October 23, 2020
False Positives
James Doogue on the Corny Virus here in the U.S.:
The percentage of 'positives', clearly shows the first
and second wave, and that numbers, in terms of percentage positives
have turned the corner.
The total number of daily deaths hasn't climbed with the absolute number of positive tests being returned. In fact it follows a similar pattern the the percentage of positives. In the graph you can see the two waves.
With the number of positive tests increasing in the US, when the number of deaths aren't, that can be a reflection of how many asymptomatic positives there are as well as improved treatment regimes. But the latter is less likely to be a key factor, because it it were, the number of deaths would still follow the number of positives results, just at a lower gradient.
So we can only conclude that either the second wave is less virulent, or there are a lot of false positives.
I'm leaning towards the false positive scenario the more I understand the RT-PCR testing method.
What is clear is that the higher the number of amplification cycles when the test threshold is reached in the RT-PCR assessment, the lower the likelihood the subject is infectious.
When testing to see if live cultures could be grown from samples taken from subjects who were tested positive based on the RT-PCR assessment, it was found that nearly all patients were not infections within 8 days of the onset of any symptoms. But it was found that using the RT-PCR process, patients could be deemed Covid-19 positive up to 47 days from symptom onset. That's about 5 weeks after they ceased to be infectious.
https://
Many other studies have concluded that the higher the number of amplification cycles needed to get a positive test, the lower the amount of virus present.
Of course many testing positive have never had symptoms so may never have been infectious. Yet the policy is to treat everyone testing positive as infectious and quarantine them for 14 days. And sometimes with a requirement to have two negative RT-PCR tests within 24 hours of each other as well, to be considered virus free.
Many people testing positive to Covid-19 and being compulsorily quarantined, may never have had an infectious level of Covid-19, or were not infectious at the time of the test.
Not only does this mean those people have been placed in quarantine unnecessarily, but governments have been obsessing over positive test results which are meaningless.
From my research, the US CDC and the UN WHO do not proscribe the number of amplification cycles at which people should no longer be considered infectious, other than to apply a maximum of 40 cycles. There is also no requirement for testers to report the number of cycles before a positive test was reached.
It's clear from available research that a more accurate assessment on infectiousness would be to have a lower amplification cycle cut-off along with determining the onset of any symptoms.
A high amplification cycle, and more than 8 days since the onset of any symptoms would mean the subject is not infectious, and does not need to be quarantined.
If the number of cycles is high, and the subject is asymptomatic, then they should isolate for 5 days and then be re-tested. If the test is negative, then clearly the person is not infectious and can come out of isolation. If they are positive, and the cycles are still high, but they are still asymptomatic, then again they are not infectious and can come out of isolation.
This common sense approach to testing would significantly reduce the number of people in Quarantine and also calm the panicked policy approach of some governments.
The total number of daily deaths hasn't climbed with the absolute number of positive tests being returned. In fact it follows a similar pattern the the percentage of positives. In the graph you can see the two waves.
With the number of positive tests increasing in the US, when the number of deaths aren't, that can be a reflection of how many asymptomatic positives there are as well as improved treatment regimes. But the latter is less likely to be a key factor, because it it were, the number of deaths would still follow the number of positives results, just at a lower gradient.
So we can only conclude that either the second wave is less virulent, or there are a lot of false positives.
I'm leaning towards the false positive scenario the more I understand the RT-PCR testing method.
What is clear is that the higher the number of amplification cycles when the test threshold is reached in the RT-PCR assessment, the lower the likelihood the subject is infectious.
When testing to see if live cultures could be grown from samples taken from subjects who were tested positive based on the RT-PCR assessment, it was found that nearly all patients were not infections within 8 days of the onset of any symptoms. But it was found that using the RT-PCR process, patients could be deemed Covid-19 positive up to 47 days from symptom onset. That's about 5 weeks after they ceased to be infectious.
https://
Many other studies have concluded that the higher the number of amplification cycles needed to get a positive test, the lower the amount of virus present.
Of course many testing positive have never had symptoms so may never have been infectious. Yet the policy is to treat everyone testing positive as infectious and quarantine them for 14 days. And sometimes with a requirement to have two negative RT-PCR tests within 24 hours of each other as well, to be considered virus free.
Many people testing positive to Covid-19 and being compulsorily quarantined, may never have had an infectious level of Covid-19, or were not infectious at the time of the test.
Not only does this mean those people have been placed in quarantine unnecessarily, but governments have been obsessing over positive test results which are meaningless.
From my research, the US CDC and the UN WHO do not proscribe the number of amplification cycles at which people should no longer be considered infectious, other than to apply a maximum of 40 cycles. There is also no requirement for testers to report the number of cycles before a positive test was reached.
It's clear from available research that a more accurate assessment on infectiousness would be to have a lower amplification cycle cut-off along with determining the onset of any symptoms.
A high amplification cycle, and more than 8 days since the onset of any symptoms would mean the subject is not infectious, and does not need to be quarantined.
If the number of cycles is high, and the subject is asymptomatic, then they should isolate for 5 days and then be re-tested. If the test is negative, then clearly the person is not infectious and can come out of isolation. If they are positive, and the cycles are still high, but they are still asymptomatic, then again they are not infectious and can come out of isolation.
This common sense approach to testing would significantly reduce the number of people in Quarantine and also calm the panicked policy approach of some governments.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
07:26 AM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
Post contains 628 words, total size 5 kb.
1
With the number of positive tests increasing in the US, when the number of deaths aren't, that can be a reflection of how many asymptomatic positives there are as well as improved treatment regimes.
It’s more likely that it’s simply a reflection of the increased number of tests. There have always been X number of cases resulting in Y number of deaths and Z number of positive tests due to taking W number of tests.
Now we are taking W x 100 tests, so we get W x 100 positive results. It does not result in additional deaths, because deaths are not related to tests. You can, and do, die from the virus whether you have been tested for it or not.
So now we are panicking about more cases, but there are not more cases. That many cases have always been there, but we didn’t know about them because we weren’t testing for them. Now we know about them because we are doing more testing. We are finding cases that were already there.
If you go searching for gold, is that gold created because you found it? Or was it there all the time and your search merely found what was already there? Get it?
It’s more likely that it’s simply a reflection of the increased number of tests. There have always been X number of cases resulting in Y number of deaths and Z number of positive tests due to taking W number of tests.
Now we are taking W x 100 tests, so we get W x 100 positive results. It does not result in additional deaths, because deaths are not related to tests. You can, and do, die from the virus whether you have been tested for it or not.
So now we are panicking about more cases, but there are not more cases. That many cases have always been there, but we didn’t know about them because we weren’t testing for them. Now we know about them because we are doing more testing. We are finding cases that were already there.
If you go searching for gold, is that gold created because you found it? Or was it there all the time and your search merely found what was already there? Get it?
Posted by: Bill H at October 23, 2020 08:08 AM (vMiSr)
2
An excellent point, Bill. If the Left weren't so hell-bent on hurting Trump any way they can, they might actually be open to having this pointed out.
Regarding testing: a friend of mine sent me a hilarious video; I've asked Tim if there is a way I can actually post a file on this site. It's a file, not a link. It's a cute English gal describing a means of self-testing that relies on the idea that a couple symptoms of COVID are a loss of the senses of smell and taste. She brings out a glass of red wine, sniffs it, then takes a swallow, saying "if you can smell it -- and taste it -- you probably don't have the virus." Then she says "I tested myself 45 times last night. I felt great. Not so good this morning." And so on.
Regarding testing: a friend of mine sent me a hilarious video; I've asked Tim if there is a way I can actually post a file on this site. It's a file, not a link. It's a cute English gal describing a means of self-testing that relies on the idea that a couple symptoms of COVID are a loss of the senses of smell and taste. She brings out a glass of red wine, sniffs it, then takes a swallow, saying "if you can smell it -- and taste it -- you probably don't have the virus." Then she says "I tested myself 45 times last night. I felt great. Not so good this morning." And so on.
Posted by: Dana Mathewson at October 23, 2020 10:27 AM (6Btpe)
3
Absolutely Bill. Rising cases is an artifact of increasing testing. That's why they keep talking about "cases"; they know the epidemic is over.
Lying bastards.
I intend to test myself for Covid tonight Dana! Me and my buddy 7lb. Dave plan to see if we are sick by visiting some of St. Louis' better brewing establishments...
Lying bastards.
I intend to test myself for Covid tonight Dana! Me and my buddy 7lb. Dave plan to see if we are sick by visiting some of St. Louis' better brewing establishments...
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at October 24, 2020 08:00 AM (b1yQi)
4
Well, be forewarned that this gal said the morning after she had the sweats and felt really fuzzy, so she tested again and again until she felt better. She said she felt it was necessary to keep testing because the virus can hit you at any time. She was using red wine.
Posted by: Dana Mathewson at October 24, 2020 11:19 AM (cIZUu)
5
That's the best way to flatten the curve after all Dana!
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at October 25, 2020 07:55 AM (Wolb4)
6
I think Dr. Foochi-Coochi'd agree with you on that one, Tim.
Posted by: Dana Mathewson at October 25, 2020 09:18 PM (ia9S4)
7
Yeah; he and Birx both are clearly intoxicated on occasion...
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at October 26, 2020 06:40 AM (QdQQ3)
8
Our Shop is one of the best shops to buy weed online UK and to buy cannabis online UK without a medical card. We have quality top shelf strains of weed for sale UK. We offer free delivery across the UK and Europe and we do ship worldwide We have more than 90 different strains. aquatic weed cutter for sale uk. how to buy weed online. Darknetweedstore.com Do not hesitate to visit our website below if you are looking for weed for sale UK, Europe, and the USA, Weed for sale Ireland, weed for sale USA, Mail order weed the UK, Buy weed Europe. , order weed online uk
PROMT Deliveries
https://darknetweedstore.com/
Buy Cannabis online, you can order Weed & Cannabis Online in the UK. We deliver fast using next Day Delivery. Get Cannabis & Weed for sale in UK Weed Supermarket. Buy Cannabis online UK, Mail order Weed UK Buy weed online UK Buy marijuanna Online UK. We deliver fast using Next Day Delivery. Weed for sale in UK. aquatic weed cutter for sale uk. how to buy weed online.
Posted by: buy weed online uk at October 26, 2020 05:42 PM (hJ4N+)
30kb generated in CPU 0.1938, elapsed 0.4408 seconds.
37 queries taking 0.4337 seconds, 166 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
37 queries taking 0.4337 seconds, 166 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
