Most people in the USA are choosing to get the COVID vaccine?

J.R.K

Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2020
Messages
1,836
Between CT 38 and CT 28 you have the factor 1,024. So the tests were about thousand times more sensitive before.
Fascinating @Austin Resch & @Giraffe. I was not aware they had dropped the PCR upper threshold, I knew that shortly after the vaccines were rolled out that the WHO issued a statement on checking for actual viral load on upper end PCR tests. But did not know that they had lowered the threshold.
90 to 95% false positives seems very high to base a decision to self quarantine and not even be able to get groceries for yourself.
I am curious to know your thoughts on the whole idea of shedding and how it plays into the places that are seeing spikes in infections.
As well what a person that is unvaccinated to do when they are living with a vaccinated person or persons?
 

Hugh Johnson

Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2014
Messages
2,648
Location
The Sultanate of Portugal
View attachment 23154

I am again curious as to how you came to the conclusion that increased vaccination has produced any significant decrease in death rate?

In most countries that have adopted mass deployment of the experimental gene therapy injection, they have simultaneously changed the guidelines for the PCR diagnostic test. Before vaccination, they were performed at upwards of 35-40Ct (producing an artificial high rate of false positives, around 90-97% false), whereas after jab rollout it is being performed at ~28Ct, inevitably leading to a significant drop in reported cases and deaths, independently of vaccination status.

Even in areas where the drastic change (not covered by the media) in diagnostic test methodology has not yet been largely implemented, these areas are seeing the opposite of what you are claiming, as can be seen in the image above.
Could you give a source in the CT changes? I am having trouble finding them.
 

Hugh Johnson

Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2014
Messages
2,648
Location
The Sultanate of Portugal
o Clinical specimens for sequencing should have an RT-PCR Ct value ≤28.

Ok, found this but I lack the context to understand the document and how that means there has been a change in the diagnostic criteria.
 

Missenger

Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2018
Messages
720
o Clinical specimens for sequencing should have an RT-PCR Ct value ≤28.

Ok, found this but I lack the context to understand the document and how that means there has been a change in the diagnostic criteria.
Ct levels are inversely proportional to the amount of target
nucleic acid in the sample (ie the lower the Ct level the greater the amount of target nucleic acid in the
sample). WVDL real time assays undergo 40 cycles of amplification.
Cts <
29 are strong positive reactions indicative of abundant target nucleic acid in the sample
Cts of 30-37 are positive reactions indicative of moderate amounts of target nucleic acid
Cts of 38-40 are weak reactions indicative of minimal amounts of target nucleic acid which could
represent an infection state or environmental contamination.

"All patients with a CT value of equal to or less than 35 may be considered positive, while those with a CT value greater than 35 may be considered negative. All samples with a CT value equal to or less than 35, which is seen as a poor sigmoidal curve, should be essentially retested. Implementing a CT value cut-off of 24 is not at all advisable as this would lead to missing of several infectious patients and increase disease transmission," states the letter dated 5 April.

The ICMR states that the globally accepted cut-off for CT value for Covid-19 ranges from 35-40 depending upon the instructions laid down by individual manufacturers.

They used the release of the vaccines as an excuse to remove false positives from their chronic covid testing marketing. When that isn't good enough for them they'll start saying there's a 'new variant' and start counting false positives again until they release a new poison into the market.
 
Last edited:

LeeRoyJenkins

Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2015
Messages
107
I'm in South Florida (slightly skewed higher demographics in my area in particular due to it being an historically retirement community) in running surveys on local platforms, we're looking at around 80% vaccinated (or want to be asap). This includes younger people (who are particularly naive and have all been cajoled by parents/friends). I wouldn't be believing it if I wasn't seeing it (hundreds and hundreds lined up in the beginning and every vax site constantly full.
 

LeeRoyJenkins

Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2015
Messages
107
Also they'll simply lie and say it's the unvaxxed causing the deaths/side effects/diseases that are about to run rampant, in order to push this down everyone's throats.
 

J.R.K

Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2020
Messages
1,836
Also they'll simply lie and say it's the unvaxxed causing the deaths/side effects/diseases that are about to run rampant, in order to push this down everyone's throats.
Unbelievable, I was kind of under the impression that Florida was a little more cooler in regards to COVID-19 restrictions and pressure for vaccination. Good to know I appreciate the birds eye viewpoint.
You stay strong and safe!!
 

Hugh Johnson

Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2014
Messages
2,648
Location
The Sultanate of Portugal




They used the release of the vaccines as an excuse to remove false positives from their chronic covid testing marketing. When that isn't good enough for them they'll start saying there's a 'new variant' and start counting false positives again until they release a new poison into the market.
Does not help me. What has the change been, what is the bureaucratic procedure this paper refers to and how has the change affected the end results in recorded statistics? I get the technical issues, not the bureaucratic ones that we are actually discussing.
 

Lollipop2

Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2019
Messages
5,267
Does not help me. What has the change been, what is the bureaucratic procedure this paper refers to and how has the change affected the end results in recorded statistics? I get the technical issues, not the bureaucratic ones that we are actually discussing.
Another article for you. I am not sure we know yet the actual numbers but you can see after this announcement that cases declined everywhere. They made the announcement late Dec. Remember how Biden was inaugurated and suddenly cases were down and they gave Biden credit.

 

Missenger

Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2018
Messages
720
Another article for you. I am not sure we know yet the actual numbers but you can see after this announcement that cases declined everywhere. They made the announcement late Dec. Remember how Biden was inaugurated and suddenly cases were down and they gave Biden credit.

There's an article paraphrasing what I said published a good 5 months ago, like it wasn't already obviously enough from the discussions here even.
 

Lollipop2

Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2019
Messages
5,267
There's an article paraphrasing what I said published a good 5 months ago, like it wasn't already obviously enough from the discussions here even.
Yeah. I have seen several posts about it on RPF. It is so surreal this drama playing out.
 

mayku-T-meelo

Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2016
Messages
188
Does not help me. What has the change been, what is the bureaucratic procedure this paper refers to and how has the change affected the end results in recorded statistics? I get the technical issues, not the bureaucratic ones that we are actually discussing.
Those are instructions or recommendations for laboratories that are measuring the effectiveness of the vaccine. If ct values over 28 are excluded the results which would otherwise be positive on a majority of routine tests are not taken into account.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom