If you're just looking at them to see if they got better you don't need an expensive test that has a 40% false negative rate.

But that's not what these doctors were doing, is it? They weren't looking at whether the patient got better or not. They were looking at viral load only.

https://twitter.com/GaetanBurgio/status/1241201751916568576

> Outcome from the study is based on viral load only and not on clinical outcome and I can see a major flaw here as clinical outcome critical.