PILOT SPIN
Spin Zone => Spin Zone => Topic started by: Lucifer on September 03, 2020, 05:51:41 AM
-
https://www.redstate.com/michael_thau/2020/09/03/ny-times-up-to-90-testing-positive-for-c19-virus-not-infectious-but-problem-actually-much-worse/
The New York Times just reported something incredible.
You know those standard PCR tests for the COVID-19 virus that everybody in America has been rushing out to get? Well, according to the Times, they’re “diagnosing huge numbers of people who may be carrying relatively insignificant amounts of the virus” and “are not likely to be contagious.”
In fact, when they looked at three sets of testing data from Massachusetts, New York, and Nevada, the Times says that, because of faulty procedures used at every single testing site in the country, “up to 90 percent of people testing positive carried barely any virus” at all.
The experts they talked to were astonished that such cases are even getting classified as infections.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/29/health/coronavirus-testing.html
-
Well, now ain't that interesting . . .
And it's from the NYT so the rest of the MSM can't blame Trump.
-
Well, now ain't that interesting . . .
And it's from the NYT so the rest of the MSM can't blame Trump.
Oh they will. If Trump acted in November when he should have we'd have perfect tests and a vaccine by now. Just ask the Perfessor.
-
They weren’t wrongly diagnosed! The author of that RedState article misunderstood the NYT article (that’s the generous explanation.) The 90% figure probably comes from two quotes in the NYT article:
“In three sets of testing data that include cycle thresholds, compiled by officials in Massachusetts, New York and Nevada, up to 90 percent of people testing positive carried barely any virus, a review by The Times found.“
...and...
“ In Massachusetts, from 85 to 90 percent of people who tested positive in July with a cycle threshold of 40 would have been deemed negative if the threshold were 30 cycles, Dr. Mina said. “I would say that none of those people should be contact-traced, not one,” he said.”
Note that there is, correctly, no mention that the people were wrongly diagnosed. That is an invention of the RedState author.
The issue the NYT article is addressing is that PCR is so effectively sensitive that it can detect the virus very early in an infection - well before the person becomes infectious or in people whose viral load never rises to a point where they can infect others. Dr. Michael Mina, who is quoted several times in the NYT’s article, has been arguing for a while now that cheap paper tests that utilize antigen testing (detection of proteins unique to the virus rather than PCR which relies on detection of RNA fragments unique to the virus) are a better idea than PCR. They yield results in minutes and can be done at home. The down side is that they aren’t as sensitive as PCR, but could still detect the virus possibly a day before the person becomes infectious. The FDA is blocking the use of such home tests and Mina has been on a campaign to get them to change. Kudos to him. Boo to RedState for spreading nonsense.
-
Oh they will. If Trump acted in November when he should have we'd have perfect tests and a vaccine by now. Just ask the Perfessor.
Was that before or after he shut down travel from China and was called racist and xenophobic by every single democrat?
I’m losing track of all these outrages.