Dwbill Loc: Sunvalley,NV

Yup research makes you Smart!!

debeda

Informed anyway🌞

lpnmajor Loc: Arkansas

This numbers crap again? It isn't a h**x, or if it is...........................the whole fricken world is in on it.

ExperienceCounts

No one said it was a h**x, what is implied is that our leaders are not being t***hful about what is happening in an effort to control the population.

Masks do or don't work, depending on who is doing the talking.

Social distancing always works, but at what cost to businesses and individuals when businesses are shuttered by government edit. Big box stores are allowed to be open, but mom and pop stores and churches are not.

Now they are saying mandatory masks or if you don't comply you will be arrested--after it was said certain people cannot wear them because of health reasons and will be excused.

We are supposed to report non-compliance for private gatherings in our own homes to the government, get in the nay-sayer's faces, call people names, make life difficult for them, trash talk and bully Christians and Catholics and Jews--notice, nothing is said about the other religions and their practices?

Hum, ever watch how C*******m and the Gestapo and Natzi Germany worked?

https://www.facinghistory.org/holocaust-and-human-behavior/chapter-6/spying-family-and-friends
https://educate-yourself.org/cn/kirwansnitchculture15dec10.shtml

Think it cannot happen in the US? Read on.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/police-bribes-brainwashes-school-children-to-report-on-parents-neighbors_3328013.html
https://thenewamerican.com/florida-snitch-line-urges-citizens-to-report-neighbors/
https://redstate.com/nick-arama/2020/04/18/de-blasio-puts-out-video-asking-people-to-rat-out-their-neighbors-for-violating-social-distancing-it-doesnt-end-well-n134804

SWMBO

Yes, they are sitting in front of the TV, beer and popcorn close at hand, getting fatter every day, great healthy lifestyle isnt it.

moldyoldy

That will catch up to you, but a lot of us are inspired to take a walk.

Wildlandfirefighter

Actually it is fairly widely known and reported that there are more false negatives than false positives, most of the false positives come from the antibody test and yes that is because if you had been previously infected with another strain of c****av***s and have antibodies, the rapid antibody test can pick it up. The PCR test however is specific only to C****-** and false positives are very uncommon, but false negatives are very common.

Wildlandfirefighter

Regardless of if this is true and why it could be true (lots of reasons for both), the bottom line is what is happening in our hospitals is not f**e. Do you have any family or friends in the medical field that you trust, just ask them. They will tell you what they are seeing as reality and it isn't good.

Yes I do believe that many that have died were old and infirm and C***d was the last straw. But if someone dying of terminal cancer ends up dying in an auto accident, they don't count that as a cancer death!

Wildlandfirefighter

I've actually shed 20 pounds since C***d started and both of my golden retrievers have lost a bit too. Many many more long walks than ever before for all of us lol!

ACP45 Loc: Rhode Island

I believe you actually have it backwards.

"Even when a sample test is undertaken to identify C19, questions remain. The RT-PCR test commonly used to test for C19 does not appear to be very reliable, nor is it designed as a diagnostic tool for identifying v***ses.

A study from the Department of Microbiology, Queen Mary Hospital, University of Hong Kong found wild variations in RT-PCR accuracy. It was found to be between 22%  – 80% reliable depending on how it was applied. This general unreliability has been confirmed by other studies. Further studies show clear discrepancies between RT-PCR test results and clinical indication from CT scans.

Most of these studies indicate RT-PCR failure to detect C19 in symptomatic patients, so-called “false negative” tests. When Chinese researchers from the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics School of Public Health conducted data analysis of the RT-PCR tests of asymptomatic patients they also found an 80% false positive rate." https://off-guardian.org/2020/04/20/c****av***s-lockdown-and-what-you-are-not-being-told-part-2/

Rapid Test Is Less Sensitive and May Be Better for Most
To address some of the shortcomings in PCR testing, most notably the time it takes to get the result, rapid tests have been developed that can provide an answer in minutes. These tests also appear to be less sensitive, which is actually a good thing. One such rapid test, called the Sofia by Quidel, looks for the presence of antigens (c****av***s proteins) rather than RNA.
In a recent comparison of PCR and the Quidel rapid test, University of Arizona researchers discovered that while the rapid test can detect more than 80% of the infections found by slower PCR tests, when used on asymptomatic individuals, that rate dropped to just 32%. (The study has not been published yet but was reviewed by experts solicited by The New York Times.15,16)
While a 32% detection rate may sound terrible, appearances can be deceiving. Remember, if labs are using a cycle threshold (CT) of, say, 40 cycles, the number of positive PCR results will be vastly exaggerated.
According to The New York Times,17 researchers have been “unable to grow the c****av***s out of samples from volunteers whose PCR tests had CT values above 27.” If the v***s cannot replicate, you will not get ill and are not infectious, so you cannot spread it to others.
When all PCR tests with a CT value over 30 were excluded from the comparison, the rapid test was found to detect more than 85% of the SARS-CoV-2 infections detected by the PCR tests, and this held true whether the individual had symptoms or not.
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/11/19/c***d-testing-fraud-fuels-casedemic.aspx?ui=0b7483587eabb187df52f7c1dc5fa5501e815a97b9f533f43cacc6655f9bbd9e&cid_source=dnl&cid_medium=email&cid_content=art1ReadMore&cid=20201119_HL2&mid=DM723904&rid=1014906348

Wildlandfirefighter

Actually that came from the CDC.

ACP45 Loc: Rhode Island

This is what the CDC states: "What this means is that the PCR test cannot detect or identify SARS-CoV-2. What it detects are fragments, which suggests that a standard “PCR positive” cannot be equated to a so-called C****-** Positive.
The PCR test will pick up fragments of several v***ses including c****a v***ses as well as influenza (flu v***ses A and B)
While SARS-2 which causes C****-** is considered to be similar to SARS-CoV-1, it has similar symptoms to seasonal influenza (V***ses A and B). Moreover, some of its milder symptoms are similar to those of the common cold c****a v***ses. According to the CDC: “Sometimes, respiratory secretions are tested to figure out which specific germ is causing your symptoms. If you are found to be infected with a common c****av***s (229E, NL63, OC43, and HKU1), that does not mean you are infected with the 2019 novel c****av***s.”
According to the CDC  there are “seven [human] c****av***ses that can infect people” the first four of which (alpha, beta) are associated with the common cold.
229E (alpha c****av***s)
NL63 (alpha c****av***s)
OC43 (beta c****av***s)
HKU1 (beta c****av***s)
MERS-CoV (the beta c****av***s that causes Middle East Respiratory Syndrome, or MERS)
SARS-CoV (the beta c****av***s that causes severe acute respiratory syndrome, or SARS)
SARS-CoV-2 (the novel c****av***s that causes c****av***s disease 2019, or C****-**)

In the above context, what this means is that a PCR test will pick up fragments of c****a as well as influenza v***ses. It will not be able to identify individual v***ses including SARS-2.
“Fragments of v***ses positive” does not mean “SARS-2 positive” (or C****-** Positive). The PCR test may pick up fragments of influenza v***ses (A, B) as well as common cold beta c****av***ses (e.g. OC43, HKU1).
In other words, the published estimates of C****-** positive (resulting from the standard PCR test) in support of the Second Wave hypothesis are often misleading and cannot be used to measure the spread of SARS-2."

debeda

I do have friends in the medical community. They are FAR from overwhelmed...

BBZ Loc: Long Island, NY

I do not doubt you, but in one day (November 29, 2020) there were 136,313 new cases and 93,219 people were hospitalized. Things are definitely getting worse, and we should still be careful.

debeda

Never said we shouldn't take precautions, but we also shouldn't allow our lives and livelihoods devastated by this. I wonder about the numbers you cited. For one day. Where did those come from?