Reminder: number of Covid cases does not matter

DrJ

Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2015
Messages
719
Friendly reminder that as they try to scare everyone into vaccination, mask-wearing, and more lockdowns that they will use ”number of cases" as the scare metric. However, since number of cases depends on number of tests given, it is effectively meaningless to report number of cases without reporting the corresponding number of tests (but this is what almost all news outlets do). The number of cases can be manipulated by manipulating the number of tests, but the case *rate* cannot. Notably many government offices are going to start requiring tests of the unvaxxed so obviously we will see more cases even if the case rate remains unchanged or even decreases.

As a decent human being, it is your responsibility to point out that any person or source reporting number of cases without reporting number of tests may be classified as one or both of the following:

1) Does not understand very basic statistics
2) is being intentionally misleading

If the person genuinely does not understand the concept you may kindly use an example such as the following to explain:

Day 1 there are 100 cases, day 2 there are also 100 cases. No change in situation right? Wrong. On day 1, 1000 tests were given. On day 2, only 200 tests were given. It's clear that reporting only cases gives an incorrect idea of the situation.

Alternative example: Day 1 there are 100 cases. Day 2 only 10 cases. Great improvement right? Wrong. On day 1, 200 tests were given. On day 2 only 10 tests were performed. The covid rate is literally 100% and we are all doomed but since it's only number of cases being reported we can't understand how screwed we are.

I find it's best to give these "hiding that we're in trouble" examples rather than a "hiding it's actually okay" example because it really catches the attention of the NPCs and Karen's who live to go around mask and vax shaming and live for the feargasms they get from the 'pandemic'.

Even an idiot can understand these simple examples, so if a person continues to go on about case numbers only i believe it's quite fair to begin openly labeling them as intellectually dishonest.

that is all and stay well?
 
Joined
Nov 16, 2012
Messages
1,100
Right, the only metric with any remote value is the % of POSITIVE tests, not the absolute number of cases. However even that metric is worthless in an absolute sense (since due to the number of test cycles it no doubt overestimates the actual number of people with significant amounts of the virus) but is only somewhat useful in the relative sense (i.e. comparing to the past trend within a geographical location, assuming the CT is kept constant, e.g. % positive tests in U.K. now vs. last July or something similar).

 
OP
DrJ

DrJ

Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2015
Messages
719
Right, the only metric with any remote value is the % of POSITIVE tests, not the absolute number of cases. However even that metric is worthless in an absolute sense (since due to the number of test cycles it no doubt overestimates the actual number of people with significant amounts of the virus) but is only somewhat useful in the relative sense (i.e. comparing to the past trend within a geographical location, assuming the CT is kept constant, e.g. % positive tests in U.K. now vs. last July or something similar).

Agree that the number of PCR cycles is yet another parameter to fiddle with to get the outcome you want. So much deception going on!
 

blob69

Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2015
Messages
362
Right, the only metric with any remote value is the % of POSITIVE tests, not the absolute number of cases. However even that metric is worthless in an absolute sense (since due to the number of test cycles it no doubt overestimates the actual number of people with significant amounts of the virus) but is only somewhat useful in the relative sense (i.e. comparing to the past trend within a geographical location, assuming the CT is kept constant, e.g. % positive tests in U.K. now vs. last July or something similar).

In my country I noticed something highly significant about the % of positive PCR tests that clearly shows that something is very wrong with these tests and they are not measuring the true prevalence. Have a look at the graph attached which shows my country's official statistics regarding PCR testing. The purple line shows the % of positive results, the bars show number of tests done. As you can see, the % of positive results correlates strongly with the number of tests done to the point where each weekend, when the number of tests done is always less (when the bars sharply drop off), the % of positive tests drops significantly too (even by a third or half in one case!). That of course should not happen if these tests were measuring the true prevalence of disease, because there is no reason why during the weekends the virus would suddenly become less virulent.

I think this clearly shows that there is some other very important factor with these tests that makes the positive rate go up when the number of tests goes up - perhaps the overburdened laboratories don't do the job good enough, contamination becomes a problem etc.

The truly bizarre thing is that no-one talks about this strange phenomenon here - it is as if people have completely lost the ability to think logically and question things.
 

Attachments

  • positive-rate.png
    positive-rate.png
    48 KB · Views: 13
OP
DrJ

DrJ

Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2015
Messages
719
In my country I noticed something highly significant about the % of positive PCR tests that clearly shows that something is very wrong with these tests and they are not measuring the true prevalence. Have a look at the graph attached which shows my country's official statistics regarding PCR testing. The purple line shows the % of positive results, the bars show number of tests done. As you can see, the % of positive results correlates strongly with the number of tests done to the point where each weekend, when the number of tests done is always less (when the bars sharply drop off), the % of positive tests drops significantly too (even by a third or half in one case!). That of course should not happen if these tests were measuring the true prevalence of disease, because there is no reason why during the weekends the virus would suddenly become less virulent.

I think this clearly shows that there is some other very important factor with these tests that makes the positive rate go up when the number of tests goes up - perhaps the overburdened laboratories don't do the job good enough, contamination becomes a problem etc.

The truly bizarre thing is that no-one talks about this strange phenomenon here - it is as if people have completely lost the ability to think logically and question things.
Lol that's crazy but thanks for sharing. If viral material is just loose genetic info that gets out under stress like Ray says then maybe people are less stressed on the weekend and the rate drops. Sounds a bit wild but not sure how else to explain.
 
EMF Mitigation - Flush Niacin - Big 5 Minerals

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom