Started By
Message

re: PCR test gives false positives from colds and other viruses now confirmed.

Posted on 10/26/21 at 9:44 pm to
Posted by Bow08tie
Louisiana
Member since Oct 2011
4220 posts
Posted on 10/26/21 at 9:44 pm to
This is why there will be a new test coming out at the end of December that will differentiate covid from the flue. When this new test comes out watch what the covid numbers do and the flue (which disappeared) numbers will increase.
Posted by tiger91
In my own little world
Member since Nov 2005
36703 posts
Posted on 10/26/21 at 9:44 pm to
I thought I read that the test CAN differentiate between natural immunity and vaccine “immunity”. ???
Posted by baybeefeetz
Member since Sep 2009
31633 posts
Posted on 10/26/21 at 10:54 pm to
Bump because this deserves it.
Posted by TDFreak
Dodge Charger Aficionado
Member since Dec 2009
7355 posts
Posted on 10/26/21 at 11:10 pm to
So…..the positivity rate? The surge? All of it? Total BS?

And the mask mandates, etc? All based on a sham inflated case count.

All these people pushing this science are plain awful.
Posted by AUstar
Member since Dec 2012
16996 posts
Posted on 10/27/21 at 12:55 am to
Fake news that has been debunked countless times. Stop listening to random bloggers who are not doctors and have no clue what they're talking about. Real doctors were asked about this and here's what they said:

quote:

However, Dr Thushan de Silva, from the University of Sheffield’s Department of Infection, Immunity and Cardiovascular Disease, has previously told Reuters that this is not correct.

He explained that the document is outlining a “very common process” that is used to determine the lowest amount of viral genetic material the PCR tests could detect. To calculate this limit, he said:“You need to have a known quantity of virus to extract genetic material (RNA) from, or alternatively a known quantity of RNA identical to that carried by the virus”. In this case, the identical RNA that the CDC used was ‘transcribed’ RNA. This is synthetically produced genetic material which is identical to that carried by the virus, and, according to Dr Stephen Griffin, a virologist and Associate Professor at Leeds Institute of Medical Research, means that scientists already know how much genetic material is present in the sample.


quote:

He explained “you can't make it quantitative with a virus stock that's not been characterised. So you start with an in vitro [in the lab] transcribed RNA, it’s much better, it's easier to do that."


quote:

Dr De Silva told Reuters: “There are now hundreds of stocks of cultured SARS-CoV-2 in laboratories around the world”.

Dr Griffin previously told Full Fact: “SARS-CoV2 has been sampled millions of times over from infected people, including those originally found to be infected in China,”.


These Covid conspiracy theories are so bizarre to me.
Posted by interdesting
Member since Dec 2020
191 posts
Posted on 10/27/21 at 1:08 am to

LINK

LINK

My reading (and I may be wrong bc there is plenty of double-talk and innuendo) is that the tests cannot fell difference or effectiveness of antibodies from infection v. Vaccine. Initially, the tests only measured antibodies from infection, bc vaccines were not available initially. But, once available, the testing is nly detects the presence of absence of antibodies (proteins) from vaccine and infection (first bullet point under first heading).
first pageprev pagePage 2 of 2Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram