Post Reply
1 of 1
Louisiana-Monroe suspends football activities after 9 positive COVID-19 tests
4,142 Views |
18 Replies |
Last: 4 yr ago by ssidedawg
I don't get it. COVID isn't a death sentence. 99% of the people who get it recover fully.
This is going to be messy
They need to do something about these PCR tests. The cycle threshold (number of PCR cycles to get a positive result) is set too high at 40, according to an infectious disease expert interviewed by the NY Times. At this level 90% of positive tests are due to detection of insignificant amounts of virus, contamination, or RNA fragments left over weeks after infection. He and other experts have said the CT threshhold should be around 30 cycles. This should have been established long before now so why it hasn't has been an epic failure by the CDC and private labs. It is highly likely that people are being quarantined and schools are shutting down sports and classes for no reason.
It also means they could be early in the infection.......ColonialDawg said:
They need to do something about these PCR tests. The cycle threshold (number of PCR cycles to get a positive result) is set too high at 40, according to an infectious disease expert interviewed by the NY Times. At this level 90% of positive tests are due to detection of insignificant amounts of virus, contamination, or RNA fragments left over weeks after infection. He and other experts have said the CT threshhold should be around 30 cycles. This should have been established long before now so why it hasn't has been an epic failure by the CDC and private labs. It is highly likely that people are being quarantined and schools are shutting down sports and classes for no reason.
Its a diagnostic test. Diagnostic tests are meant to screen. I mean, are 100% of every colonoscopy positive for colon cancer? Every mammogram positive for breast cancer.
Now what you do with the results is a different issue, but changing the threshold would leave out many people who are early in the disease.
Nope. CDC own data says Ct should be 33 max. Above 33 no live virus was recovered. We are quarantining people unnecessarily.
100%....also there is this:
"Table 3 shows the types of health conditions and contributing causes mentioned in conjunction with deaths involving coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). For 6% of the deaths, COVID-19 was the only cause mentioned. For deaths with conditions or causes in addition to COVID-19, on average, there were 2.6 additional conditions or causes per death."
https://nbc25news.com/news/local/cdc-94-of-covid-19-deaths-had-underlying-medical-conditions
"Table 3 shows the types of health conditions and contributing causes mentioned in conjunction with deaths involving coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). For 6% of the deaths, COVID-19 was the only cause mentioned. For deaths with conditions or causes in addition to COVID-19, on average, there were 2.6 additional conditions or causes per death."
https://nbc25news.com/news/local/cdc-94-of-covid-19-deaths-had-underlying-medical-conditions
https://www.advisory.com/daily-briefing/2020/09/01/covid-tests
"Morrison said a better threshold would be 30 to 35, while Mina said he'd recommend setting the threshold to 30 or less.
According to Mandavilli, CDC data shows that it's very difficult to detect significant loads of live coronavirus within a patient sample that tests positive at a cycle threshold above 33, meaning patients who test positive at a cycle threshold of 33 or higher likely are not carrying enough of a viral load to transmit the virus to others."
"Morrison said a better threshold would be 30 to 35, while Mina said he'd recommend setting the threshold to 30 or less.
According to Mandavilli, CDC data shows that it's very difficult to detect significant loads of live coronavirus within a patient sample that tests positive at a cycle threshold above 33, meaning patients who test positive at a cycle threshold of 33 or higher likely are not carrying enough of a viral load to transmit the virus to others."
Again, quoting individuals is kinda silly. Medicine doesnt work with 1-5 people making statements and everything rushes towards that new method. Thankfully that is the case as medicine would be far different today and everyday everytime someone posted an anecdotal story or a small case study.
Its month 9 of the virus and the world is learning as we go. For you to keep making definitive statements is weird. I know people with lots of letters after their name who still are figuring this thing out. Heck, the links you post arent definitive!
This is from the very first paragraph:
"Some of the nation's leading public health experts say that the most commonly used type of coronavirus test in America could be generating positive results for large numbers of people who are carrying low levels of the virus and therefore may not be contagious, Apoorva Mandavilli reports for the New York Times."
Its month 9 of the virus and the world is learning as we go. For you to keep making definitive statements is weird. I know people with lots of letters after their name who still are figuring this thing out. Heck, the links you post arent definitive!
This is from the very first paragraph:
"Some of the nation's leading public health experts say that the most commonly used type of coronavirus test in America could be generating positive results for large numbers of people who are carrying low levels of the virus and therefore may not be contagious, Apoorva Mandavilli reports for the New York Times."
LOL. I quoted a virologist and MD/PhD with expertise in immunology/epidemiology/infectious disease. I also cited actual CDC data. It is ridiculous to be using a Ct of 40 on PCR tests.ssidedawg said:
Again, quoting individuals is kinda silly. Medicine doesnt work with 1-5 people making statements and everything rushes towards that new method. Thankfully that is the case as medicine would be far different today and everyday everytime someone posted an anecdotal story or a small case study.
Its month 9 of the virus and the world is learning as we go. For you to keep making definitive statements is weird. I know people with lots of letters after their name who still are figuring this thing out. Heck, the links you post arent definitive!
This is from the very first paragraph:
"Some of the nation's leading public health experts say that the most commonly used type of coronavirus test in America could be generating positive results for large numbers of people who are carrying low levels of the virus and therefore may not be contagious, Apoorva Mandavilli reports for the New York Times."
And comparing a PCR test to colonoscopy and mammograms is idiocy. If someone gets a colonoscopy and polyps are discovered, the physician is going to biopsy the polyps first, not start the patient on chemotherapy. If a mammogram reveals a breast lesion they are going to biopsy that lesion first, not start the patient on chemotherapy. They also know what factors indicate a biopsy vs not getting a biopsy.
A PCR test only detects genomic material. It tells you nothing about whether the genomic material comes from live or dead virus. We know for a fact that viral RNA fragments can be detected for 12 weeks or more post-infection. We also know that samples get contaminated through improper handling by those performing swabs and lab technicians mishandling samples. It takes very little contamination to generate a false positive. That is why a Ct threshhold is important. The CDC's own study showed that beyond a Ct of 33 (that is 33 amplification cycles) no live virus was recovered. A Ct of 40 is generating a lot false positives.
Now, I would think that if you had a colonoscopy and they identified a few polyps that you would want them to biopsy those polyps first before injecting you with chemotherapy. Maybe I'm wrong. In the same way, if you are feeling fine and you had a positive COVID PCR test I would think you would want them to confirm that positive before telling you to isolate yourself for no reason. This virus has an IFR of 0.2%, twice that of flu, and you want to shut everything down over a PCR test with improperly established Ct thresholds? OK, you do you man.
ColonialDawg said:LOL. I quoted a virologist and MD/PhD with expertise in immunology/epidemiology/infectious disease. I also cited actual CDC data. It is ridiculous to be using a Ct of 40 on PCR tests.ssidedawg said:
Again, quoting individuals is kinda silly. Medicine doesnt work with 1-5 people making statements and everything rushes towards that new method. Thankfully that is the case as medicine would be far different today and everyday everytime someone posted an anecdotal story or a small case study.
Its month 9 of the virus and the world is learning as we go. For you to keep making definitive statements is weird. I know people with lots of letters after their name who still are figuring this thing out. Heck, the links you post arent definitive!
This is from the very first paragraph:
"Some of the nation's leading public health experts say that the most commonly used type of coronavirus test in America could be generating positive results for large numbers of people who are carrying low levels of the virus and therefore may not be contagious, Apoorva Mandavilli reports for the New York Times."
And comparing a PCR test to colonoscopy and mammograms is idiocy. If someone gets a colonoscopy and polyps are discovered, the physician is going to biopsy the polyps first, not start the patient on chemotherapy. If a mammogram reveals a breast lesion they are going to biopsy that lesion first, not start the patient on chemotherapy. They also know what factors indicate a biopsy vs not getting a biopsy.
A PCR test only detects genomic material. It tells you nothing about whether the genomic material comes from live or dead virus. We know for a fact that viral RNA fragments can be detected for 12 weeks or more post-infection. We also know that samples get contaminated through improper handling by those performing swabs and lab technicians mishandling samples. It takes very little contamination to generate a false positive. That is why a Ct threshhold is important. The CDC's own study showed that beyond a Ct of 33 (that is 33 amplification cycles) no live virus was recovered. A Ct of 40 is generating a lot false positives.
Now, I would think that if you had a colonoscopy and they identified a few polyps that you would want them to biopsy those polyps first before injecting you with chemotherapy. Maybe I'm wrong. In the same way, if you are feeling fine and you had a positive COVID PCR test I would think you would want them to confirm that positive before telling you to isolate yourself for no reason. This virus has an IFR of 0.2%, twice that of flu, and you want to shut everything down over a PCR test with improperly established Ct thresholds? OK, you do you man.
And I pulled my quote from the same exact article. You are using it as fact and even those same doctors are presenting it was a question. I mean, even you have to agree THEY know more about THEIR own research than YOU?
If you have a colonoscopy and they find polyps then that is the equivalency of the PCR, NOT chemotherapy. Quarantining isnt equal to chemo. Chemo would be somewhat equal to a medical regimen for COVID. Chemo is a drug. They would test the polys if suspicious and start you on a high fiber diet. Google it if you dont believe me. FYI....You will find at least a dozen different doctors who vary their opinion with that course of action. But they are highly trained and "practicing medicine" ....not using Google.
I get you hate quarantine and "over-reaction" but your dabbling in medicine with Google doesnt make you an expert....in any way shape or form. Stick to football....we all should on DP. Facebook is better suited for individual opinions on the pandemic.
Colonial and ss???
You guys hate each other?
I appreciate the info both of y'all put out on here, but I'll be honest with you, if you're trying to EDUCATE people about all this stuff, you may as well forget it.
Covid is a lot like politics and religion. Really very, very hard to change someone's mind on it....even with definitive, non-contradictory FACTS. Just ain't gonna happen.
And I've been guilty of trying to educate people myself.
But....some people just like to debate.
Carry on!!
You guys hate each other?
I appreciate the info both of y'all put out on here, but I'll be honest with you, if you're trying to EDUCATE people about all this stuff, you may as well forget it.
Covid is a lot like politics and religion. Really very, very hard to change someone's mind on it....even with definitive, non-contradictory FACTS. Just ain't gonna happen.
And I've been guilty of trying to educate people myself.
But....some people just like to debate.
Carry on!!
I don't hate Colonel. Far from it.
sside is a brother from another mother. We vehemently disagree with each other a lot and have heated debates but I respect him and certaainly don't despise him.ssidedawg said:
I don't hate Colonel. Far from it.
ColonialDawg said:sside is a brother from another mother. We vehemently disagree with each other a lot and have heated debates but I respect him and certaainly don't despise him.ssidedawg said:
I don't hate Colonel. Far from it.