OK, forum friends… you can relax, I am reducing my posting, since I seem to cause so much trouble. However, I wanted to share recent things I learned
***
It’s all about science!! When you oppose Dr. Fauci, you are against science, so he said. People who argue against the mRNA jab, are quickly silenced by with "scientific data"…. the rapid outbreaks of the recent past... broken down on a state-by-state basis… broken down by age-group.... vaxxed vs unvaxxed, etc.
In the 1980/1990s, Aids/HIV was the big medical topic. At that time, Dr. Fauci became a prominent scientist in this field. At the same time, a Dr. Kary Mullis invented the PCR test. They gave him the Nobel Price for his invention, and his test was used in this research.
I often wondered, what Dr. Mullis would say about the current pandemic. Unfortunately, he passed away in August2019.
During this pandemic, his PCR Test has become the “gold standard” in Covid testing, as they say. From the very beginning, the media has presented us with daily updates and graphs about the progress of Covid infections.
Then came the Elon Musk incident. Elon took 4 tests on the same day, from the same set of test devices, and had 2 positives and 2 negatives. I thought “ Wow, he could have just flipped a coin. This doesn’t look very scientific”
Did anyone explain this strange incident? Not that I know of. It should have made me seriously question the “scientific data” in this pandemic… but somehow, I put this incident aside, and kept on watching the case numbers go up and down throughout the months. (brainwashed?)
Not long ago, I found a very old interview with Dr. Mullis. (link below) One of his comments caught my attention. He said: “With this test, you can find almost anything in anybody”. If there is just one single molecule of what you are looking for, the test can amplify it and make into something measurable.
He then added… the PCR test allows you to “take a miniscule amount of something and turn it into something important”.
Wow! Think about this for a minute!!! (please note: this is not me talking. This is the inventor of the PCR test talking)
What a perfect tool for anybody with an agenda!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xc0Kysti6Kc
Throughout the many months of this pandemic, this test was the “gold standard of Covid testing”, as they said, and it was used to keep the People informed.
This could explain, why so many people were surprised to be tested as “positive”, while they felt just fine… totally without symptoms. After all, (as I was taught in school) 1000s of bacteria and viruses inhabit or attack our bodies all the time… and our immune system deals with them,and we don’t call ourselves “infected”. Maybe, many of these barely-there “infections’ should not have been called “Covid cases”
Was it really necessary to shut down the economy and lock us all up? Wouldn't masks have been enough?
Thanks Gunter,
You raised some great points. I hope this will help
"During this pandemic, his PCR Test has become the “gold standard” in Covid testing, as they say. From the very beginning, the media has presented us with daily updates and graphs about the progress of Covid infections.
Then came the Elon Musk incident. Elon took 4 tests on the same day, from the same set of test devices, and had 2 positives and 2 negatives. I thought “ Wow, he could have just flipped a coin. This doesn’t look very scientific”
metmike: So taking 4 tests and using that to imply the accuracy of 400,000,000 tests is supposed to be science?
Musk is a brilliant guy and knows that was total bs. I can flip a coin 4 times and get 4 heads and then tell everybody the coin is messed up.
As it turns out, false NEGATIVES are a bigger problem. ..............and that Elon Musk actually had COVID, so the example you/he used is one that tells us the COVID is being UNDERcounted and NOT OVERcounted.
Number of coronavirus (COVID-19) tests performed in the most impacted countries worldwide as of August 24, 2021*
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1028731/covid19-tests-select-countries-worldwide/]
met
metmike: Do you think that taking 4random tests from this number is a good scientific way to predict the accuracy of the other 569,066,351 tests?
Again, the data suggests we are UNDERcounting because of more false negatives.
This discussion/paper deals with false positives in a low prevalence area, which is what you were referring to:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7850182/
False negative results in COVID-19 testing are well recognised and frequently discussed. False positive results, while less common and less frequently discussed, still have several adverse implications, including potential exposure of a non-infected person to the virus in a cohorted area. Although false positive results are proportionally greater in low prevalence settings, the consequences are significant at all times and potentially of greater significance in high-prevalence settings.
"Not long ago, I found a very old interview with Dr. Mullis. (link below) One of his comments caught my attention. He said: “With this test, you can find almost anything in anybody”. If there is just one single molecule of what you are looking for, the test can amplify it and make into something measurable.
He then added… the PCR test allows you to “take a miniscule amount of something and turn it into something important”.
Wow! Think about this for a minute!!! (please note: this is not me talking. This is the inventor of the PCR test talking)
What a perfect tool for anybody with an agenda! "
metmike: Wow! is exactly right Gunter. That is paranoid, conspiracy theory stuff on steroids.
As I just stated, false NEGATIVES are a bigger problem based on the indisputable facts. It totally busts your belief that they are intentionally causing more false positives for their "agenda"
Based on that, what do you suppose the "agenda" is for those causing more false negatives?
To spread more COVID?
The real world agenda for giving the tests is to try to determine if somebody has COVID or not with the most accurate testing available.
That's it Gunter. Everything authentic entirely supports that.
For SURE there are alot of errors and the tests are not reliable compared to tests for many other things.........but the errors absolutely do not support any agenda, no way, no how. The far right sites that you frequent have you on the exact wrong path here.....again.
Let’s say for example, the real-world false positive rate is 4% for SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing.
For every 100,000 people who test negative and truly don’t have the infection, we would expect to have 4,000 false positives. The problem is that for most of these we never know about them. The person who tested positive is asked to quarantine, and everyone assumes they had asymptomatic disease.
This is also confounded by the fact the false positive rate is dependent upon the underlying prevalence of the disease. With very low prevalence as we see in Australia, the number of false positives can end up being much higher than the actual true number of positives, something known as the false positive paradox.
metmike: This would be around 4% to be false positives. Many of them are in areas that have low COVID rates for obvious reasons. If nobody has COVID and 100 people get tested from that area, there can't be any false negatives. Any mistake on the test will have to be a false positive.
False negatives, we know with certainty are MUCH higher than false positives.
This particular discussion sites a small study that showed false negatives were 36%!
It gives several reasons for why that's the case.
Studies have suggested that PCR tests start to detect RNA from SARS-CoV-2, roughly 1-3 days before the onset of symptoms – similar to when people start to become infectious – with the highest viral loads observed during the first few days of symptoms (assuming the person is symptomatic). From this point, the amount of virus gradually declines, until it can no longer be detected by PCR. In general, asymptomatic people may test positive for 1-2 weeks, while those with mild-to moderate disease often continue to test positive for a week or more after this.
Less sensitive lateral flow or rapid-antigen tests require a higher viral load to record a positive result, which is why they often only identify people during their most infectious period.
Even though PCR tests are widely regarded as the gold-standard for detecting SARS-CoV-2, they are not perfect, and their probability of detecting an infection will vary depending on when that test is performed. A PCR test done to confirm a coronavirus infection in someone who has recently developed COVID-19-like symptoms, is more likely to detect the presence of viral RNA, than a test performed on someone who only became infected the day before, or who became infected several weeks ago.
How carefully material was collected from the nose and/or throat could also influence the likelihood of an infected person testing negative (a false negative) – with home tests likely to be less accurate than those done by professionals.
my wife works at a nursing home. they did testing all the time. it was very common for someone to test positive, and told to stay home, but then shortly after that (within a day or so), they tested negative and were back at work a few days later. this was Not just a one time problem. it happened maybe 6 times. it tells me that the test was NOT reliable, and gives false results many times. this confirms what i have read from experts that explain why the test is not perfect.
testing might be useful in some situations, but we should not rely on it as a gold standard.
Wow, metmike…
I admitted that I shrugged off the Elon Musk incident.Although, I have to wonder what kind of “science” we are dealing with here.
You point out the millions of tests that have been conducted, as compared to just one Elon Musk incident…. Sure, but how many of these millions have taken 4 tests in one day? Probably none.
When I measure my desk, it will always be 7’ long, no matter how often I measure it. When my doctor gives me a cancer test, I don’t want to hear “Maybe you have it, maybe do you don’t”.What kind of “science’ is this???
However, let’s except the fact that “science” in this field of medicine is on a different level than other fields of science.
********
But then you accuse me again of posting things from “far right” sites. The inventor of the PCR test is now also thrown into this group of “B.S. providers” and “quacks” on the far right???
At the beginning of the pandemic, our health agencies artificially inflated Covid fatalities, and right now a gigantic effort is underway to keep the People uninformed about the negatives of the mRNA jab (even the President is now involved)…. and I point out that the inventor of the PCR test himself stated that his test can be used to turn a little nothing into a big thing, clearly enabling the test provider to either show something or show nothing….
and I point out that somebody could have had an agenda……. and this makes me paranoid???
*****
You talk much about false positives and false negatives… the unreliability of this test..
It seems to me, more important would be the settings of the test (understanding the PCR test, as Dr.Mullis so clearly described it). At some point, at the beginning, somebody had to ask “shall we make a big deal out of this, or shall we down-play it?”
So, they picked a certain “cycle threshold” to create an image of the pandemic’s progress.
Was it set too high or too low?….That’s in the eye of the beholder… however, they did create an economic disaster, coupled with the People being made afraid, ready to accept totalitarian measurements (it was worse in the Europe)
******
On May 1, the CDC changed its procedure, so that the test for vaccinated people only showed severe cases, ignoring barely-there cases, while leaving the test settings for unvaxxed people the same.Shortly thereafter, not surprisingly, it became the “pandemic of the unvaxxed”
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/health-departments/breakthrough-cases.html
In the meantime, the CDC has recently been recommending other Covid tests, which can be used in lieu of the PCR test. I don’t know much about them. Apparently it’s up to the test stations or state agencies to decide which test to use.
I don’t know which test they used in Cape Cod, when they came up with a totally different picture (74% of new of cases were vaccinated people)
Either way, the term “authentic science’ is greatly misused, IMHO
.
big gov could just stick to the facts and let them lay. But no, especially in our school systems they are using the fear. Its gotten so bad you cannot live your life nor your kids go to school without fear being cast around, A school just north went back to 'computer school" and contact tracing today and already had another God awful mask mandate in place, Maybe they could get real and do some reading and find out an open window in the class room is as effective as a stupid mask with no side affects.
Wow, hayman
Just yesterday I was thinking about preparing a final post, explaining my views about this pandemic.
And then you posted this link.This link includes many of the things I was focusing on. I have a couple other issues he didn’t hit.
However, this author’s post leaves me in the dust, with his thorough explanations, most of it backed by links.
One thing that is very important to mention about this article. This article was written in April, before the Delta arrived. This author had no idea that just a few months later, the efficacy of the vaxx would drop to a dismal 39%
This single item alone should make everyone think… but then, so many people don’t want to think… they rather believe the propaganda.
Thanks again.
Thanks bear,
I agree that the COVID testing accuracy needs to greatly improve. There are just too many false negatives and false positives.
I can't speak for the nursing home where your wife works and "it happened maybe 6 times" as you stated(which I believe), all I can do is show you more links and studies with legit objective data and authentic science........ as always. . The false/bad test results in the studies were all over the place. Some showed good accuracy, some showed horrible accuracy.
The tests and the humans involved are just flawed and they need to work on improving them.
"This single item alone should make everyone think… but then, so many people don’t want to think… they rather believe the propaganda."
Gunter,
It's YOU buying into the massive dis/mis information that I have proven is wrong dozens of times here.
At least you finally admitted that the vaccine does not alter your DNA
but still wouldn't respond about whether its gene therapy or not.
Do you still believe that one too!
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/73449/#73590
And you finally recognized that this Canadian doctor is a huge quack after being unhappy with me for calling him that from the get go.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/73846/#74045
At this rate, by the year 2030, you will finally be fully embracing the authentic science (-:
Musk is a brilliant guy and knows that was total bs. I can flip a coin 4 times and get 4 heads and then tell everybody the coin is messed up.
MM. you appear to have overlooked a rather large flaw in your analogy.
You can reasonably expect random results from a coin toss.
You should not expect random results from a "scientific test" that is being used to create laws and policies and restrictions.. If you can expect random results from the test, the test, and resulting data iare worthless.
The definition of science is the replication of results.
this is where we differ MM. I an not a anti vaxxer. I think it helps. Mandates v our constitution is where those so called experts drive into the ditch. We will always have some form of covid. if we want to preserve a country we must respect our constitution. This does vary when wind bags like Fauci declare enough is enough or what ever stupid thing he comes out with. That is evil talk. That is a communist talking. That is an elite who should of retired generations ago. This country has quite enough problems because we ignored our constitution previously.
Did you catch that school system now requiring ankle bracelets for students. Now how does that strike anyone living in a constitutional republic....ankle bracelets...really...cannot tell you how many ways this is wrong.
Maybe with any luck we will another teacher come here and tell us the ankle bracelets are exaggerated like the critical race theory was.....uhmmm seems to be conversations all over the country now. What else are they hiding??
Gunter, I sincerely hope you do not reduce your posting. Enjoy your post very much. With your background you have a unique perspective and we need that here.
"MM. you appear to have overlooked a rather large flaw in your analogy."
Maybe the analogy was not clear to you.
4 is very small number. You can't glean anything significant from a study with a sample size of 4 in a field that has 500 million+ in it. At least 400 would have been preferable, with 4,000 being better yet.
The ironic thing is that Gunter was arguing that this was proof of bad hombre's with an agenda that are trying to inflate the COVID POSITIVES........but it's actually an example of the complete opposite............. inflated false NEGATIVES because Musk ended up having COVID. Regardless, 4 tests is way too tiny by any reasonable standard.
I agree completely that the tests are flawed and maybe as much as 5% are coming back with false positives..NOT 50% in the Musk, 4 sample personal study, which is off by a factor of 10.
https://sciencing.com/disadvantages-small-sample-size-8448532.html
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4296634/
https://catalogofbias.org/biases/wrong-sample-size-bias/
https://www.iwh.on.ca/what-researchers-mean-by/sample-size-and-power
comprende Tim?
"this is where we differ MM. I an not a anti vaxxer. I think it helps. Mandates v our constitution is where those so called experts drive into the ditch"
Thanks mcfarm,
I totally get the individual rights/freedom side and why on this. Tim also agrees with you strongly.
We had a discussion here about it and I also provided an article that give both sides.
https://www.sccm.org/Blog/June-2021/Ethical-Considerations-for-a-COVID-19-Vaccine-Mand
As a scientist for 39 years(dang, I'm getting old) that is my field of expertise and its in that area that I'm using data/evidence and authentic science to give my opinion.
I have a strong personal ethical view on this but I don't try to impose my non expert opinion about that but its no better than yours or Tims.
My case on the ethics/morals is............who do YOU consider the people who we can trust on ethical/moral issues. The Pope? Spiritual/Religious leaders? Politicians? FOX news? INFOWARS?
I asked for you to please give me a sincere answer mcfarm.
On the science, do you know who I trust?
NOBODY.
I trust the data, facts, evidence and authentic science interpreted by metmike the scientist and nobody else. Just like with the fake climate crisis.
And BTW, the fake climate crisis has nothing to do with this. I hear all the time that they are faking a climate crisis so how can we trust anything THEY state about COVID.
These are 2 totally independent fields of science with totally different characters and politics with completely different data sets and dynamics. It's true that THEY are out there manufacturing narratives and trying to influence us for political ideologies but THEY include FOX news, INFOWARS and other far right sites.
On the ankle bracelets, I don't know much about that. It sounds dumb but there's no science for my opinion that related to COVID.
On Gunter, I also hope that he continues to post here. He's been a great poster for years.
Since I do not censor anything on COVID here, he has to be an adult and face vetting and fact checking of his bad information. I've spent 100+ hours this Summer having to do that and make corrections based on objective science and taking each and every one seriously.
As mentioned previously, if you want an echo chamber that pacifies and repeats things that you like to read and hear to increase traffic................sorry but this isn't the place for you.
One of the biggest conditions for me to be here is that people can find the objective truths based on the authentic facts that are completely independent of politics.
Democrats were all mad at me when Trump was in office, now Republicans are mad at me with Biden in office(on this and the fake election steal).
Gunter is going to some very bad, unreliable and politically/profit driven sites to get information that he has decided to believe without doing his own vetting.
He is using me as a fact checker. I'm happy to do it though its frustrating that he will dispute the indisputable with a cognitive bias driven, non critical thinking mentality...........which is NOT like him from the past.
I always look forward to learning new things from him and everyone else here too....using the scientific method. This is where the scientist, first assumes that they are wrong and if they can't show that..........can have confidence that they are right........which is the opposite of how most people do it.
Left leaning hypocrites really catch my eye. And that is why I will never agree that this new Pope is any kind of spiritual leader. Billy Graham was a great spiritual/moral leader of my time imho. He lived what he preached every day. If on Monday he was against abortion you could rest assured he believed it every day. He was a man that spread the word while walking with the people. He did not live behind huge walls, surrounded by security with tons of gold to count at nite.
I was raised Catholic and Billy Graham was a protestant but when we were kids, my dad would make us watch Grahams televised programs.
He was the real deal!