CDC Withdraws Emergency Use Authorization to FDA for RT-PCR Tests for detecting and identifying SARS-CoV-2 after Dec 31st 2021

[BillyBobzTeeth]

https://www.cdc.gov/csels/dls/locs/2021/07-21-2021-lab-alert-Changes_CDC_RT-PCR_SARS-CoV-2_Testing_1.html

 

I wonder how many people over the last 2 years tested positive for Covid, when infact it was just the flu, due the now unreliable RC/PCR test.

 

 

[KhunLA]

They've known they give false positives since the beginning ...

... dream come true for Thai hospitals and why I would never take a test.

[Virt]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSL1N2P42U5

 

VERDICT

 

False. The CDC is not removing some PCR tests because they failed to differentiate between COVID-19 and Influenza. 

[bunnydrops]

10 minutes ago, Virt said:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSL1N2P42U5

 

VERDICT

 

False. The CDC is not removing some PCR tests because they failed to differentiate between COVID-19 and Influenza. 

May be why the local clinic here shows the test called RT-qPCR instead of just RT-PCR as before.

[KhunLA]

From the link above: 

"This is not due to the tests failing or confusing SARS-CoV-2 with influenza, however, but in order to transition toward using a test that can facilitate the diagnosis of both viruses."

 

OR ... more accurately, diagnosis any (infectious) coronavirus.  I'm finding it hard to believe, people don't know this, what I thought was 'common knowledge'.

[Virt]

4 minutes ago, bunnydrops said:

May be why the local clinic here shows the test called RT-qPCR instead of just RT-PCR as before.

Different countries use different PCR tests. In Denmark we use a variant pcr test that has been modified so it can detect omicron without using whole genome sequencing after the test, so that saves times too.

 

As for the original poster 

Here is also a link that describes how PCR tests work.

 

https://www.nebraskamed.com/COVID/pcr-test-recall-can-the-test-tell-the-difference-between-covid-19-and-the-flu

[Virt]

10 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

 

 Edit. Deleted above. Double quoted.

10 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

From the link above: 

"This is not due to the tests failing or confusing SARS-CoV-2 with influenza, however, but in order to transition toward using a test that can facilitate the diagnosis of both viruses."

 

OR ... more accurately, diagnosis any (infectious) coronavirus.  I'm finding it hard to believe, people don't know this, what I thought was 'common knowledge'.

I fail to see your point when the same article also had this to say.

 

"The alert advises labs to switch to other COVID-19 testing methods and “encourages laboratories to consider adoption of a multiplexed method that can facilitate detection and differentiation of SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses.” The reason being, “Such assays can facilitate continued testing for both influenza and SARS-CoV-2 and can save both time and resources as we head into influenza season.”"blockquote widget

Edited December 29, 2021 by Virt

[KhunLA]

12 minutes ago, Virt said:

 Edit. Deleted above. Double quoted.

I fail to see your point when the same article also had this to say.

 

"The alert advises labs to switch to other COVID-19 testing methods and “encourages laboratories to consider adoption of a multiplexed method that can facilitate detection and differentiation of SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses.” The reason being, “Such assays can facilitate continued testing for both influenza and SARS-CoV-2 and can save both time and resources as we head into influenza season.”"blockquote widget

Thought mine and your post are self explanatory.  PCR test does not detect 'infectious' viruses.  Didn't work with HIV and doesn't with covid.

 

So as you point out, the advisory recommends to use a different test. 

Edited December 29, 2021 by KhunLA

[Virt]

2 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Thought mine and your post are self explanatory.  PCR test does not detect 'infectious' viruses.  Didn't work with HIV and doesn't with covid.

 

So as you point out, the advisory recommends to use a different test. 

Read my other link.

The Nebraska link.

[KhunLA]

17 minutes ago, Virt said:

Read my other link.

The Nebraska link.

Didn't see or read, though disagree with, as it repeatedly states the test isn't inaccurate.

 

Re-read my reply, as I stated it can not detect 'infectious' virus.  

 

Paraphrased from elsewhere: 

"The tests can detect genetic sequences of viruses, but not viruses themselves....

 

...does not mean the PCR test is unable to detect the presence of SARS-CoV-2 - the virus that causes COVID-19 - rather that it cannot determine whether the individual tested is infectious."

 

Layman's terms ... if it finds, lets say dead / inactive tissue of the virus, then you've tested positive, though it may be no danger to you, or anyone else.

Edited December 29, 2021 by KhunLA

[Virt]

15 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Didn't see or read, though disagree with, as it repeatedly states the test isn't inaccurate.

 

Re-read my reply, as I stated it can not detect 'infectious' virus.  

 

Paraphrased from elsewhere: 

"The tests can detect genetic sequences of viruses, but not viruses themselves....

 

...does not mean the PCR test is unable to detect the presence of SARS-CoV-2 - the virus that causes COVID-19 - rather that it cannot determine whether the individual tested is infectious."

 

Layman's terms ... if it finds, lets say dead / inactive tissue of the virus, then you've tested positive, though it may be no danger to you, or anyone else.

Yeah i knew about that and i think this article in lancet describes what you are talking about.

 

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanmic/article/PIIS2666-5247(20)30172-5/fulltext

 

This thread however were not started because of that, but because the topic poster questioned the PCR tests, and if people had been tested positive for covid, when they only had the flu, and this is not the case, so not sure if the thread should be allowed to continue, since it could be considered fake news and confuse people.

 

The other issue could be continued in another thread.

 

[rabas]

More fake news.

 

If you open the CDC page and follow the links you get to the page below with countless authorized PCR tests for analysing COVID, even home kits. It remains the golden standard of testing as it evolves in response to newer variants.  

 

https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/coronavirus-disease-2019-covid-19-emergency-use-authorizations-medical-devices/in-vitro-diagnostics-euas-molecular-diagnostic-tests-sars-cov-2

[Danderman123]

The CDC advisory is real, but relates to one specific PCR test that is faulty. 

 

The EUA for all other PCR Tests remains in place. 

 

The thread author is misinformed about RT-PCR and Covid in general.