In a study published May 22, 2020 by Bullard et al , in Clinical Infectious Diseases, it was found that out of 90 PCR positive samples, there was no viable viral growth in samples with a Cycle Threshold (Ct) > 24. [1]
All tests over Ct of 24 should have been disregarded according to this evidence. The tests can’t tell the difference between active and inactive RNA matter. All laboratories should report the number of cycles they used to return all positive results, to gauge it’s accuracy.
A few weeks after the Bullard study, on June 8, 2020, the Australian government first released their “Public Health Laboratory Network Guidance on Nucleic Acid Test Result Interpretation for SARS-CoV-2”.
By July 13, 2020 they sent out an update “to clarify the terms ‘false positives’ and ‘inconclusive results‘”, where they are fully aware that off-target (non-specific) material could potentially be amplified, and this type of false positive occurs with high Ct. Though “usually 35-45 cycles are undertaken”, which anything over 40 (according to this guidance) is high!
It states “To comply with TGA requirements, the laboratory must report the results according to the commercial manufacturer’s recommendations.” This means every person who had a PCR test, the lab should have recorded the Ct value,