Covid 19 Part XXIII-33,444 in ROI(1,792 deaths) 9,541 in NI(577 deaths)(22/09)Read OP

TonyMaloney

TonyMaloney wrote: »

were you just thumbing through the Tennessee Star when you stumbled upon this article, Woody?

USA doing a lot of testing.

Good to compare notes.:P

TonyMaloney

LessOutragePlz wrote: »

Who?

pretty sure Dec was talking to me

relax

Azatadine

declanflynn wrote: »

another nut case

The Oxford professor is a nut case? Come on now.....

About time our esteemed professors were challenged by peers. Far too much bias and unchallenged theories out there at the moment.

Gods Gift

Professor Luke o neill just sold the company he co founded for €400 million.

OscarMIlde

ACitizenErased wrote: »

How are you calling a HSE response BS? Did you not read De Gascuns Twitter thread? They can't distinguish between low load and false positives.


"A high Ct value (indicating a low virus burden) does not and cannot distinguish between a virus load on the way up (e.g. in a pre-symptomatic individual), a virus load on the way down (e.g. in a recovering individual), a poorly taken specimen, and a false positive result."

Exactly. Those are results at the limit of detection. They are barely detecting any covid 19 RNA. However, they are detecting some covid 19 RNA. If there was control gene you could definitively say 'that swab was good enough so we can say there is barely any virus detected from the late CT'. Then ponder what that means in real terms. The virus invades a cell, takes over it's machinery to create viral copies of itself, which then spill out and invade neighbouring cells. If a swab produces a weak result that we know from a control gene is definitely not due to a poor swab, we still don't know whether that low viral amount is due to A) a newly infected person where virus is still multiplying within cells and yet to reach the limit of detection, or whether it is a patient in recovery where viral levels are diminished due to the bodies immune response.

We are in an even more invidious position with covid 19 as there is no control gene to control for a poor swab, so now we add option C) to our list of possibilities, the patient has high levels of covid 19, but the swab didn't gather enough sample to effectively detect.

Now, given that most people being tested are either close contacts of confirmed cases or symptomatic people, and the RT-PCR test is not erroneously amplifying non-specific sequences, I would be fairly confident this discussion of false positives is a complete red herring. Mainly propagated by people extrapolating too much with the little knowledge they have.

fritzelly

Martina1991 wrote: »

They said the FP rate is 0.7% to 0.8%

0.7/10,000 tests = 70
0.8/10,000 tests = 80

Thats where they got those numbers but dividing by the total number of tests isn't right.

It should be 0.7 or 0.8 divided by the number of positive swabs.

Saying different here
https://thecritic.co.uk/matt-hancock-obstinate-or-innumerate/

The 0.8 is on the total tested

ACitizenErased

HSE Daily Operations Update
94 in hospital, increase of 4.
Dublin Hospitals: 60 (+1)
Nationwide: 34 (+3)
5 confirmed cases in hospitals today - 2 in Mater, 1 each in Connolly, Mullingar, St. James, Beaumont and Cavan.
16 in ICU, decrease of 1.
8 ventilated, decrease of 1.

declanflynn

Azatadine wrote: »

The Oxford professor is a nut case? Come on now.....

About time our esteemed professors were challenged by peers. Far too much bias and unchallenged theories out there at the moment.

I agree, but jeysus not by people who are off their heads

LessOutragePlz

declanflynn wrote: »

You

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SwlkumcRf6w

Is this Spanish doctor a nutcase too?

It's very telling that you resort to name calling when you're beloved experts are challenged on their viewpoints and the narrative that is pushed is called into question.

I'm sorry to tell but they is going to be an awful lot of nutcases once people realise the truth and start calling people out in their bullshiit.

petes

declanflynn wrote: »

I agree, but jeysus not by people who are off their heads

Who was off their head? Were you off your head watching it? She asked him to qualify an answer and he hadn't a notion what to say, looked like a deer in headlights. About time someone questioned these claims and it's certainly not going to be done by anyone in rte.

Martina1991

ACitizenErased wrote:

Does a specificity of 99.2 to 99.3 mean that 0.7 to 0.8% of people who don't have the disease (IE whatever's left over after the actual positives) test positive? I thought the specificity of a test is its ability to designate an individual who does not have a disease as negative. Which means that it designates 99.2-99.3 of those who don't have it as negative, the rest as positive?

The question is:
How many people who got a positive result were falsely told they were positve

Answer e.g.: 0.8%
So 0.8% of the people who got a positive result were false.

Not 0.8% of every one who was tested.

TonyMaloney

LessOutragePlz wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SwlkumcRf6w

Is this Spanish doctor a nutcase too?

It's very telling that you resort to name calling when you're beloved experts are challenged on their viewpoints and the narrative that is pushed is called into question.

I'm sorry to tell but they is going to be an awful lot of nutcases once people realise the truth and start calling people out in their bullshiit.

that video is over a month out of date, hot shot

gmisk

Azatadine wrote: »

The Oxford professor is a nut case? Come on now.....

About time our esteemed professors were challenged by peers. Far too much bias and unchallenged theories out there at the moment.

She is a nutcase...just like that loon from UCD Dolores Cahill...it doesn't matter where she is from.

declanflynn

LessOutragePlz wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SwlkumcRf6w

Is this Spanish doctor a nutcase too?

It's very telling that you resort to name calling when you're beloved experts are challenged on their viewpoints and the narrative that is pushed is called into question.

I'm sorry to tell but they is going to be an awful lot of nutcases once people realise the truth and start calling people out in their bullshiit.

if you believe that bull**** theres no hope for you

funnydoggy

Layman here - does this mean they're running through the PCR tests loads of times making it really sensitive? So we're getting a lot of false positives?

declanflynn

petes wrote: »

Who was off their head? Were you off your head watching it? She asked him to qualify an answer and he hadn't a notion what to say, looked like a deer in headlights. About time someone questioned these claims and it's certainly not going to be done by anyone in rte.

she was all rte could afford, probably just off the boat from India with fake papers

LessOutragePlz

declanflynn wrote: »

if you believe that bull**** theres no hope for you

Hahahaha so you only believe RTE and a certain group of experts but not an ICU doctor that is exactly working in the hospital.

Makes perfect sense really since someone people can't be saved from their own ignorance.

growleaves

declanflynn wrote: »

she was all rte could afford, probably just off the boat from India with fake papers

Ah so you're only trolling. Fair enough

Polar101

LessOutragePlz wrote: »

Is this Spanish doctor a nutcase too?.

I don't know, but I generally wouldn't watch a Youtube video if they have "OMG" or "unbelievable" in the title (or "truth"). Every time I've done that, I get a video with a shouty voice ramming down an opinion, rather than a balanced view.

<link dump deleted>

Thierry12

Gods Gift wrote: »

Professor Luke o neill just sold the company he co founded for €400 million.

The wolf on the hill is never as hungry as the wolf climbing hill

TonyMaloney

declanflynn wrote: »

she was all rte could afford, probably just off the boat from India with fake papers

yeesh

that's some nasty **** declan

Widdensushi

funnydoggy wrote: »

Layman here - does this mean they're running through the PCR tests loads of times making it really sensitive? So we're getting a lot of false positives?

It's irrelevant, with so many being found with no symptoms, the numbers to watch are icu and deaths, we should only get case numbers once or twice a week

declanflynn

LessOutragePlz wrote: »

Hahahaha so you only believe RTE and a certain group of experts but not an ICU doctor that is exactly working in the hospital.

Makes perfect sense really since someone people can't be saved from their own ignorance.

how do u know he is a doctor?

Martina1991

fritzelly wrote:

Saying different here

That person thinks 91% of cases are false positives? And that doesnt sound crazy?


So months ago people were convinced they had covid, tested negative and some were saying sure they're probably false negatives.

Our criteria was narrowed to detect as many cases as possible and yet we couldn't find them all with lower capacity at the time.

And now the conversation has moved on to cycle thresholds and how suddenly the cases that we are detecting are wrong as well.

We've gone from not being good enough at finding cases to pulling them out of thin air.

???

TonyMaloney

Deleted User wrote: »

https://twitter.com/BothaBoy/status/1308507098490245133?s=20

Do you think everyone working in medicine is an idiot?

GooglePlus

[Deleted User] wrote: »

https://twitter.com/BothaBoy/status/1308507098490245133?s=20

I stabbed myself in the eyes when I got to the word Overlord, had to use voice to text for this. Cheers.

Allinall

Gods Gift wrote: »

Professor Luke o neill just sold the company he co founded for €400 million.

The company he founded was just sold for €400 million.

Massive difference.

LessOutragePlz

declanflynn wrote: »

she was all rte could afford, probably just off the boat from India with fake papers

Wow racist much?

froog

Gods Gift wrote: »

Professor Luke o neill just sold the company he co founded for €400 million.

Fair play to him. Great to see an irish person having success in his field.