Exactly. The PCR test is a diagnostic tool. Not a screening tool. It can establish if you HAD been infected with the SARs-2 virus and that your immune system had attacked the virus but not WHEN. It could not tell you when you were infected and if you were still infectious. PLUS it takes several days to get a test result. How many non-infectious cases were forced to spend 14 days in isolation is unknown. That did not seem to matter.
The best indicator PCR tests have to shed a light on the level of viral load in the system is the CT number. The cycle threshold. The number of amplification cycles that were required to produce enough viral material to test. The higher CT number, say 40, the lower the viral load. The lower the viral load, less than 35, the less likely the person was infectious. At least that is what some authorities believed. Viral RNA can remain in the human body for weeks , maybe months after the infection had cleared up. That is why PCR tests are not useful as a screening tool.
What we need right now is a test that shows if someone is infectious. That is all that matters. That is where a less sensitive rapid test (results in 10 minutes) can be effective. Why are we not using them more? Better than a ‘vaccine’ passport. ‘Vaccine’ passports do not tell anyone if the holder is infectious. Useless as a screening tool. Yet millions of dollars have been spent developing them and making their use mandatory.