A report from Russian state media with no useful data

There are literally several hundred peer review papers for rtPCR. Its not a new or novel technique. Its been around years.

Regarding the specific PCR test that is being used for the mass test programme, Mike Yeadon says:
This is a good moment to mention that the PCR test protocol for SARS-CoV-2, which everyone in the world is now using, was invented in the lab of Prof Drosten in Berlin. The scientific paper in which the method was described was published in January 2020, two days after the manuscript was submitted. One of the authors of the paper is on the editorial board of the journal that published it. There is concern that this extremely important article, which contains a PCR test protocol that has been used to run hundreds of millions of PCR tests across the world, including the UK, was not peer-reviewed. No peer review report has been released, despite many requests to do so.

Do you take issue with this?

rtPCR is an established technique with many many papers. Protocols the same. You wouldnt expect a peer review for every single test.
There is no "single" PCR test anyway, each brand and assay works slightly differently. The core science is well reviewed and sound for what it does and that is detect very specific fragments of RNA. Its possibly doing that TOO well buts its doing exactly what its intended to do.

...dont actually understand any of the details.

You are purposefully and dishonestly misrepresenting what is said and giving statements that are unsubstantiated. What is the point of you? A member of the 77th perhaps...

the Key Points stand

You clear have absolutely no understanding of the subject and no ability to think from yourself.
You're just spamming repeatedly identical content offering no personal insight, thinking or response to any of the criticism.

Copy/pasting incorrect statements 100s of times doesn't suddenly make them true.
You are purposefully and dishonestly misrepresenting what is said and giving statements that are unsubstantiated.

As opposed to you copy/pasting a single source that has no verification or review at all you mean?
When was the last time you read any form of scientific paper or journal on the subject?

So to summarise

- PCR is a very good test for measuring exposure. It does that very well.
- viral exposure is increasing. A simple look at the UK covid dashboard and testing performed shows that.
- There is plenty of evidence its rising on there alone
- Respiratory deaths were above average late spring and are rising now
- Exposure is rising. Its not over
- Exposure is rising, cases are rising. HIT has not been met.

None of this is heard but you clearly dont understand and certainly dont want to hear anything that disagrees with your pre-conceived view.

As for asking who am i. I was formerly a medical biochemist with a dissertation on a respiratory diseases. This at least means that unlike you i have more understanding and not just spam copy/paste without offering any personal input or thought at all.

So lets hear YOUR view.

How do you explain the increase in the percentage of positive tests along with the increase in overall tests that rises ahead of any changes in test capacity with NO other variables changed ?

Why do you insist on carping on about false positives when you fail to realise you need symptoms to get a standard test so its a confirmatory diagnostic.

Lets hear YOUR explanations not a panic copy/paste you found online.

Re kyta's posts:

Copy/pasting incorrect statements 100s of times doesn't suddenly make them true.

Maybe not - but it seems to be working for the Government!

Regarding the specific PCR test that is being used for the mass test programme, Mike Yeadon says:
This is a good moment to mention that the PCR test protocol for SARS-CoV-2, which everyone in the world is now using, was invented in the lab of Prof Drosten in Berlin. The scientific paper in which the method was described was published in January 2020, two days after the manuscript was submitted. One of the authors of the paper is on the editorial board of the journal that published it. There is concern that this extremely important article, which contains a PCR test protocol that has been used to run hundreds of millions of PCR tests across the world, including the UK, was not peer-reviewed. No peer review report has been released, despite many requests to do so.

Do you take issue with this?

rtPCR is an established technique with many many papers. Protocols the same. You wouldnt expect a peer review for every single test.
There is no "single" PCR test anyway, each brand and assay works slightly differently. The core science is well reviewed and sound for what it does and that is detect very specific fragments of RNA. Its possibly doing that TOO well buts its doing exactly what its intended to do.

OK - a generalised answer. But do you take issue with what Mike Yeadon says in this particular situation? For example, is there nothing shared from Drosten's paper across millions of PCR tests directed at the same problem?