Eyeofthetiger 0
Well-known member
@earl said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1511733) said:
Yeah this will get bad.
Coronavirus Outbreak
- Thread starter AL The Tiger
- Start date
- Status
Yeah this will get bad.
swag_tiger
Well-known member
Could be a disaster if it is the new variant. We definitely won't be ready for this one.
leichhardtjunior
Well-known member
Here are 3 examples of Bayesian Conditional Probability, which are very relevant to the current COVID-19 “pandemic”.
1) Let’s say 50 out of 100 people have COVID-19 and you take a COVID test that’s 99% accurate (only 1% of the test results are false). If you test “positive” for COVID-19, what’s the chance you really have COVID?
100-50= 50 people don’t have COVID but 50×1%= 0.5 will falsely test positive anyway. So the probability of a true positive is 50/(50+0.5)= 99% and you almost certainly have COVID- only 1% of “positive” test results are false.
2) Now, let’s say 2 out of 100 people have COVID-19 and the COVID test is still 99% accurate. If you test “positive” for COVID-19, what’s the chance you really have COVID?
100-2= 98 people don’t have COVID but 98×1%= ~1 will falsely test positive anyway. So the probability of a true positive is 2/(2+1)= 66%- 33% of all “positive” cases are now FALSE!
3) Finally, let’s say 2 out of 100 people have COVID-19 and the COVID test is only 75% accurate (25% of the test results are false). If you test “positive” for COVID-19, what’s the chance you really have COVID?
100-2= 98 people don’t have COVID but 98×25%= ~25 will falsely test positive anyway. So the probability of a true positive is now only 2/(2+25)= 7% – 93% of all “positive” cases are now FALSE!
In these examples, the incidence and test accuracy are known. But in reality, we have NO IDEA what the REAL incidence and test accuracy are- and that’s been the case for the past 18 months! In all likelihood, the vast majority of “positive COVID-19 cases” are FALSE POSITIVES! This also means the number of “COVID deaths” worldwide have been GREATLY INFLATED! (Anyone who tested “positive” with COVID-19 within 30 days of death is counted as a “COVID death” regardless of the actual cause of death!)
The primary COVID-19 test is PCR (polymerase chain reaction), which was invented by Kary Mullis, who won the 1993 Nobel Prize for it. Mullis invented PCR in order to manufacture DNA. Every “cycle” of PCR doubles (copies) a designated strand of DNA. After a cycle, newly copied DNA from the previous cycle can be copied as well, so there’s an exponential increase in copies with every cycle. After the 1st cycle, there are 21= 2 identical strands (1 copy and the original strand). After 3 cycles, there are 23= 8 strands (7 copies and the original). After 28 cycles, there are 228= 268 million copies. After 35 cycles, there are 235= 34 billion copies. After 45 cycles, there are 245= 35 trillion copies!
Mullis repeatedly said PCR couldn’t be used to diagnose a viral infection, which didn’t stop the medical industry from creating viral tests anyway. In reality, the accuracy of the PCR test is extremely low- which effectively means that PCR CAN NOT DIAGNOSE COVID-19!
In a PCR test, “forward” and “reverse” primers are added to a test sample in order to determine if the SARS-COV-2 virus is present. The two primers supposedly attach ONLY to TWO SPECIFIC segments of the virus. If the two primers find a match and attach to a DNA* strand in the test sample, then any DNA between the two primers is duplicated per PCR cycle. A PCR viral test is “positive” if enough DNA is made (to be detected) by the time the test completes. If too few cycles are run, then not enough DNA will be copied to be detected and the test will be negative even if the primers found a match. On the other hand, if the primers don’t find a match, then nothing will be copied (detected) regardless of the number of cycles.
*Note: SARS-COV-2 is supposedly a retrovirus, which means it consists of single-stranded RNA, not double-stranded DNA. PCR only works with DNA, so the RNA is first converted to DNA before running PCR.
PCR is great at manufacturing a known DNA strand. But as a viral test, it has at least 2 FALSE premises:
It’s WRONG to ASSUME the two primers are uniquely SPECIFIC to a particular virus! Virologists claim the SARS-COV-2 virus is 30,000 bases long where each base can be one of 4 “letters” (A, C, T and G). Guess what- the two primers are typically only 25+25= 50 bases long. That’s right- the SARS-COV-2 PCR test ONLY CHECKS 50/30,000= 0.17% of the virus for a match! That’s like saying “BIG” and “MISTAKE” are the same word because they both contain an “I”!
This first link below shows two typical primers for a COVID-19 PCR test, which are only 22+26=48 letters long. The 2nd link shows how the primers are used to duplicate DNA for those who are interested.
https://www.otago.ac.nz/biochemistry/research/otago736925.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polymerase_chain_reaction
Virologists claim the world is teeming with TRILLIONS of viruses, which are EVERYWHERE (possibly even in outer space per the panspermia theory)! If that’s true, then 99.9999999% of viruses have NOT been sequenced so it’s NONSENSE to claim the two primers are unique to SARS-COV-2. (SARS-COV-2 is supposedly at least 80% similar to other coronaviruses, which for the most part only cause a minor cold.)
The two primers delineate the ends of a DNA segment (typically only 1,000 bases long) of the SARS-COV-2 virus, NOT the full 30,000 bases. So even if the two primers find a match, it’s WRONG to ASSUME the rest of the virus (30,000-50= 29,950 bases) is actually present! (The human body constantly produces varying viral-like fragments, which could FALSELY match the two primers.) When the PCR test is run at high cycles (>35), then it becomes increasingly likely that any such fragment will be amplified into a false “positive” for COVID-19.
Guess what- during 2020, PCR tests were routinely run over 35 cycles up to even 45 cycles! The WHO only recommended lowering the number of PCR cycles on 01/20/2021 (the day of Biden’s inauguration). This is the REAL reason why COVID-19 “cases” plunged in early 2021, NOT the vaccines.
Since the vaccine roll-out, the PCR manipulation continues since the CDC mandates different PCR cycles for the vaccinated vs. the unvaccinated! PCR tests are now run at 28 cycles for vaccinated people and at 40 cycles for the unvaccinated, i.e. 28 reduces the number of “positive” cases (and makes the vaccine appear more “effective”) and 40 greatly increases the number of “false” positives among the unvaccinated (which is used to justify vaccination for everyone!).
COVID-19 “cases” and “deaths” are based on the INVALID PCR test, which means that ALL of the COVID statistics are INVALID!
1) Let’s say 50 out of 100 people have COVID-19 and you take a COVID test that’s 99% accurate (only 1% of the test results are false). If you test “positive” for COVID-19, what’s the chance you really have COVID?
100-50= 50 people don’t have COVID but 50×1%= 0.5 will falsely test positive anyway. So the probability of a true positive is 50/(50+0.5)= 99% and you almost certainly have COVID- only 1% of “positive” test results are false.
2) Now, let’s say 2 out of 100 people have COVID-19 and the COVID test is still 99% accurate. If you test “positive” for COVID-19, what’s the chance you really have COVID?
100-2= 98 people don’t have COVID but 98×1%= ~1 will falsely test positive anyway. So the probability of a true positive is 2/(2+1)= 66%- 33% of all “positive” cases are now FALSE!
3) Finally, let’s say 2 out of 100 people have COVID-19 and the COVID test is only 75% accurate (25% of the test results are false). If you test “positive” for COVID-19, what’s the chance you really have COVID?
100-2= 98 people don’t have COVID but 98×25%= ~25 will falsely test positive anyway. So the probability of a true positive is now only 2/(2+25)= 7% – 93% of all “positive” cases are now FALSE!
In these examples, the incidence and test accuracy are known. But in reality, we have NO IDEA what the REAL incidence and test accuracy are- and that’s been the case for the past 18 months! In all likelihood, the vast majority of “positive COVID-19 cases” are FALSE POSITIVES! This also means the number of “COVID deaths” worldwide have been GREATLY INFLATED! (Anyone who tested “positive” with COVID-19 within 30 days of death is counted as a “COVID death” regardless of the actual cause of death!)
The primary COVID-19 test is PCR (polymerase chain reaction), which was invented by Kary Mullis, who won the 1993 Nobel Prize for it. Mullis invented PCR in order to manufacture DNA. Every “cycle” of PCR doubles (copies) a designated strand of DNA. After a cycle, newly copied DNA from the previous cycle can be copied as well, so there’s an exponential increase in copies with every cycle. After the 1st cycle, there are 21= 2 identical strands (1 copy and the original strand). After 3 cycles, there are 23= 8 strands (7 copies and the original). After 28 cycles, there are 228= 268 million copies. After 35 cycles, there are 235= 34 billion copies. After 45 cycles, there are 245= 35 trillion copies!
Mullis repeatedly said PCR couldn’t be used to diagnose a viral infection, which didn’t stop the medical industry from creating viral tests anyway. In reality, the accuracy of the PCR test is extremely low- which effectively means that PCR CAN NOT DIAGNOSE COVID-19!
In a PCR test, “forward” and “reverse” primers are added to a test sample in order to determine if the SARS-COV-2 virus is present. The two primers supposedly attach ONLY to TWO SPECIFIC segments of the virus. If the two primers find a match and attach to a DNA* strand in the test sample, then any DNA between the two primers is duplicated per PCR cycle. A PCR viral test is “positive” if enough DNA is made (to be detected) by the time the test completes. If too few cycles are run, then not enough DNA will be copied to be detected and the test will be negative even if the primers found a match. On the other hand, if the primers don’t find a match, then nothing will be copied (detected) regardless of the number of cycles.
*Note: SARS-COV-2 is supposedly a retrovirus, which means it consists of single-stranded RNA, not double-stranded DNA. PCR only works with DNA, so the RNA is first converted to DNA before running PCR.
PCR is great at manufacturing a known DNA strand. But as a viral test, it has at least 2 FALSE premises:
It’s WRONG to ASSUME the two primers are uniquely SPECIFIC to a particular virus! Virologists claim the SARS-COV-2 virus is 30,000 bases long where each base can be one of 4 “letters” (A, C, T and G). Guess what- the two primers are typically only 25+25= 50 bases long. That’s right- the SARS-COV-2 PCR test ONLY CHECKS 50/30,000= 0.17% of the virus for a match! That’s like saying “BIG” and “MISTAKE” are the same word because they both contain an “I”!
This first link below shows two typical primers for a COVID-19 PCR test, which are only 22+26=48 letters long. The 2nd link shows how the primers are used to duplicate DNA for those who are interested.
https://www.otago.ac.nz/biochemistry/research/otago736925.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polymerase_chain_reaction
Virologists claim the world is teeming with TRILLIONS of viruses, which are EVERYWHERE (possibly even in outer space per the panspermia theory)! If that’s true, then 99.9999999% of viruses have NOT been sequenced so it’s NONSENSE to claim the two primers are unique to SARS-COV-2. (SARS-COV-2 is supposedly at least 80% similar to other coronaviruses, which for the most part only cause a minor cold.)
The two primers delineate the ends of a DNA segment (typically only 1,000 bases long) of the SARS-COV-2 virus, NOT the full 30,000 bases. So even if the two primers find a match, it’s WRONG to ASSUME the rest of the virus (30,000-50= 29,950 bases) is actually present! (The human body constantly produces varying viral-like fragments, which could FALSELY match the two primers.) When the PCR test is run at high cycles (>35), then it becomes increasingly likely that any such fragment will be amplified into a false “positive” for COVID-19.
Guess what- during 2020, PCR tests were routinely run over 35 cycles up to even 45 cycles! The WHO only recommended lowering the number of PCR cycles on 01/20/2021 (the day of Biden’s inauguration). This is the REAL reason why COVID-19 “cases” plunged in early 2021, NOT the vaccines.
Since the vaccine roll-out, the PCR manipulation continues since the CDC mandates different PCR cycles for the vaccinated vs. the unvaccinated! PCR tests are now run at 28 cycles for vaccinated people and at 40 cycles for the unvaccinated, i.e. 28 reduces the number of “positive” cases (and makes the vaccine appear more “effective”) and 40 greatly increases the number of “false” positives among the unvaccinated (which is used to justify vaccination for everyone!).
COVID-19 “cases” and “deaths” are based on the INVALID PCR test, which means that ALL of the COVID statistics are INVALID!
leichhardtjunior
Well-known member
https://www.cdc.gov/csels/dls/locs/2021/07-21-2021-lab-alert-Changes_CDC_RT-PCR_SARS-CoV-2_Testing_1.html
Wildcat777
Well-known member
We can sustain or endure anymore locks downs. The problem we have and for which there is no history, is that I believe this virus is man made and as it mutates, it does so differently. Ways that we don’t understand and can possibly control. This situation is unique and different. But keeping the world locked down is not the solution. Not sure how this will pan out. We can can see our mistakes of the past and be critical, but all those mistakes we can’t foresee. We will probably have to live with it and deal with it, somehow? All we can do is protect ourselves and families as best we can. Like anytime in life, it’s not time to be selfish and inconsiderate towards others, in our families and the community. We need to work together. There is no other option.
swag_tiger
Well-known member
We can't just disregard Covid altogether, especially with the new strain real risk.
Pascoes_barber
Well-known member
Nobody knows much yet.
It's already been sequenced, I guess we'll know in a month or two how effective (or not) the current vaccines are, and a real 'rubber hits the road' moment for re-working and mass-production of new vaccines (if they're actually required) will see how 'easy' it is.
It's already been sequenced, I guess we'll know in a month or two how effective (or not) the current vaccines are, and a real 'rubber hits the road' moment for re-working and mass-production of new vaccines (if they're actually required) will see how 'easy' it is.
swag_tiger
Well-known member
@pascoes_barber said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1511788) said:
Hence we still have to be on high alert.
earl
Well-known member
@leichhardtjunior said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1511771) said:
This is nonsense. PCR testing is the gold standard.
earl
Well-known member
@wildcat777 said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1511783) said:
This simply isn't true.
It could have been developed in a lab and it could have leaked from a lab but it doesn't mutate differently. It's just another coronavirus.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coronavirus
Coronaviruses are a group of related RNA viruses that cause diseases in mammals and birds. In humans and birds, they cause respiratory tract infections that can range from mild to lethal. Mild illnesses in humans include some cases of the common cold (which is also caused by other viruses, predominantly rhinoviruses), while more lethal varieties can cause SARS, MERS and COVID-19. In cows and pigs they cause diarrhea, while in mice they cause hepatitis and encephalomyelitis.
earl
Well-known member
@pascoes_barber said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1511788) said:
Correct. I'm skeptical about how easy it is to repurpose the vaccine because they didn't do it for Delta. The reality is we will find out though.
earl
Well-known member
@swag_tiger said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1511789) said:
If we have learnt one thing it is to be on high alert and try not to be the demographic location that suffers the most because you don't take precautionary measures.
Give it a couple of weeks until we know more. Maybe a month. All you have to do is be stricter on anyone coming into the country. I don't think we should jump into lockdowns quickly.
swag_tiger
Well-known member
@earl said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1511794) said:
I'm saying if we starting getting thousands of cases a day we need to start thinking about it.
earl
Well-known member
@swag_tiger said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1511799) said:
It has to be an option.
FinestTigers
Well-known member
The threat of the virus to the population is always the same.
The proper precautionary measures that should be taken should also be the same,
If the vaccinations are proven ineffective against the new variant then lockdowns will be a must just like it happened with the delta.
The hard lessons that were learnt before each lockdown should never be forgotten, e.g the Eastern Suburbs/Bondi cluster that was the cause of a four month stressful lockdown, which began with when a man in his 60s who worked as a limousine driver, and had been transporting infected crew off international flights.
The proper precautionary measures that should be taken should also be the same,
If the vaccinations are proven ineffective against the new variant then lockdowns will be a must just like it happened with the delta.
The hard lessons that were learnt before each lockdown should never be forgotten, e.g the Eastern Suburbs/Bondi cluster that was the cause of a four month stressful lockdown, which began with when a man in his 60s who worked as a limousine driver, and had been transporting infected crew off international flights.
leichhardtjunior
Well-known member
@earl said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1511791) said:
LOL
Well it’s a good thing I don’t require the same ‘extremely high standards’ of validation as you!
If you say so Earl ??
Again, your a hypocrite and a conformist. If the source of information doesn’t include www.GOV you don’t have the capacity to genuinely consider it.
You are completely biased.
earl
Well-known member
@leichhardtjunior said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1511813) said:
Ad-hominen attacks don't help you at all. We are talking facts.
I have extremely high standards in relation to requiring proof when information is provided. You are providing misinformation and you are doing it consistently. You are also consistently wrong.
That link you provided doesn't prove your point at all. You should also have a look at yourself because you've fallen for misinformation. You've gone looking for some facts to back up your uninformed opinion and you think you've found it but in reality you don't understand the issue at all. Your link is meaningless and silly and it's not even talking about what you think it is.
https://www.tga.gov.au/covid-19-rapid-antigen-self-tests-are-approved-australia
The reality is that PCR testing is the gold standard. We now have rapid antigen testing as well but it's no where near as good.
Come back with something that isn't so easily refuted.
earl
Well-known member
@leichhardtjunior - I've done the research for you and hopefully you read and understand this prior to posting again.
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/lab/testing.html
CDC’s newest laboratory test, detects two types of influenza viruses (A and B) and SARS-CoV-2 at the same time. This test is called the CDC Influenza SARS-CoV-2 (Flu SC2) Multiplex Assay.
Although the CDC 2019 nCoV Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel filled an important unmet need when it was developed and deployed in early 2020, the demand for this test has declined due to the authorization of higher-throughput alternatives and multiplexed assays that detect both SARS-CoV-2 and other common respiratory pathogens simultaneously. For this reason, CDC will discontinue the 2019 nCoV Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel after December 31, 2021.
As the test is still performing very well,
In layman terms what has happened is that the test has been improved so they are phasing out one test and adding in another test. The initial test though is still performing well.
There is no issue at all from a layman's perspective and if you think there is you don't understand the science and therefore you shouldn't comment on it.
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/lab/testing.html
CDC’s newest laboratory test, detects two types of influenza viruses (A and B) and SARS-CoV-2 at the same time. This test is called the CDC Influenza SARS-CoV-2 (Flu SC2) Multiplex Assay.
Although the CDC 2019 nCoV Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel filled an important unmet need when it was developed and deployed in early 2020, the demand for this test has declined due to the authorization of higher-throughput alternatives and multiplexed assays that detect both SARS-CoV-2 and other common respiratory pathogens simultaneously. For this reason, CDC will discontinue the 2019 nCoV Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel after December 31, 2021.
As the test is still performing very well,
In layman terms what has happened is that the test has been improved so they are phasing out one test and adding in another test. The initial test though is still performing well.
There is no issue at all from a layman's perspective and if you think there is you don't understand the science and therefore you shouldn't comment on it.
leichhardtjunior
Well-known member
@earl said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1511818) said:
As validated by @Earl.gov 😂😂😂
- Status
