Posted on 07/12/2020 7:32:44 PM PDT by Not_Who_U_Think
This is not an accusation, but a ruthless taking stock [of the current situation]. I could slap myself, because I looked at Sars-CoV2- way too long with panic. I am also somewhat annoyed with many of my immunology colleagues who so far have left the discussion about Covid-19 to virologist and epidemiologist. I feel it is time to criticise some of the main and completely wrong public statements about this virus. Firstly, it was wrong to claim that this virus was novel. Secondly, It was even more wrong to claim that the population would not already have some immunity against this virus. Thirdly, it was the crowning of stupidity to claim that someone could have Covid-19 without any symptoms at all or even to pass the disease along without showing any symptoms whatsoever. But let’s look at this one by one.
(Excerpt) Read more at medium.com ...
sigh. posted 07/08/2020 7:39:10 PM PDT · by definitelynotaliberal
but still, interesting thoughts on immunity.
I’ve posted the link in several replies. Thank you for making it a general post
A very good article.
Open back up
Yes it is. Thanks.
Thanks. Worth reading so far.
I missed the 7/8 post, so thanks for posting it again - a good read.
Asymptomatic transmission is occurring, and this has been known for months.
HOW MUCH asymptomatic transmission there is, and how many PCR + “cases” without symptoms are capable of transmission, is unknown, and is at the center of any and all questions about COVID-19 epidemiology.
” When the initial worst case scenarios didn’t come true anywhere, some now still cling to models predicting a second wave. Let’s leave them their hopes — I’ve never seen a scientific branch that manoeuvred itself so much into the offside.”
Ahem, globull warming.
On June 12, 2020, FDA granted an amendment to the Emergency Use Authorization for the CDC diagnostic test for COVID 19 to address global shortages of materials needed to perform the test. This amendment provides alternatives for processing the test:
Four additional extraction reagents that can be used in the existing extraction methods
An additional extraction instrument and associated reagents
A new process that can be used in place of the extraction method when materials for the current method are limited
The CDC memo on the subject can be found here: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/lab/virus-requests.html
My question is: Could this change in testing procedure have influenced the change in the number of positive cases reported after the date of the change? Reported cases began increasing in the middle of June, but fatalities did not show much change until very recently.
Secondly, how does the data on sensitivity and specificity compare between the recently approved changes and the prior procedure?
Do you have a link/source for that?
thanks for posting
shamdemic
Excellent piece.
>> Do you have a link/source for that?
No? That's what I thought. :)
*
He didnt mention the fda change to positives in April. Prior to that at least 2 targets were required for a positive. Now a single target only? Why?
You may not have immunity if your detectable virus was not specific to it.
So did I and everyone should read this-and it should be discussed in the news
bkmk
bkmk
This all makes perfect sense up to the point where he says, “The virus is gone for now. It will probably come back in winter.......”
Gone????
Then why are there people still dying? I’m guessing that there is a good explanation for that question and I wish he answered it. Everyone I have showed this article to points out that question.
*Then why are there people still dying?*
Because people still die, even with the best of care and of medicine. Doctors aren’t God. Death is a fact of life. Death and taxes.
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.