Omicron now

[man down]

I don’t know how the talks in Canada are going, but if it’s about the Harvard University, I refer to its homepage:

Huh? Go to the last paragraph where it says "findings " please tell us and motherjones what it says. How in the HELL can that be taken out of context? What's funny is motherjones isn't even talking about the last paragraph. They're talking about other parts of the paper. I'd think the "findings" would be the final outcome of the study.

[Citizen Koba]

PCR tests are good? Musk, James and many more had false tests.

Then the FDA pulled the tests because of false outcomes. Why you spreading misinformation?

No your sources are. Yes PCR tests done correctly are generally something in the region of 92+ % accurate if I recall right although poor testing practice when they're done by people at home for instance can lead to increased false negatives. Yes some people had false tests, even at 90+ % you get some false tests. it's far better than not having tests at all.

The FDA did not pull their test due to false Flu postives but simply for logistical reasons. They didn't suggest not using PCR tests altogether and recommended people continue using tests from other manufacturers but were simply shifting priority for those tests produced directly on behalf of the CDC to multiplex rather than single virus tests. ie because such test use much of the same resources in manufacture and because it save time during adminstration of the tests they decided it made more sense to concentrate on a test that could idenitify both flu and COVID rather than on seperate tests for each, especially with the advent of flu season.

Read this paragraph from the CDC that you just linked bearing what I just said in mind:

In preparation for this change, CDC recommends clinical laboratories and testing sites that have been using the CDC 2019-nCoV RT-PCR assay select and begin their transition to another FDA-authorized COVID-19 test. CDC encourages laboratories to consider adoption of a multiplexed method that can facilitate detection and differentiation of SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses. Such assays can facilitate continued testing for both influenza and SARS-CoV-2 and can save both time and resources as we head into influenza season. Laboratories and testing sites should validate and verify their selected assay within their facility before beginning clinical testing.

Hope that clarifies things for you a bit...

And no PCR tests can't and never could misdiagnose Flu as COVID. They just don't work like that:

In fact, the CDC’s 2019-nCoV RT-PCR test was developed to look for the presence of a nucleic acid found only in the covid virus, said , director of infectious disease programs at the Association of Public Health Laboratories.

“It is not remotely accurate that the CDC test doesn’t differentiate between flu and SARS-CoV-2. It doesn’t detect influenza. It only detects SARS-CoV-2,” said Wroblewski. “If flu and covid are both circulating, you would be able to detect only SARS-CoV-2 and not flu.”

How the CDC’s 2019-nCoV RT-PCR test (or any other PCR test) works, Wroblewski said, is that primers, which are little bits of a genetic material, are used to identify specific viruses. In this case, the primer is built to identify a nucleic acid found only in the covid virus.

If the covid virus is present in the sample, the primer will attach to the virus’s nucleic acid and make many copies of it. A chemical in the test will then fluoresce, which the polymerase chain reaction, or PCR, machine will interpret as a positive result. If the covid virus is not present, the primer will have nothing to attach to.

Statement from a CDC spokesperson about the reason for their withdrawl of the EUA - also mentioning that the higher throughput of tests devloped privately by other companies subsequent to the protocol developed early in the pandemic by the CDC.

“Although the CDC 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019 nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel met an important unmet need when it was developed and deployed and has not demonstrated any performance issues, the demand for this test has declined with the emergence of other higher-throughput and multiplexed assays,” Nordlund said.

She continued: “CDC is encouraging public health laboratories (PHL) to adopt the CDC Influenza SARS-CoV-2 (Flu SC2) Multiplex Assay to enable continued surveillance for both influenza and SARS-CoV-2, which will save both time and resources for PHL.”

“CDC is likely going to pull its own EUA for its test because hundreds of other labs now have their own EUAs and CDC no longer even needs to use its own test since many companies now have EUAs for manufactured tests,” he said in an email. “The major Companies like Roche, Hologic, Abbott all have their own test kits and instruments. Then the ThermoFishers of the world have EUAs for their PCR kits that can be run in the exact same way as the CDC assay. So there really is no reason for CDC to retain their EUA.”

This is very old news, man. It'd really save me a whole lot of time if you checked through stuff that's been debunked already. Ive been doing this kinda stuff for a long time and I was fact checking other topics well before COVID became a thing as a kinda sideline (used to edit and proof read medical papers for theses or publication too FWIW but it ain't really cost efficient for me any more). In fact I'm pretty damn sure I've even dealt with this specific question with you before, but honestly this **** all blurs into one after abit. Can't always remeber going back a few months who I was talking to.

And please believe me... I ain't fighting for some 'cause' or because I got some empassioned belief in vaccination man, I seriously couldn't give a ****, I just want people to make the best decisions based on the best available evidence. I'm not rying to trick people or win some kinda battle or some ****, just to point out some of the vast amount of incorrect information that's floating around. If the information tells me it's no longer a worthwhile benfit to take further jabs or information becomes available demonstrating the risk is much higher than was previously demonstrated by the evidence then I'd simply stop taking it.

[man down]

No your sources are. Yes PCR tests done correctly are generally something in the region of 92+ % accurate if I recall right although poor testing practice when they're done by people at home for instance can lead to increased false negatives. Yes some people had false tests, even at 90+ 5 you get some false tests. it's far better than not having tests at all.

The FDA did not pull their test due to false Flu postives but simply for logistical reasons. They didn't suggest not using PCR tests altogether and recommended people continue using tests from other manufacturers but were simply shifting priority for those tests produced directly on behalf of the CDC to multiplex rather than single virus tests. ie because such test use much of the same resources in manufacture and because it save time during adnminstration of the tests they decided it made more sense to concentrate on a test that could idenitify both flu and COVID rather than on seperate tests for each.

And no PCR tests can't and never could misdiagnose Flu as COVID. They jst don't work like that:


Statement from a CDC spokesperson about the reason for their withdrawl of the EUA - also mentioning that the higher throughput of tests devloped privately by other companies subsequent to the protocol developed early in the pandemic by the CDC.





This is very old news, man. It'd really save me a whole lot of time if you checked through stuff that's been debunked already. Ive been doing this kinda stuff for along time and I was fact checking other topics well before COVID became a thing as akinda sideline (used to edit and proof read medical papers for theses or publication too FWIW but it ain't really cost efficient for me any more)

LOL it never ends! So why are they going to a new test? What does the CDC link I posted say?

[man down]

Lets look at all the stars and others that got false tests.




playing with the cycle rate.




You can blame the test or the tester or the cycle rate but the facts are there's false positive tests. That affects the numbers.

my company just showed up I'll add more later.

[Madison Boxing]

Lets look at all the stars and others that got false tests.




playing with the cycle rate.




You can blame the test or the tester or the cycle rate but the facts are there's false positive tests. That affects the numbers.

my company just showed up I'll add more later.

the tests for this thing are useless, much like the other interventions

[Dakuwaqa]

the tests for this thing are useless, much like the other interventions

Useless? Post the data on PCR accuracy pleeeeeze!!

[man down]

the tests for this thing are useless, much like the other interventions

Hmm I can post in here again. I tried this AM and it would ask me to sign in over and over. I could make a new topic but I couldn't post in here. Oh well back on track.

[man down]

Germany has lost its minds. Cops are walking around with a measuring stick to see if you're far enough apart. Lol these people are jabbed!
So masks and social distancing and jabs.

[TonyGe]

Lets look at all the stars and others that got false tests.




playing with the cycle rate.




You can blame the test or the tester or the cycle rate but the facts are there's false positive tests. That affects the numbers.

my company just showed up I'll add more later.

Yeah but it doesn't affect the death rate which in the US is three times higher than in Canada.

[man down]

Yeah but it doesn't affect the death rate which in the US is three times higher than in Canada.

Yeah but........