I thought the PCR results were 100% false as Drosten just guessed at what he thought the genetic sequence of Sars-cov-2 might be (he had no actual sample available when he created his PCR protocol) and selected a few pre exisitng genetic fragments as the basis for his PCR diagnostic tool.
The WHO lapped it up adopting this fraud test as the global standard and the rest is history.
Drosten's "mashup" was a joke. He also recommended Ct 45. The cycle thresholds have been known for decades. The legal system in most places have been using 25 Ct as the limit for their DNA evidence protocol.
I thought the PCR results were 100% false as Drosten just guessed at what he thought the genetic sequence of Sars-cov-2 might be (he had no actual sample available when he created his PCR protocol) and selected a few pre exisitng genetic fragments as the basis for his PCR diagnostic tool.
The WHO lapped it up adopting this fraud test as the global standard and the rest is history.
Drosten's "mashup" was a joke. He also recommended Ct 45. The cycle thresholds have been known for decades. The legal system in most places have been using 25 Ct as the limit for their DNA evidence protocol.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/346483715_External_peer_review_of_the_RTPCR_test_to_detect_SARS-CoV-2_reveals_10_major_scientific_flaws_at_the_molecular_and_methodological_level_consequences_for_false_positive_results
It seems that Hammond doesn't understand the these terms, and how to use them, and more than Weiler....