One essential step in method characterization is to determine the limit of detection (LoD). As this requires a quantitative readout from the assay, one needs to use a precisely quantified reference substance as calibrant, ie it needs to be known in the reference that the SARS CoV2 RNA genome is exactly present at a concentration of X copies/µl.
I am with you here, if people really knew what was in them they would never have one. Does not help that the medical foundations are immune from prosecution for any side affects. I know this will cause a fury of abuse on here but just do the research its all out there.Well each to their own. Personally I wouldn't ever have one.
the people who blindly follow instructions without care for their own well being astounds me ! Igrorance is bliss methodology ?I am with you here, if people really knew what was in them they would never have one. Does not help that the medical foundations are immune from prosecution for any side affects. I know this will cause a fury of abuse on here but just do the research its all out there.
I believe the antigen test (have you got COVID-19 virus) is pretty accurate in that it detects the specific COVID-19 virus rather than any coronavirus. The antibody test (have you had it) I think can pick up other types. It's the former that counts for the stats as I understand it.Given that some on here seem well versed in this stuff, I would appreciate some greater insight.
My thoughts on testing run like this.
It is my understanding that the test we are using at this time is in no way specific for Covid 19. Any corona virus will give a positive including some that are no more than the common cold, given the enhanced sensitivity (high number of repetitions) of the test, this does not even have to be a 'live' virus, it may simply be 'fragments' or traces of a minor infection that occurred weeks, possibly months ago.
Given this methodology, the more tests you run, the more positives you get, it is these results that define the number of 'cases' or 'infections' and are used to drive the lockdown agenda. This is despite the number of people suffering real illness being quite small and the death rate from covid 19 itself being tiny.
That is my understanding in layman's terms, more information is always welcome.
buy Covid19 as never been identified as it so jow can it be detected.I believe the antigen test (have you got COVID-19 virus) is pretty accurate in that it detects the specific COVID-19 virus rather than any coronavirus. The antibody test (have you had it) I think can pick up other types. It's the former that counts for the stats as I understand it.
I don't think that's quite right. The antibody test checks to see if you have had the virus, ie has your immune system generated antibodies in response to the infection. My understanding is that it is this test that is not widely available, or at least not widely used (not sure which). The antigen test checks to see if you currently have the virus, with a positive result generating the recommendation to self-isolate and all that jazz so that you don't pass it on. It also prompts the trace bit of 'test and trace'.The antigen test is supposed to be more accurate but is not that widely available.
It is not the test used to determine the 'infection rate' on which all the governments ridiculous decisions are made, that is the antibody test.
This is used because of it's ability to generate lots of 'cases', which for some reason is what the government wants.
I suppose the logic is that people with positive results (ie infections) can pass it on to other people, regardless of how ill they get. In terms of public policy response that gives you the numerator for whatever ratios are considered salient. There is clearly some disagreement about what the substance of the responses should be, and indeed about the thresholds or other triggers for those responses.Thanks Steve. I shall do some more reading.
My concern is that, whichever test is being used, the figures for the number of 'cases' bears no resemblance to the number of people getting ill, let alone dieing.
Test lots of people, generate lots of cases that justifies lockdown. No one even has to get ill, it's all in the 'numbers'.
I agree with a lot of what he says, but like you think there may be another reason for keeping us locked down. I guess in time, history will tell us what the real reason was. But logic says that this lockdown is causing more problems than the virus is. I have seen a few things on other boards were it is claimed that around the world people are making legal claims to try and change things as this pandemic cannot be supported by science.Sorry. managed to loose the link.
Just seems to me the vaccine agenda is being pushed through fear without due diligence of the safety of the vaccines being used.Careful Richard, you are morphing into Bnet there.
That said, I think the vaccine agenda is concealing something very nasty, just not quite sure exactly what it is.
Had mine this morning with no ill effects so far.But does the flu jab hurt?
I had mine about 6 weeks weeks ago. Apparently it contains dead babies but I didn't suffer any major side effects.Had mine this morning with no ill effects so far.
It may well contain genetically modified stem cells. Foetal tissue is a primary source of such cells.I had mine about 6 weeks weeks ago. Apparently it contains dead babies but I didn't suffer any major side effects.