As an overweight 74 yr old who barely sleeps, Trump is of the higher risk category who we should be focusing our efforts on- especially since he's POTUS.
It's the 20 yr olds in good shape testing positive that are irrelevant.
Hell, even in-shape Melania who is 50(!!) is of little concern.
And yet even his symptoms so far have been a mild fever which has broken and feeling mildly fatigued. From the sounds of it I felt worse symptoms from the cold I caught at the beginning of the year.
This speaks to multiple factors, the most important is it gives credence to the probability the virus was man made. 1 the virus longevity is far shorter than most and the symptoms severity have lessened almost incredulously when transferring through hosts. 2 the therapeutics and prophylactics are making a difference. 3 the WHO, CDC, and DNC have made the Covid in America far worse with their actions and with far greater casualties, not even counting the economic and secondary illness deaths that are going to occur due to these policies for years to come.
Around 10% test positive on average, with it doubling in hotspots and cutting in half or more in cool areas. Since most doctors don't get that you may not test positive until 4-8 days after symptoms, the tests are often administered too early, and they're loathe to administer followup tests because of cost, and admission of improper treatment.
Trump didn't make an error. He got sick, like we're all going to. People are too stupid to contain this, so the only option is for it to run its course.
My wife has been working with old folk for the duration of this whatever it is...and she did a test cause she felt like shit and that came back negative.
I don't know what tests this person thinks they're using but the percentage of people getting tested who test positive here in the Netherlands is 3.1% (58728 out of 1880036 tests as of last Tuesday).
I had a family member who suspected allergy/hay fever problems or perhaps a mild cold. Thought they needed a Covid test. I told them no, don't get one and that I would not be getting Covid test for no reason, ever. I've had allergies my whole life and I can tell allergies from the cold.
Don't listen to me of course and go have a test done. Now despite no test results yet because they have "symptoms" they have been told to quarantine, can't go to work, and got a call from the health department to provide a bunch of information. If the test comes back negative they still are "required" to do these things.
I'd probably just totally ignore the rules except perhaps the working from home part, except I already work from home. I do think if I ever feel the need to get a test I'm going to suddenly become an "undocumented immigrant" with no ID.
They boosted the gain on the PCR tests so much that they're picking up stray non-viable RNA fragments that may also be indicative that you had previously had the virus but are no longer contagious. And using that highly sensitive test as a standalone indication of whether or not you are infected instead of using it as one datapoint in an overall clinical assessment (which would include whether or not the patient is presenting symptoms).
Interesting discussion here. Each "cycle" being referred to is effectively boosting the gain of the test by a factor of 2. So when research suggests using a test with 25-30 cycles to assess disease, a test running at 40+ cycles is 1024-32768 times more sensitive.
Given that Trump has probably been subject to a constant regime of testing that eliminates the possibility of him having had and recovered from Covid-19 undetected, a highly sensitive test just means catching the virus' presence in the pre-clinical stage and allowing treatments to be started sooner. In a high risk, high importance patient I see nothing wrong with using a test that can pick up small amounts of viral RNA that can very likely develop into a full-blown infection and get a headstart.
Also, I find it incredibly hard to take the claims of some junk-tier blog that host such literary gems as "face diapers" and a pathological phobia of needles over the data I've actually seen reported by people at least in the business of healthcare, not auto-sales, showing that most tests carried out are still negative.
As an overweight 74 yr old who barely sleeps, Trump is of the higher risk category who we should be focusing our efforts on- especially since he's POTUS.
It's the 20 yr olds in good shape testing positive that are irrelevant.
Hell, even in-shape Melania who is 50(!!) is of little concern.
And yet even his symptoms so far have been a mild fever which has broken and feeling mildly fatigued. From the sounds of it I felt worse symptoms from the cold I caught at the beginning of the year.
This speaks to multiple factors, the most important is it gives credence to the probability the virus was man made. 1 the virus longevity is far shorter than most and the symptoms severity have lessened almost incredulously when transferring through hosts. 2 the therapeutics and prophylactics are making a difference. 3 the WHO, CDC, and DNC have made the Covid in America far worse with their actions and with far greater casualties, not even counting the economic and secondary illness deaths that are going to occur due to these policies for years to come.
Around 10% test positive on average, with it doubling in hotspots and cutting in half or more in cool areas. Since most doctors don't get that you may not test positive until 4-8 days after symptoms, the tests are often administered too early, and they're loathe to administer followup tests because of cost, and admission of improper treatment.
Trump didn't make an error. He got sick, like we're all going to. People are too stupid to contain this, so the only option is for it to run its course.
By the time "science" realises there is a pandemic, it is already too late.
My wife has been working with old folk for the duration of this whatever it is...and she did a test cause she felt like shit and that came back negative.
I don't know what tests this person thinks they're using but the percentage of people getting tested who test positive here in the Netherlands is 3.1% (58728 out of 1880036 tests as of last Tuesday).
I had a family member who suspected allergy/hay fever problems or perhaps a mild cold. Thought they needed a Covid test. I told them no, don't get one and that I would not be getting Covid test for no reason, ever. I've had allergies my whole life and I can tell allergies from the cold.
Don't listen to me of course and go have a test done. Now despite no test results yet because they have "symptoms" they have been told to quarantine, can't go to work, and got a call from the health department to provide a bunch of information. If the test comes back negative they still are "required" to do these things.
I'd probably just totally ignore the rules except perhaps the working from home part, except I already work from home. I do think if I ever feel the need to get a test I'm going to suddenly become an "undocumented immigrant" with no ID.
thats why im not testing, why stand in a queue with a bunch of people who have probably got it
What are you on about. 95% of tests here come back negative.
They boosted the gain on the PCR tests so much that they're picking up stray non-viable RNA fragments that may also be indicative that you had previously had the virus but are no longer contagious. And using that highly sensitive test as a standalone indication of whether or not you are infected instead of using it as one datapoint in an overall clinical assessment (which would include whether or not the patient is presenting symptoms).
Interesting discussion here. Each "cycle" being referred to is effectively boosting the gain of the test by a factor of 2. So when research suggests using a test with 25-30 cycles to assess disease, a test running at 40+ cycles is 1024-32768 times more sensitive.
Given that Trump has probably been subject to a constant regime of testing that eliminates the possibility of him having had and recovered from Covid-19 undetected, a highly sensitive test just means catching the virus' presence in the pre-clinical stage and allowing treatments to be started sooner. In a high risk, high importance patient I see nothing wrong with using a test that can pick up small amounts of viral RNA that can very likely develop into a full-blown infection and get a headstart.
Also, I find it incredibly hard to take the claims of some junk-tier blog that host such literary gems as "face diapers" and a pathological phobia of needles over the data I've actually seen reported by people at least in the business of healthcare, not auto-sales, showing that most tests carried out are still negative.