infectious Diseases makes it clear: The data used today are purely manipulative. Because they are based on a value for which there is actually no infectivity. This in turn also explains the fact why neither the number of deaths nor that of hospitalizations is increasing.

Ct value as the decisive factor

This is about the so-called cycle threshold value, which is known by the abbreviation Ct value. This value describes how often the SARS-CoV-2 gene fragment from the patient sample has to be replicated before an added fluorescent dye in connection with the pathogen gene fragment lights up significantly.

The glow can be used to prove that a part of the virus is actually present in the sample. It also states how many virus fragments are contained in the original sample. If only one virus fragment is contained, this section has to be duplicated many times in order to be able to carry out a detection. This creates a large Ct value. If the sample contains many virus fragments, only a few duplications are necessary; the Ct value is small. Therefore, the lower the Ct value, the higher the concentration of virus fragments in the sample.

In order to be able to put this connection in numbers, the team around Jared Bullard from the Canadian University of Manitoba used a trick. They used samples that had previously been assessed as positive by RT-PCR. They grew these on so-called Vero cells. Vero cells are a cell line obtained from normal green monkey kidney cells. Viruses ’thrive on this. If their concentration in the sample is sufficient to be infectious, they multiply.

But this was only the case for 28.9 percent of the positive PCR samples. There was also another very decisive factor: This 28.9 percent only occurred if no more than 24 replication cycles were carried out in the PCR test.
At Ct values ​​above 24, the researchers did not find any increase in the virus. Therefore, an infection above this value is not to be expected, they concluded in May.

The numbers contain political explosives, because RKI and Swissmedic must have known them.

However, measurements are made at Ct values ​​of 30 and more. A regulation based on the limit value of 24 observed in May does not exist in Germany, Switzerland or other countries. The consequences are explosive. Because the number of new infections discussed again and again says practically nothing and stirs up panic for no reason.

This is also confirmed by PCR test laboratories that carry out corresponding SARS-CoV-2 tests in Germany:

“The higher the Ct value, the lower the virus concentration in the sample examined. In SARS-CoV-2-PCR, Ct values ​​greater than 30 indicate a low virus concentration, while Ct values ​​greater than 35 indicate a very low virus concentration in the sample. ”

The document from the specialist laboratory is also precise when it comes to the risk of infection. It coincides with the results of the Canadian researchers:

"Since only the viral RNA and not the entire, intact virus is detected by means of PCR, SARS-CoV-2-RNA detection cannot automatically be equated with the patient's infectiousness or contagiousness."

>>> https://academic.oup.com/cid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/cid/ciaa638/5842165
>>> https://smallpdf.com/shared#st=47ee2ead-e16d-4b8d-8923-7dab796515ed&fn=predicting_infectious_severe_acute_respiratory_syndrome_coronavirus_2_from_diagnostic_samples___clinical_infectious_samples___clinical_infectious_samples___clinical_infectious_diseases387_clinical_infectious_diseases38
>>> https://smallpdf.com/shared#st=9fafe088-549d-44ef-b9db-ad430b9f0ed8&fn=laborwissenkonrekt_sars-cov-2_ct-wert.pdf&ct=1603829129570&tl=share-document&rf=link

Assuming only once that a PCR is stopped after 24 cycles,

what would be the consequences then?
1. If some of the tests with a CT value = 24 were false negative. This phenomenon depends on the evaluation method, with a limit value for the fluorescence the cut-off would be exactly at 24 cycles, with the maximum of the second derivative you need a piece of the curve behind the limit value.
2. The rate of false positives would increase significantly. The characteristic S-shape of the fluorescence proves a successful chain reaction in the reagent vessel in contrast to a non-specific probe disintegration. For this, the PCR must be observed until it reaches its saturation phase (usually approx. 40 cycles).
3. A CT value is not a natural constant, it is always the overall package consisting of sampling, transport (medium), extraction, PCR reagent and cycler that counts. Even if each individual component only had a spread of one cycle in each direction (which would be estimated more than conservatively), then a deviation of plus / minus 5 cycles would be absolutely normal for the same amount of virus in different laboratories. Such limit values ​​therefore have to be validated again and again for the respective local overall package and can only be transferred to a very limited extent from laboratory to laboratory.
4. A CT value is always a snapshot, at the beginning and at the end of an infection the viral load is naturally low. Even with a high CT value (low amount of virus), the virus shedding a few days before or later can be completely different. Therefore, the statutory reporting obligation according to §7 IfSG is independent of the CT value.
5. The question of infectivity is only one of several questions in diagnostics. In the clinical diagnosis of pneumonia, the virus replication in the nasopharynx can be significantly reduced. In order to be able to determine the correct therapy for a Covid-19 disease, the maximum sensitivity of the PCR is required. Of course, you could do a BAL whenever you suspect pneumonia, if you had infinite resources, if you wanted to torture your patients and if you don't care about the risk of infection.
6. If the virus replicates mainly in the lungs, a patient may well be infectious, even with a high CT value in the nasopharynx smear.
7. At this point in time, an arbitrary limit value for the CT would significantly worsen clinical diagnostics without really reducing the number of reports. During the summer up to and including September, I had only had a few positive cases to report, most of them with a CT over 20. In the past few weeks the number of positive results has increased dramatically, with a good half currently having a CT value below 20, some a few even under 10. Studies that consider the distribution of virus quantities in the test material are therefore always only a snapshot.

Summary: The CT value is a helpful tool in the hands of specialists with methodological competence and extremely dangerous in the hands of medical laypeople. In the publications of Prof. Drosten or in the publications of the RKI, the CT value has long been used as additional information for assessing the infectiousness. A binding limit value is currently not possible due to a lack of standardization.
on Tuesday, October 27, 2020 at 11:59 pm
changed on 10/28/2020 00:02:04
changed on 10/28/2020 00:04:50

@Staphylococcus rex - demand

Thank you for your additions, but it was particularly important for me to draw your attention once again to the fact that SARS-CoV-2-RNA detection via PCR does not automatically mean that the patient is infectious or contagious, which then inevitably make a quarantine necessary would,

But I have two more questions for you on the subject.

My first question relates to what you said about the lack of standardization. To what extent does this influence, in your opinion and across the board, the informative value of the PCR in relation to Sars-Cov-2?

Second question:

I would like to draw from the remarks by Prof. Dr. med. Cite Nele Wellinghausen from the MVZ Labor Ravensburg and then ask whether you would agree to this and whether, to your knowledge, the recommendation given at the end is (can) ALWAYS implemented in practice?

The Ct value in relation to infectivity:

"Since only the viral RNA and not the entire, intact virus is detected by means of PCR, SARS-CoV-2-RNA detection cannot automatically be equated with the patient's infectiousness or susceptibility to infection. Some working groups (see literature) have agreed the correlation of the viral genome load (corresponding to the virus amount) in the test material and the cultivability of the viruses contained in the sample in cell culture as a measure of the infectivity From these investigations, “cut-off” values ​​in the range of Ct values ​​from 31 - 34 can be derived, ie with Ct values> 30, SARS-CoV-2 can be found much less frequently in cell cultures than at lower Ct values ​​and the infectiousness of the patient concerned is to be classified as lower however, in the case of previously unknown patients, they can be taken into account by means of a control examination from a new sample.

Last posts on this topic