ChiefsPlanet Mobile
Page 3415 of 3903
« First < 2415291533153365340534113412341334143415 3416341734183419342534653515 > Last »
Nzoner's Game Room>***NON-POLITICAL COVID-19 Discussion Thread***
JakeF 10:28 PM 02-26-2020
A couple of reminders...

Originally Posted by Bwana:
Once again, don't come in this thread with some kind of political agenda, or you will be shown the door. If you want to go that route, there is a thread about this in DC.
Originally Posted by Dartgod:
People, there is a lot of good information in this thread, let's try to keep the petty bickering to a minimum.

We all have varying opinions about the impact of this, the numbers, etc. We will all never agree with each other. But we can all keep it civil.

Thanks!

Click here for the original OP:

Spoiler!

[Reply]
Donger 05:48 PM 01-21-2021
Originally Posted by DaFace:
Don't see why not. As long as we're sticking to discussion about facts and not about our opinions of people, it's fine.
Thanks. The reporters ask some CP-questionable questions at the end, so fair warning:


[Reply]
DaFace 05:49 PM 01-21-2021
Originally Posted by Donger:
Thanks. The reporters ask some CP-questionable questions at the end, so fair warning:

Got a summary? I have no interest in watching an hour-long press conference. :-)
[Reply]
Donger 06:06 PM 01-21-2021
Originally Posted by DaFace:
Got a summary? I have no interest in watching an hour-long press conference. :-)
He's only on for 15 minutes.

Basically that he thinks the SA variant is more worrisome than the UK variant, and that it's not proven to be here yet. But that he's confident that the existing vaccines will still be effective against them but perhaps with reduced efficacy.

Believes 100 million vaccinations in 100 days is realistic.

Will be completely open and transparent. Science and evidence-based.
[Reply]
TLO 06:30 PM 01-21-2021
Thanks for posting. Some good information there from Fauci.

Hopefully the vaccines we have will continue to show a high degree of efficacy. If not, at least we can quickly tweak the mRNA vaccines. I'd imagine that would be bad news for vaccines that aren't of the mRNA platform though.
[Reply]
ChiliConCarnage 06:47 PM 01-21-2021
Originally Posted by TLO:
Thanks for posting. Some good information there from Fauci.
Yeah, it was decent. Slap him down as another person who has no idea why were vaccinating slower than expected. A little frustrating, tbh. How are we supposed to fix the issue if noone can point out the issue consistently?
[Reply]
petegz28 06:51 PM 01-21-2021

[Reply]
TLO 06:52 PM 01-21-2021
Originally Posted by petegz28:
Why did it take them so long??
[Reply]
petegz28 06:56 PM 01-21-2021
Originally Posted by TLO:
Why did it take them so long??
TLO I can't get into that without risking getting the ban. I think it is rather ironic that we have known this for months and they are just now choosing to say something about it.

I will leave it at that.
[Reply]
Donger 06:58 PM 01-21-2021
Originally Posted by TLO:
Why did it take them so long??
It didn't. The recent release was a reminder, not new information.
[Reply]
petegz28 07:00 PM 01-21-2021
Originally Posted by Donger:
It didn't. The recent release was a reminder, not new information.
"Has now released guidance...." is a reminder?

Not sure how you square that circle, bro.
[Reply]
Pasta Little Brioni 07:05 PM 01-21-2021
Originally Posted by Donger:
It didn't. The recent release was a reminder, not new information.
Are you fucking kidding me with this? :-) Good lord. You mumble about cases for months on end when most were a pile of bunk
[Reply]
Donger 07:06 PM 01-21-2021
Originally Posted by petegz28:
"Has now released guidance...." is a reminder?

Not sure how you square that circle, bro.
No. That's what happens when you believe everything you see on Twitter.

If you actually take the time to read the actual source:

https://www.who.int/news/item/20-01-...-users-2020-05

Product type: Nucleic acid testing (NAT) technologies that use polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for detection of SARS-CoV-2

Date: 13 January 2021

WHO-identifier: 2020/5, version 2

Target audience: laboratory professionals and users of IVDs.

Purpose of this notice: clarify information previously provided by WHO. This notice supersedes WHO Information Notice for In Vitro Diagnostic Medical Device (IVD) Users 2020/05 version 1, issued 14 December 2020.

Description of the problem: WHO requests users to follow the instructions for use (IFU) when interpreting results for specimens tested using PCR methodology.

Users of IVDs must read and follow the IFU carefully to determine if manual adjustment of the PCR positivity threshold is recommended by the manufacturer.

WHO guidance Diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2 states that careful interpretation of weak positive results is needed (1). The cycle threshold (Ct) needed to detect virus is inversely proportional to the patient’s viral load. Where test results do not correspond with the clinical presentation, a new specimen should be taken and retested using the same or different NAT technology.

WHO reminds IVD users that disease prevalence alters the predictive value of test results; as disease prevalence decreases, the risk of false positive increases (2). This means that the probability that a person who has a positive result (SARS-CoV-2 detected) is truly infected with SARS-CoV-2 decreases as prevalence decreases, irrespective of the claimed specificity.

That's how, bro.
[Reply]
Donger 07:09 PM 01-21-2021
Originally Posted by Pasta Giant Meatball:
Are you ****ing kidding me with this? :-) Good lord. You mumble about cases for months on end when most were a pile of bunk
Its all a hoax, right!!?

Moron.
[Reply]
petegz28 07:10 PM 01-21-2021
Originally Posted by Donger:
No. That's what happens when you believe everything you see on Twitter.

If you actually take the time to read the actual source:

https://www.who.int/news/item/20-01-...-users-2020-05

Product type: Nucleic acid testing (NAT) technologies that use polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for detection of SARS-CoV-2

Date: 13 January 2021

WHO-identifier: 2020/5, version 2

Target audience: laboratory professionals and users of IVDs.

Purpose of this notice: clarify information previously provided by WHO. This notice supersedes WHO Information Notice for In Vitro Diagnostic Medical Device (IVD) Users 2020/05 version 1, issued 14 December 2020.

Description of the problem: WHO requests users to follow the instructions for use (IFU) when interpreting results for specimens tested using PCR methodology.

Users of IVDs must read and follow the IFU carefully to determine if manual adjustment of the PCR positivity threshold is recommended by the manufacturer.

WHO guidance Diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2 states that careful interpretation of weak positive results is needed (1). The cycle threshold (Ct) needed to detect virus is inversely proportional to the patient’s viral load. Where test results do not correspond with the clinical presentation, a new specimen should be taken and retested using the same or different NAT technology.

WHO reminds IVD users that disease prevalence alters the predictive value of test results; as disease prevalence decreases, the risk of false positive increases (2). This means that the probability that a person who has a positive result (SARS-CoV-2 detected) is truly infected with SARS-CoV-2 decreases as prevalence decreases, irrespective of the claimed specificity.

That's how, bro.


The message that was posted said nothing about a reminder. Sorry, but that is just that. But carry on....
[Reply]
Pasta Little Brioni 07:12 PM 01-21-2021
Originally Posted by Donger:
Its all a hoax, right!!?

Moron.
So now you are lying again
[Reply]
Page 3415 of 3903
« First < 2415291533153365340534113412341334143415 3416341734183419342534653515 > Last »
Up