Lab - Webinar - PCR Test - Positive

At the end of a very long "webinar" to other labs - (BGI Genomics), he said they had to modify their equipment to try and 'get' a positive result from the control - because quote:

... "the CT value the reference-lab had was below their cut-off - so they called it negative & BGI was able to pull that out at a higher sensitivity and determine positive sample"

Source: Webinar "Hit the Ground Running: The Clinical Venture of a Start-up COVID-19 Testing Lab Led by Blackhawk Genomics"
https://www.bgi.com/us/company/events/blackhawk/

Source: YouTube
https://youtu.be/7zjiXweEBQM

Why this matters.

There's a paper titled "Cycle threshold as a measure of infectivity from
Covid-19 PCR tests" in the African Journal of Respiratory Medicine about Melbourne's PCR test being way too extreme (producing overrated numbers of cases):

https://www.africanjournalofrespiratorymedicine.com/articles/cycle-threshold-as-a-measure-of-infectivity-fromcovid19-pcr-tests.pdf

NSW Health Pathology list their cut-off of threshold between 40-45 cycles.
https://www.pathology.health.nsw.gov.au/covid-19-info/sars-cov2-nat

Whereas several published papers and lawsuits and even Dr Fauci says that anything above 36 was dead nucleotides - not infectious.

Dr Fauci Interview:
Fauci PCR>36 Dead Nucleotides - Interview - 17 Jul 2020
https://rumble.com/vj9xlx-fauci-pcr36-dead-nucleotides-interview-17-jul-2020.html

Papers:

"patients with Ct above 33–34 using our RT-PCR system are not contagious"
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10096-020-03913-9

"A false positive test result can impede a correct diagnosis, delaying or depriving patients of appropriate treatment."
https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.04.26.20080911

"patients could not be contagious with CT >25"
https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciaa638

"CT 25 infectious for up to 70%, CT 30 drops to 20% infectious, CT 35 less than 3% infectious"
https://dx.doi.org/10.1007%2Fs10096-020-03913-9

This snippet of the webinar shows that not only does it seem that the PCR Tests are incapable of differentiating between Flu/RSV (Respiratory

To get FDA EUA approval and for Quality Control, their equipment needs to test against a Positive and Negative control (regularly). These controls are also used to train new lab staff on detection. They (those in the webinar above) purchase their controls from a company called Zeptometrix. ("the virus" and the "not the virus")

Zeptometrix Flu/RSV/SARS-CoV-2 Positive & Negative Controls
https://www.zeptometrix.com/search/results?term=flu%2frsv%2fsars

When you look at their sales pages for the controls, the 0.5ml controls are for Flu/RSV/SARS-CoV-2 - the one control... contains all 3.. Respiratory Syncytial Virus, Influenza (which we stopped tracking) and SARS-CoV-2

CDC, TGA, - every country - health tracking websites say they no longer track "laboratory-confirmed" Influenza (during the pandemic)

WHO/CDC/Australia & other countries require COVID-19 to be listed on the death certificate - regardless of how they died - if they were lab-confirmed or it was assumed to be a contributing factor in the death.

The latest (August 2021) CDC Flu weekly summary reports 17% of all deaths were due to pneumonia, influenza and COVID-19 but then said of those, only 4 were listed as influenza "indicating" the mortality is due to COVID-19.
(But unless I'm misunderstanding something - the tests themselves do not differentiate between 4 different respiratory diseases, and that hypothesis is validated by the fact that they do not track lab-confirmed cases of the other diseases)