The CDC did not change the CT value for vaccinated only

[kyle]

Reading between the lines I'd say *in effect* the cdc did change the criteria, even per this document. That it is to establish "lineage" seems to be a red herring.

Where's the misinformation?

 

[Peatogenic]

Reading between the lines I'd say *in effect* the cdc did change the criteria, even per this document. That it is to establish "lineage" seems to be a red herring.

Where's the misinformation?

I still don't know what they mean by "sequencing". If it's a common thing that specimens are submitted for, then it's , in effect, changing the CT for all vaccinated tests. If it's not something done often, I'm not sure. The original claim was that there was a directive to change the CT when testing all vaccinated people. But their guidelines make it seem like it's for just specific "sequencing".

 

[mariantos]

Pride is important for self protection. And while my attempt is not to be divisive, division is natural and healthy. It's not natural to be unified.

I'm trying to really understand your point of view, moreover, I agree with half of what you said, namely that we should not be fully unified, if that's what you thought and if I understood correctly, then you were referring to people everywhere, who when they come to have the same "thought" will not produce anything beneficial on the whole. E.g. The Tower of Babylon.


However, please be patient and try to give me an understanding, because I referred to us who are targeted and implicitly exposed, to us the people against whom those who want to subdue us fight, for us the oppressed excessively from all sides I wrote, so let us be united and there be tolerance in truth and mutual help between us, which is not a bad thing at all, it is not harmful in any way, but productive, strengthening, effective.The unity I wrote about is in total opposition to the contradiction unsupported by constructive arguments, which does not bring benefits, actually.

I do not share the same opinion as you about pride. I perceive pride as being in total antithesis to the protection of your neighbor, pride in essence is just an attitude of self-superiority mastered in an illusory way. I don't know you personally dear brother, but please believe me, because if I lie to you, then I lie to myself and this is the last thing I want, I was a very proud person and I still have problems with pride which I easily notice and which I find miserable. My pride never protected me, but only gave me a false state of protection, it was just the weak material of constitution for my armor that I considered impenetrable, it nourished my vanities, I considered that I deserved everything and that I'm someone. Pride makes it all come down to you, you will automatically disregard the one around you, because pride inevitably becomes the forerunner of arrogance.

Pride is a danger to those around you and implicitly to you. Pride and envy have turned the most beautiful creature into a devil!

Regardless of whether we do not share the same ideas, I respect your point of view and I convey to you in the end that only time can prove the opposite, so give time some time!

 

[Fred]

I still don't know what they mean by "sequencing". If it's a common thing that specimens are submitted for, then it's , in effect, changing the CT for all vaccinated tests. If it's not something done often, I'm not sure. The original claim was that there was a directive to change the CT when testing all vaccinated people. But their guidelines make it seem like it's for just specific "sequencing".

"Sequencing" is genetic sequencing. It is done occasionally as a form of what they call "surveillance" ... to see what variants are in circulation. A certain amount of virus (apparently) must be present in the sample in order to perform genetic sequencing. I don't know the rationale, but it doesn't matter. The lower CT requirement for sequencing has no bearing on the CT positivity threshold used (incorrectly) to diagnose covid. In short, you are correct. The CDC does not (publicly, at least) have a different standard for vaxxed. It is the same BS standard across the board.

 

[Regina]

You are being redirected...

rairfoundation.com

 

[Peatogenic]

"Sequencing" is genetic sequencing. It is done occasionally as a form of what they call "surveillance" ... to see what variants are in circulation. A certain amount of virus (apparently) must be present in the sample in order to perform genetic sequencing. I don't know the rationale, but it doesn't matter. The lower CT requirement for sequencing has no bearing on the CT positivity threshold used (incorrectly) to diagnose covid. In short, you are correct. The CDC does not (publicly, at least) have a different standard for vaxxed. It is the same BS standard across the board.

Haidut pointed out, though, that they don't give sequencing specifications for unvaccinated.

 

[Peatogenic]

I'm trying to really understand your point of view, moreover, I agree with half of what you said, namely that we should not be fully unified, if that's what you thought and if I understood correctly, then you were referring to people everywhere, who when they come to have the same "thought" will not produce anything beneficial on the whole. E.g. The Tower of Babylon.


However, please be patient and try to give me an understanding, because I referred to us who are targeted and implicitly exposed, to us the people against whom those who want to subdue us fight, for us the oppressed excessively from all sides I wrote, so let us be united and there be tolerance in truth and mutual help between us, which is not a bad thing at all, it is not harmful in any way, but productive, strengthening, effective.The unity I wrote about is in total opposition to the contradiction unsupported by constructive arguments, which does not bring benefits, actually.

I do not share the same opinion as you about pride. I perceive pride as being in total antithesis to the protection of your neighbor, pride in essence is just an attitude of self-superiority mastered in an illusory way. I don't know you personally dear brother, but please believe me, because if I lie to you, then I lie to myself and this is the last thing I want, I was a very proud person and I still have problems with pride which I easily notice and which I find miserable. My pride never protected me, but only gave me a false state of protection, it was just the weak material of constitution for my armor that I considered impenetrable, it nourished my vanities, I considered that I deserved everything and that I'm someone. Pride makes it all come down to you, you will automatically disregard the one around you, because pride inevitably becomes the forerunner of arrogance.

Pride is a danger to those around you and implicitly to you. Pride and envy have turned the most beautiful creature into a devil!

Regardless of whether we do not share the same ideas, I respect your point of view and I convey to you in the end that only time can prove the opposite, so give time some time!

All the things you define as pride are obviously bad things. I don't know if you initially brought up "pride" in reference to me, but if you did I'm not sure how you'd ascribe these pride traits, as you define them, to anything I've done.

To me, pride is self worth and self trust. The other person in this thread, and others in another thread over the past two days enacted a cultic group psychology response towards me because I expressed concern or questioned something. One that I'm very familiar with. When you call them out on it, they resort to all kinds of logical manipulations that they themselves are likely not even aware of. I even had a guy today trying to persuade me that my worldview and way of processing information will lead me astray.

With these types of people they always put on a pretense of intellectualism or rationalism or compassion, until their unadulterated bitterness eventually reveals itself.

There are *lots* of people like this in the world. And I'm still in the process of decoding it and being aware of it. It's my cue to spell it out in real time their logical fallacies. To not let any manipulation slide. And I believe I'm pretty good at it now.

Yes, I know it sounds strange to focus on that, but I overcame a trauma disorder (CPTSD) a few years ago specifically related to psychological abuse (and with hormone therapy). And early on I would have sensed a disordered dynamic but not trusted myself. But I've spent years now working through it and see these things very clearly now. In fact, I think I'm too conscious of it. Which poses a problem when these different dynamics and manipulations are very normalized in the world.

In the long-term, I know eventually I'll be at a place where I don't feel the need to expose it when I come across it. That it won't activate my system where I believe I'm even in a mild danger, and certainly not the danger of my original trauma.

And in the meantime I try to revere things like anger, because anger is a body signal of needing to protect yourself. At least I'm conscious of what I experience. And I know I didn't have to go in this level of detail, but being on this forum the past two days was very activating for me, directly because a handful of people were implementing (unconscious?) group think strategies and manipulations toward me. And it's "pride" that I lacked in my past life, a lack of true self trust/respect, and I would have just caved to those group dynamics and believed the things I've been accused of.

I'm also learning more and more that I just don't process information in a standard way. And that apparently caused some confusion for some people as well.

 

[Fred]

Haidut pointed out, though, that they don't give sequencing specifications for unvaccinated.

The document in question is ONLY about investigating breakthrough cases, and reads: "For cases with a known RT-PCR cycle threshold (Ct) value, submit only specimens with Ct value ≤28 to CDC for sequencing. (Sequencing is not feasible with higher Ct values.)" So it says right there that they CAN'T sequence a specimen with CT over 28 - "not feasible". This is not a double-standard at all, they just want to see what variants are evading the vaccine.

 

[Peatogenic]

The document in question is ONLY about investigating breakthrough cases, and reads: "For cases with a known RT-PCR cycle threshold (Ct) value, submit only specimens with Ct value ≤28 to CDC for sequencing. (Sequencing is not feasible with higher Ct values.)" So it says right there that they CAN'T sequence a specimen with CT over 28 - "not feasible". This is not a double-standard at all, they just want to see what variants are evading the vaccine.

Ok, thank you for clarifying that. It's what I sensed, yet because of my lack of understanding of lab work/documents I couldn't fully make that case. What's worse is that I had an extremely lengthy discussion with @haidut on his big PCR thread, and I presume he understands all the terminology, and I kept bringing up sequencing and he'd go on very longwinded responses never bringing up sequencing but *really* trying to drill it in that the CDC was up to no good here....exploring all the ways that this guideline could spell out fraud.

Per other discussions on this thread, that was another example of this very rigid ganging up that I see in authoritarian (even if mild) groups...like a sense of a narrative being threatened. When my interest is not to argue that the CDC is ethical, my interest is in every snapshot being truthful.

 

[Lord Cola]

I didn't really word that right. I meant that it's a common goal post move in general, not you. Even with people who support vaccines. They will reference the CDC and then when you reference the CDC and it goes against their narrative they question suddenly the reliability of the CDC.

The reason "covid skeptics" reference the CDC is because the people they are trying to talk to put their faith in the CDC. The "skeptics" are trying to reveal the contradictions in the CDC and mainstrea media's narrative, not because they think the CDC is the arbiter of truth.

 

[Peatogenic]

The reason "covid skeptics" reference the CDC is because the people they are trying to talk to put their faith in the CDC. The "skeptics" are trying to reveal the contradictions in the CDC and mainstrea media's narrative, not because they think the CDC is the arbiter of truth.

The quote of mine you reference actually gives an overall example of me doing just that with people who put their trust in the CDC.

Per your second sentence:. My post here is questioning a claim that Covid skeptics use by referencing something they believe the CDC said. See Haidut's big thread saying the CDC issued guidelines to start testing vaccinated people differently.

Additionally, the quote of mine you reference is in response to a Covid skeptic. When I outlined what the CDC actually issued in their guideline, they said that they don't trust the CDC anyway.

I don't believe that the millions of Covid skeptics that spread these articles (claiming that the CDC changed the guidelines for testing vaccinated people) think that the CDC are the arbiters of truth. I believe they were saying they caught the CDC being transparent about their fraud. But they didn't read what the guideline actually said. A goalpost move would be for them to say that they don't trust the CDC anyway or pointing to other verified frauds.

 

[Lord Cola]

The quote of mine you reference actually gives an overall example of me doing just that with people who put their trust in the CDC.

Per your second sentence:. My post here is questioning a claim that Covid skeptics use by referencing something they believe the CDC said. See Haidut's big thread saying the CDC issued guidelines to start testing vaccinated people differently.

Additionally, the quote of mine you reference is in response to a Covid skeptic. When I outlined what the CDC actually issued in their guideline, they said that they don't trust the CDC anyway.

I don't believe that the millions of Covid skeptics that spread these articles (claiming that the CDC changed the guidelines for testing vaccinated people) think that the CDC are the arbiters of truth. I believe they were saying they caught the CDC being transparent about their fraud. But they didn't read what the guideline actually said. A goalpost move would be for them to say that they don't trust the CDC anyway or pointing to other verified frauds.

I was responding to your statement with a general observation. Maybe I don't understand the jargon but I didn't see anything that said vaxxed and unvaxxed should have different testing protocols, not that I was looking into this much, just looked at some links posted.

 

[Fred]

Ok, thank you for clarifying that. It's what I sensed, yet because of my lack of understanding of lab work/documents I couldn't fully make that case. What's worse is that I had an extremely lengthy discussion with @haidut on his big PCR thread, and I presume he understands all the terminology, and I kept bringing up sequencing and he'd go on very longwinded responses never bringing up sequencing but *really* trying to drill it in that the CDC was up to no good here....exploring all the ways that this guideline could spell out fraud.

Per other discussions on this thread, that was another example of this very rigid ganging up that I see in authoritarian (even if mild) groups...like a sense of a narrative being threatened. When my interest is not to argue that the CDC is ethical, my interest is in every snapshot being truthful.

No problem. To be clear, the entire pandemic is a lie based upon intentional misuse of PCR. It is NOT a diagnostic test. It is what they call a "screening" test, at best. Kary Mullis invented the test and said this ...
"...with PCR, if you do it well, you can find almost anything in anybody. It starts making you believe in the sort of Buddhist notion that everything is contained in everything else. Because if you can amplify one single molecule up to to something that you can really measure, which PCR can do, then there’s just very few molecules that you don’t have at least one single one of them in your body. So that could be thought of as a misuse of it just to claim that it’s meaningful. ... It’s just a process that’s used to make a whole lot of something out of something. It doesn’t tell you that you’re sick and it doesn’t tell you that the thing you ended up with really was gonna hurt you or anything like that."

 

[Peatogenic]

No problem. To be clear, the entire pandemic is a lie based upon intentional misuse of PCR. It is NOT a diagnostic test. It is what they call a "screening" test, at best. Kary Mullis invented the test and said this ...
"...with PCR, if you do it well, you can find almost anything in anybody. It starts making you believe in the sort of Buddhist notion that everything is contained in everything else. Because if you can amplify one single molecule up to to something that you can really measure, which PCR can do, then there’s just very few molecules that you don’t have at least one single one of them in your body. So that could be thought of as a misuse of it just to claim that it’s meaningful. ... It’s just a process that’s used to make a whole lot of something out of something. It doesn’t tell you that you’re sick and it doesn’t tell you that the thing you ended up with really was gonna hurt you or anything like that."

Yes, I agree.

 

[mariantos]

All the things you define as pride are obviously bad things. I don't know if you initially brought up "pride" in reference to me, but if you did I'm not sure how you'd ascribe these pride traits, as you define them, to anything I've done.

To me, pride is self worth and self trust. The other person in this thread, and others in another thread over the past two days enacted a cultic group psychology response towards me because I expressed concern or questioned something. One that I'm very familiar with. When you call them out on it, they resort to all kinds of logical manipulations that they themselves are likely not even aware of. I even had a guy today trying to persuade me that my worldview and way of processing information will lead me astray.

With these types of people they always put on a pretense of intellectualism or rationalism or compassion, until their unadulterated bitterness eventually reveals itself.

There are *lots* of people like this in the world. And I'm still in the process of decoding it and being aware of it. It's my cue to spell it out in real time their logical fallacies. To not let any manipulation slide. And I believe I'm pretty good at it now.

Yes, I know it sounds strange to focus on that, but I overcame a trauma disorder (CPTSD) a few years ago specifically related to psychological abuse (and with hormone therapy). And early on I would have sensed a disordered dynamic but not trusted myself. But I've spent years now working through it and see these things very clearly now. In fact, I think I'm too conscious of it. Which poses a problem when these different dynamics and manipulations are very normalized in the world.

In the long-term, I know eventually I'll be at a place where I don't feel the need to expose it when I come across it. That it won't activate my system where I believe I'm even in a mild danger, and certainly not the danger of my original trauma.

And in the meantime I try to revere things like anger, because anger is a body signal of needing to protect yourself. At least I'm conscious of what I experience. And I know I didn't have to go in this level of detail, but being on this forum the past two days was very activating for me, directly because a handful of people were implementing (unconscious?) group think strategies and manipulations toward me. And it's "pride" that I lacked in my past life, a lack of true self trust/respect, and I would have just caved to those group dynamics and believed the things I've been accused of.

I'm also learning more and more that I just don't process information in a standard way. And that apparently caused some confusion for some people as well.

No, not at all. In my initial message, when I brought up pride, I was referring to the whole, including myself. My intention was not to target or accuse anyone, I just wanted to smooth things over.

I am sorry for the abuses suffered, now I understand why this predisposition to adopt the defensive mode.

All the best!

 

[Perry Staltic]

All the things you define as pride are obviously bad things. I don't know if you initially brought up "pride" in reference to me, but if you did I'm not sure how you'd ascribe these pride traits, as you define them, to anything I've done.

To me, pride is self worth and self trust. The other person in this thread, and others in another thread over the past two days enacted a cultic group psychology response towards me because I expressed concern or questioned something. One that I'm very familiar with. When you call them out on it, they resort to all kinds of logical manipulations that they themselves are likely not even aware of. I even had a guy today trying to persuade me that my worldview and way of processing information will lead me astray.

With these types of people they always put on a pretense of intellectualism or rationalism or compassion, until their unadulterated bitterness eventually reveals itself.

There are *lots* of people like this in the world. And I'm still in the process of decoding it and being aware of it. It's my cue to spell it out in real time their logical fallacies. To not let any manipulation slide. And I believe I'm pretty good at it now.

Yes, I know it sounds strange to focus on that, but I overcame a trauma disorder (CPTSD) a few years ago specifically related to psychological abuse (and with hormone therapy). And early on I would have sensed a disordered dynamic but not trusted myself. But I've spent years now working through it and see these things very clearly now. In fact, I think I'm too conscious of it. Which poses a problem when these different dynamics and manipulations are very normalized in the world.

In the long-term, I know eventually I'll be at a place where I don't feel the need to expose it when I come across it. That it won't activate my system where I believe I'm even in a mild danger, and certainly not the danger of my original trauma.

And in the meantime I try to revere things like anger, because anger is a body signal of needing to protect yourself. At least I'm conscious of what I experience. And I know I didn't have to go in this level of detail, but being on this forum the past two days was very activating for me, directly because a handful of people were implementing (unconscious?) group think strategies and manipulations toward me. And it's "pride" that I lacked in my past life, a lack of true self trust/respect, and I would have just caved to those group dynamics and believed the things I've been accused of.

I'm also learning more and more that I just don't process information in a standard way. And that apparently caused some confusion for some people as well.

I think you are overly sensitive due to your background and are projecting things you fear.