Test, Test, Test

[rmarion]

 

[rmarion]

 

[Uncle Dave]

I dont believe the conclusion this person came to is accurate.

PCR test recall: Can PCR tests tell the difference between COVID-19 and the flu?

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) voluntarily recalled a PCR test they'd been using. The recall was not because the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test was inaccurate.

www.nebraskamed.com

 

[regor]

 

[Uncle Dave]

between Jana Broadhurst, MD, PhD and author of the UNMC Nebraska medicine article on the test

vs.

"Rae" who boasts a star, a flower, a sprout and a sunshine emoji (and 2.5K followers) - you guys are going with Rae on this.

 

[JUSTWANNARACE]

What does the guy that invented the PCR test have to say about them?

 

[Uncle Dave]

What he said, or what people quoting him say he said?

 

[Ghit]

What he said, or what people quoting him say he said?

I'm paraphrasing here but he said something about fauci being an ignorant piece of shit.

 

[Ghit]

What does the guy that invented the PCR test have to say about them?

 

[RitcheyRch]

Something's fishy! FRAUDCI is up to something

 

[spectra3279]

I dont believe the conclusion this person came to is accurate.

PCR test recall: Can PCR tests tell the difference between COVID-19 and the flu?

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) voluntarily recalled a PCR test they'd been using. The recall was not because the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test was inaccurate.

www.nebraskamed.com

Yeah, highly accurate if you want to inflate the numbers. When cumkwats, oranges, air and goats tested positive.

 

[Uncle Dave]

I think this is a better explanation

The tests can detect genetic sequences of viruses, but not viruses themselves.”
it cannot determine whether the individual tested is infectious.

Fact check: Inventor of method used to test for COVID-19 didn’t say...

Correction Nov. 13, 2020

www.reuters.com

 

[Ghit]

I think this is a better explanation

The tests can detect genetic sequences of viruses, but not viruses themselves.”
it cannot determine whether the individual tested is infectious.

When they have to change a verdict of a "fact check"

Rae is really providing a beneficial service service through disinformation. Breaking the thought process(or really jump starting it) and getting one to question the reality they are confronted with is of the utmost importance right now, moreso than being correct in the main. Since the reality of testing is itself disinformation no harm is done.

The test is so sensitive that it's basically meaningless. I read a story of a french tennis player tested positive 200 something times. The test may be accurate, and only relevant for justifying a pandemic designation. Certainly not clinically relevant to the individual patient or their outcome given a ban on certain treatment options in the US, which is to force the use of the shot under EUA.

My cousin canceled Christmas with the family due to her son testing positive after a cold. She went and tested him again 10 days later. She'll probably go again, because she's nuts, all these testing freaks are f'ing nuts!

 

[propcheck]

I think this is a better explanation

The tests can detect genetic sequences of viruses, but not viruses themselves.”
it cannot determine whether the individual tested is infectious.

Fact check: Inventor of method used to test for COVID-19 didn’t say...

Correction Nov. 13, 2020

www.reuters.com

I thought we already established Fact Checkers are just people the media pays to give an opinion. Well I mean thats what the propaganda master Fuckerberg said in court last month.
And as we can all agree opinions are like A$$holes everybody has one and they all stink

 

[Uncle Dave]

I thought we already established Fact Checkers are just people the media pays to give an opinion. Well I mean thats what the propaganda master Fuckerberg said in court last month.
And as we can all agree opinions are like A$$holes everybody has one and they all stink

Thats from Reuters not "fact checkers".

They did a good bit of research on the inventors actual statement vs how it was interpreted.

So you are going with Rae? and the position that these tests dont work at all?

 

[Uncle Dave]

When they have to change a verdict of a "fact check"

Rae is really providing a beneficial service service through disinformation. Breaking the thought process(or really jump starting it) and getting one to question the reality they are confronted with is of the utmost importance right now, moreso than being correct in the main. Since the reality of testing is itself disinformation no harm is done.

The test is so sensitive that it's basically meaningless. I read a story of a french tennis player tested positive 200 something times. The test may be accurate, and only relevant for justifying a pandemic designation. Certainly not clinically relevant to the individual patient or their outcome given a ban on certain treatment options in the US, which is to force the use of the shot under EUA.

My cousin canceled Christmas with the family due to her son testing positive after a cold. She went and tested him again 10 days later. She'll probably go again, because she's nuts, all these testing freaks are f'ing nuts!

Reuters revisited it and called it misleading vs an outright falsehood. It a pretty complex subject.

The test is used for a variety of VIRI diseases Sars COV2 is just one.
Same way HIV is detected but no body says that doesn't work.

You seem to believe the margin of error is so high its not worth doing at all, Im curious what the data you might have to support that?

Mandates are a separate subject - I dont agree with them and have not implemented them even under enormous pressure to do so.

 

[Ghit]

You seem to believe the margin of error is so high its not worth doing at all, Im curious what the data you might have to support that?

The mandates are the ONLY subject and cannot be decoupled.

My assertion is this,

-The test provides little to no clinical value, they test because they "just want to know". This is true based on prophylactic treatment bans.
-Test results(not case severity+count) are principally being used to justify mandates or other freedom destroying measures.
-The error rate is not relevant due to results being politicized and individuals incentivized to provide them, i.e. paid time off.

I believe PCR testing can be useful to determine the prevalence of _something_ and that it is an accurate tool. The main argument is that it has been weaponized against the populace. Thus the data it produces is trash, garbage in/garbage out.

We would have no pandemic designation if we had no PCR because it has been used to legitimize all efforts, being the "gold standard" aka gospel truth.

 

[MSum661]

View attachment 1077563

Holding a Donut...lol.

 

[propcheck]

Thats from Reuters not "fact checkers".

They did a good bit of research on the inventors actual statement vs how it was interpreted.

So you are going with Rae? and the position that these tests dont work at all?

Well Dave if you read your own posted article in it’s entirety you will see the final sentence stating the article was compiled by “Reuters team of fact checkers” So there is that little nugget in your post.
as for your short sighted assumptions about my position on PCR tests. Well, wrong again Sir. I don’t think they are false ,bad or some scary evil magic assay that people make them out to be. I believe people made a mistake in how they were using them and that is why the cdc sent out the lab alert to reduce cycling and I truly believe the medical community screwed up by making assumptions that influenza took a year off and people only had COVID. Now they are being told to test for both since they did not do it on their own.