She also vastly overestimates the sensitivity of PCR tests.
When you have various countries stating they are using tests with results from 35 to 40 cycles and are using these results to decide the figures that result in a lockdown and yet you have even Dr Fauci himself saying any test 35 cycles or over is unviable - There are grave and valid concerns with its misuse as a tool for screening in this way and those concerns are not being addressed at the level that the hysteria is being pushed regarding the 'cases, cases, cases' in the media.
She is not the only one that has stood up with such claims and they are not without grounding.
The CDC support only using a cycle threshold of 33 yet they have come forward with criticism of Fauci's description of how the CT works. The other thing is some machines a CT of 35 is equivalent to a CT of 40 on another machine... In other words CT is not an accurate metric to determining the efficacy of the test or to determining whether the test is a false positive or not. It is absolutely correct that CT cutoffs do need to be monitored and that it should be reported, however that number on its own is misleading without other information to go along with it. You are right that it can be misused as a screening tool, however that doesn't change that Dr Sam Bailey is intentionally misleading people with faulty or improperly worded claims about these tools. There are valid criticisms of these tools, hers are not that.
Well, I agree with her. And in rise of a totalitarian government caused by a 'pandemic' - it's not such a far reach that things would be used this way nor is one that speaks this way speaking conspiracy theory anymore as it's all coming to fruition and it's all public. lol
So, how about you, instead of criticizing with words - which are no greater than her words - provide sources of your claims. If you indeed have the truth and know it, simply saying so doesn't make it any more true.
Illustrate with research and sources why you are correct.