Posted on 05/13/2021 1:28:04 PM PDT by Fractal Trader
There’s an old saying that goes something like this: “If you torture the numbers long enough, you can make them say anything.” In our Covid-hysteria world, the CDC and other medical organizations have practiced a variation of the saying. If you run enough cycles of the PCR tests, you can make any sample test positive for Covid-19.
For over a year, there have been questions from doctors and scientists about the efficacy of having high “Cycle Thresholds” (Cts) for swab testing for Covid-19. Every cycle doubles the chances of finding a positive case, so 34 cycles will have 16-times more coronavirus materials than a 30-cycle test. There is no consensus about how many cycles should be run to give an acceptably accurate determination of Covid infections. Some doctors say it should be as low as 10. Others go as high as 35.
Some labs where PCR tests are checked will go over 40 or even 50 cycles. This is likely how a pawpaw fruit and goat, neither of which are capable of contracting Covid-19, both tested positive last year in a stunt by Tanzanian President John Magufuli.
The CDC has left the guidelines about the appropriate number of cycles ambiguous from the beginning. As a result, Covid-19 “cases” have skyrocketed at times even though a high Ct threshold can result in false-positives very easily. But things have changed now that tens of millions of Americans have been vaccinated. The CDC suddenly wants limits to the number of cycles but ONLY for those who have been vaccinated.
(Excerpt) Read more at noqreport.com ...
It’s all theater.
Bingo-— been saying this for the last 9 months. The PCR and the false positives from it’s improper use has DRIVEN the dem run states for continuous needless LOCKDOWN and destruction of their economies. All for FAKE reasons.
Now we hav idiots in the dem states pushing to have CHILDREN up to age 16/17 ==== “get the vaccine”... NO— DONT— not any clinical data to support this. Protect the “at risk” from the contact with the carriers— sure. But don’t force the eminently herd immune young to get messenger RNA injected in their bodies. Criminal behaviour. and uh, Fauci gonna get booted— so CNN can cry some more because the few who were watching will no longer be watching.
You’ve been here all this time and still don’t know what a title is or where it belongs?
Lawdy, you so stoopy.
If this is correct, it renders most numbers bogus.
One that remains the gold standard is Excess Deaths. Those are deaths of all causes. Those are indeed falling, just as they did from the peak last March/April before there were any vaccines in existence.
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm
before you click that, here is what you need to do. Scroll way down and click weekly deaths by age. You’re going to see an orange line that is below the multi year death count pre Covid. You can’t say GOTCHA because that line is so far down. That line requires several weeks for death counts to accumulate from the various place sending them in. My own number is 5 weeks back. You’ll get most of the deaths that way.
Now, another thing to see is how the red line (which represents last year) also fell from its peak (when the virus arrived in the Northeast) essentially down to the multi year number. So . . . there’s really nothing new this year vs last year. The vaccines may be doing this or that, but they didn’t collapse the death count any more than it collapsed last year.
I admit to my error. However, the preview function only shows the quoted text. It does not show headline, etc.
Immediately after I posted I contacted Amdin Moderator to fix
Instructions from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention state that the agency will only undertake gene sequencing of post-vaccinated cases of COVID-19 if the viral samples are detected at notably lower sensitivity levels than are tolerated for positive COVID-19 tests overall.
The directive, posted on the CDC’s website, concerns the study of “breakthrough” cases of COVID-19, or positive test results in the fully vaccinated. Numerous such cases have been reported, albeit out of millions and millions of vaccinations.
Some of those cases, the CDC says, “will have SARS-CoV-2 sequencing performed at a clinical, public health, or commercial reference laboratory.” Yet the CDC directs labs to only submit such tests for sequencing if they “have an RT-PCR Ct value ≤28.”
**************************************************************
Nothing mysterious here. They are setting it at this level SIMPLY to insure that the sample would likely have a sufficiently high VIRAL LOAD to allow for SUCCESSFUL gene sequencing. This gene sequencing on vaccinated cases is to determine whether new variants are appearing and “breaking through” vaccination immunity. NOTHING MYSTERIOUS OR SINISTER.
The problem with excess deaths is that includes deaths that are not directly related to COVID. For example, overdoses have skyrocketed, lives have been lost due to missing scheduled medical appointments, etc
That’s not a “problem”. Dead is dead. If people offed themselves for fear of the virus, that’s still a death that happened because the virus existed in society. The virus found another way to kill them. Much like the Black Death in the mid 1300s. About half of deaths were starvation. The farmers got infected and died. Those people would not have starved were the Y. Pestis bacteria not rampant.
BTW, excess deaths last year far exceeded the official Covid death count. A substantial cause of that would be the old guy living alone who develops symptoms, knows that most survive them, doesn’t and dies and gets picked up weeks later from the stink. Never tested. Not a Covid recorded death, though Covid killed him.
There does not have to be sinister intent to still corrupt the numbers.
I respectfully disagree and most experts I have run across agree with my characterization.
Sweden for example, had excess deaths from COVID, but few of these other kinds of death. This shows that these excess deaths are policy driven, not disease driven.
“There does not have to be sinister intent to still corrupt the numbers.”
***************************************************
I agree that when it comes to driving agendas, there has been considerable corruption and misrepresentation of various numbers. But this isn’t one of those instances. A COVID-19 “case” in a vaccinated person may be found by a PCR test run at over 28 cycles. But a sample from that person would only be forwarded for genetic sequencing if they retested a sample with the PCR test being set at less than 29 cycles and still tested positive. That screening is simply to help insure that a genetic sequencing could be successfully done.
It has nothing to do with agenda, and you did not defend the corrupting of the result.
There is no justification for having a different PCR cycle count declaring a “case” in vaccinated vs unvaccinated. They should have the same criterion. And I think you know it.
Doesn’t matter why it was done. Doesn’t matter at all. This is a corruption of the definition of “case”.
Vaccinations started in the middle of December, and cases started going down in the middle of January. Nice graphs here.
https://coronavirus.1point3acres.com/en
Cases, hospitalizations and deaths have gone down since then. And now, no masks. :)
The virus will work its way slowly through the un-vaccinated. As they recover and develop antibodies several strains over the next year or two, maybe we’ll get closer to herd immunity. Those who are only waiting longer can pay for the shots after full FDA approval. Works for me.
“…There is no justification for having a different PCR cycle count declaring a “case” in vaccinated vs unvaccinated….”’
*****************************************************************
Sorry, but the vaccinated person was ALREADY determined to be a “case”. It’s being reported as and counted as a “case”. Now they determine whether the “case” should have its sample forwarded for genetic sequencing. Whether it’s forwarded or not, it has already been counted as a “case”. If it doesn’t qualify for genetic sequencing it still counted as a case. In my experience ANY writing related to COVID-19, from ANY source, needs to be read carefully. There’s a lot of misleading writing… from BOTH sides.
Trial participants have been vaccinated for 14 months. People in the general population have been vaccinated for five months, and hospitalizations have been decreased greatly over the past four months. If the CDC only wants to pay attention to tests that show larger viral loads, that’s fine with me.
If that’s correct, that would be legit.
BTTT.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.