11th Nov 2020 : A Portuguese Court of Appeal has made a judgement in relation to a detention case. In it the Court analysed how reliable the PCR Test is and concluded that if misused the PCR Test would have a reliability as low as 3%. for the detection of Coronavirus, and with a False Positive rate of 97%.
The judge references a Sept 2020 paper in the Clinical Infectious Diseases Journal which determined that the quality of a PCR Test depends on the amount of “amplification” cycles used in the test with the following cycle vs quality tradeoff:
25 = 70%, 30 = 20%, 35 = 3%, 35> = 0%
The Portugeuse judge concluded that at 35 cycles a PCR Test produces only 3% reliability and 97% false positives.
The NHS guidance for the use of PCR for the diagnosis of Coronavirus, is 45 Cycles, which is equal to producing 0% .
Samples from the ruling:
“At a cycle threshold (ct) of 25, about 70% of the samples remained positive in cell culture (ie they were infected): at a ct of 30, 20% of the samples remained positive; in a ct of 35, 3 % of the samples remained positive; and in a ct above 35, no sample remained positive (infectious) in cell culture (see diagram).
This means that if a person has a positive PCR test at a cycle threshold of 35 or higher (as is the case in most laboratories in the US and Europe), the probabilities of a person being infected are less than 3%. The probability of the person receiving a false positive is 97% or higher”
“In short, Covid-19 tests that call for false positives are increasingly likely in the current uk epidemiological climate landscape, with substantial personal consequences for the health and corporate system.
Thus, there are so many scientific doubts expressed by experts in the field, which are the ones that matter here, as to the reliability of such tests, ignoring the parameters of their performance and that there is no diagnosis made by a doctor, in the sense of the existence of infection and risk”
“To summarise, false-positive COVID-19 swab test results might be increasingly likely in the current epidemiological climate in the UK, with substantial consequences at the personal, health system, and societal levels”