Selwyn
Established Member
No such thing as a false negative
Social distancing, .. what's that?
- Thread starter transatlantic
- Start date
Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:
- Status
No such thing as a false negative
Selwyn
Established Member
I'm actually having a bit of a problem following your train of thought. So I'm not sure I agree with you or not as I can't ascertain exactly what you mean.
RobinBHM
Established Member
and as I said, the excess death figure agrees with the covid death figure
and you keep avoiding the obvious thing: that is the deaths from covid despite massive intervention
the vast majority of vulnerable people -=especially the elderly, or those with conditions shielded during the first wave.
So the argument you keep repeating is based on a false premise.
RobinBHM
Established Member
false negative
noun
- a test result which wrongly indicates that a particular condition or attribute is absent.
Selwyn
Established Member
You cant get a false negative pcr
SammyQ
Established Member
PCR: a.k.a. Polymerase Chain Reaction...it does what it says on the tin. It amplifies what is there. Your statement " You can't get a false negative pcr " is conflating facts mightily and does little save exhibit your ignorance. Go work for Trump.
For those who are not following, PCR only makes what DNA is present in the test sample more plentiful. If, for some reason, covid DNA is not in said test sample, it will not be amplified. So, in a universe, far, far, removed from probability, a Corona-virus carrier, who (miraculously) gives a blood sample free of C19DNA, will "test negative". This scenario is specious, utterly so, so the " You can't get a false negative pcr " statement is pseudo-science and complete tosh.
Sam
For those who are not following, PCR only makes what DNA is present in the test sample more plentiful. If, for some reason, covid DNA is not in said test sample, it will not be amplified. So, in a universe, far, far, removed from probability, a Corona-virus carrier, who (miraculously) gives a blood sample free of C19DNA, will "test negative". This scenario is specious, utterly so, so the " You can't get a false negative pcr " statement is pseudo-science and complete tosh.
Sam
Last edited:
Selwyn
Established Member
Oh no I would agree that when covid first came out that it definitely contributed to an awful lot of deaths. That is obvious
I can't understand your middle sentence. What is my false premise? You need to write a bit more clearly and I will definitely respond with clarity to make my point
Selwyn
Established Member
But if is not there and you are not showing symptoms how on earth can you call it a covid "Case". We are all constantly under attack from virus and we can find all sorts in us - we don't say we are ill when we don't feel ill and the tests show we don't have an illness
SammyQ
Established Member
See my edit above.
S.
S.
What you fail to point out in your ignorance that it cant detect whether the virus is active or not. And your go work for Trump comment what's that all about? Totally irrelevant!
SammyQ
Established Member
FatmanG? Ignorance is "not knowing"? Really? I am a Biologist, have been for 39 years. PCR is not a test, its a tool - to make more covid DNA - to enable a subsequent covid test.
Using "PCR" and "test" conflated together is balderdash. They are two separate procedures, admittedly used one after t'other in some medical scenarios.
To mangle them.together is symptomatic of the bluster and pseudoscience the Trump administration employs to manufacture announcements designed to appeal.to their voters.
I consider two trolls now fed.
Sam
Using "PCR" and "test" conflated together is balderdash. They are two separate procedures, admittedly used one after t'other in some medical scenarios.
To mangle them.together is symptomatic of the bluster and pseudoscience the Trump administration employs to manufacture announcements designed to appeal.to their voters.
I consider two trolls now fed.
Sam
artie
Sawdust manufacturer.
No no no.
I don't mind if you are scared, I don't mind if you misunderstand, I don't mind if you stick to your guns even when you're wrong, but don't tell me that positive means negative, that's a step too far, even for you.
Selwyn
Established Member
Er, I think you were trolling me. I'm all about the data - the data isn't there to support the reaction. If we stopped testing people without actual symptoms and changed the pcr cycles to 30-35 then most of this nonsense wouldn't exist and we could just see things for what they really are
Trainee neophyte
Established Member
I've been hiding for the last day or so, and things seem to have moved on on a bit here. Backing up to the point I was trying trying to make, rather badly it would seem, I put up a worldwide fatality rate for covid 19 being 0.14%, based on 10% of the world population being infection, and the million known deaths. @RobinBHM tells me categorically that influenza death rate is 10 times lower than this, Ie. 0.014%, presumably.
The font of all truth and wisdom, also known as wikipedia, suggests that the average influenza infects 300,000 to one billion people, and the death rate death rate worldwide is 290,000–650,000/year. If the coronavirus has currently infected 800,000ish people, and killed one million, then it is less than twice as deadly as the average influenza. We haven't even started looking at bad years. I therefore dispute the 10 times more deadly epithet for our novel coronavirus.
I fully accept that a lot of people are being infected, and there are a lot of measures to try and stop this, but the rates of death once infected look to be in about the same ballpark, as they say in America. You could get me to agree that they are a bit higher, but not significantly so. So the question is - if I am out by a factor of ten, what did I do wrong?
The font of all truth and wisdom, also known as wikipedia, suggests that the average influenza infects 300,000 to one billion people, and the death rate death rate worldwide is 290,000–650,000/year. If the coronavirus has currently infected 800,000ish people, and killed one million, then it is less than twice as deadly as the average influenza. We haven't even started looking at bad years. I therefore dispute the 10 times more deadly epithet for our novel coronavirus.
I fully accept that a lot of people are being infected, and there are a lot of measures to try and stop this, but the rates of death once infected look to be in about the same ballpark, as they say in America. You could get me to agree that they are a bit higher, but not significantly so. So the question is - if I am out by a factor of ten, what did I do wrong?
SammyQ
Established Member
[/QUOTE]
Oh dear...ever heard of "asymptomatic,"???
If they are asymptomatic they are not sick are they? Counting them is just to add to the fear.
As to how much asymptomatic spread the disease, well pretty low chance since they are not coughing and presumably not producing much virus either since they are not ill.
Selwyn
Established Member
Oh dear...ever heard of "asymptomatic,"???
[/QUOTE]
I have and we are making an excessive reaction to the asymptomatics.
artie
Sawdust manufacturer.
Oh dear...ever heard of "asymptomatic,"???
[/QUOTE]
Not until recently.
It used to be that if you felt poorly you went to the doctor.
Nowadays even though you are on top of the world, you need to go and get tested, to see if you have an assortment of cancers or virus. Even though you might live out your life quite happily without being impacted.
Last edited:
Once again a know all calling out anyone who disagrees with them a troll. Grow up! A PCR test can only identify the presence of material namely HIV. Its not meant as a weapon to test healthy asymptomatic young people then blame them for killing Granny. I don't give a damn about Trump and your political views but I do care about my children and grandchildren and what's the future for them and any imbecile can see this virus is being used to create fear and change our whole way of life all because the poorly and old are in danger! They were before the virus and always will be. World economic destruction for WHAT?
From where I can see Trumps the only one to remotely tell the truth
SammyQ
Established Member
"I have and we are making an excessive reaction to the asymptomatics. "
OK, all you Long-Covid sufferers, step right up and tell Selwyn et al how you would rather have had YOUR asymptomatic 'spreader' detected by testing, rather than given YOU the disease...Of course, he/she/it would have had to self-isolate and then you would not have contracted Cov-19 from them?....
Sam
OK, all you Long-Covid sufferers, step right up and tell Selwyn et al how you would rather have had YOUR asymptomatic 'spreader' detected by testing, rather than given YOU the disease...Of course, he/she/it would have had to self-isolate and then you would not have contracted Cov-19 from them?....
Sam
- Status
