CDC Busted for inflating death numbers

[Faun]

No way!

BUSTED: CDC Inflated COVID Numbers, Accused of Violating Federal Law

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) stands accused of violating federal law by inflating Coronavirus fatality numbers, according to stunning information obtained by NATIONAL FILE. CDC illegally inflated the COVID fatality number by at least 1,600 percent as the 2020 presidential...

nationalfile.com

Why would the CDC want to inflate numbers?

LOL

You're right ... no way.

Your nationalfile.com article claims the CDC "stands accused" of falsifying fatality numbers, only when you actually read the article, they're the ones accusing the CDC and nationalfile.com is nothing but a rightwingnut conspiracy site. Even worse, if you actually read the article, their complaint is about PCR testing producing false negatives. That affects the number of cases.

I guess you didn't realize if the number of cases is really lower than what's being reported, that increases the fatality rate.

So tell me the ratio of false negatives to false positives given a cycle threshold of 40?

And why use a ct of 40 when it is common knowledge that anything over 35 is going to be meaningless?

It's relative. As the number of cases decreases and the number of deaths remains constant, the fatality rate increases.

 

[Faun]

What happened to the flu this year?

It's down because people are taking precautions they've not taken in the past; such as social distancing, wearing masks, working remotely, avoiding crowded places, eating outdoors, washing their hands more regularly, gathering in smaller numbers, staying at home, etc...

 

[Juicin]

It also was exposed to the air, and the sensitivity is the problem you pleb.

Just how much COVID do you think is floating in the air?

At 35 cycles it's everywhere you would be tested.

Like i said a fart could set it off

Just google about what normal PCR cycle ranges are.

It all depends on the cycles. You need to google if you don't understand. They are jacking up the sensitivity to unworldly levels at 35 cycles.

I don’t have to google it. I’ve done PCR assays for almost 20 years.

Has anyone tested your hypothesis of a fart being able to set off a PCR assay?

No but i got that line from some one who is in the same industry.

If you know this then why would you take a 35 cycle test seriously? It's absurd

Maybe that's appropriate in some scenarios but not an aerosol virus.

I would expect your shit to carry the virus but yes i haven't seen anything that confirmed that. There probably is evidence on that.

“Probably” is a dangerous term in science.

The virus is only aerosolized in specific circumstances. It’s not just lingering in the air all over the place and the swabs are only exposed to open air for mere seconds anyway.

Any lab test is verified and validated for accuracy. These tests have been done. Assuming 35 cycles is too many is just conjecture unless there’s data to support it.

Yea like people fucking breathing all over a hospital or clinic where you're getting tested

It's everywhere the dispersion patterns for all aersols are crazy.

If you want to prevent that you have to do a lot of work with pressure and air flow. Which the place you're getting tested does not have. And even if it did it would certainly have to slow down.

I'm pretty confident that it will be in your shit. Just like i was pretty confident a corona virus wasn't a big deal. Surprise it wasn't.

Now everyone is pretending they understand science as they track colds across the planet....What the fuck is wrong with people like you? You should be part of the cohort laughing at this shit.

Just because there isn't enough in the air to make you sick doesn't mean it won't pop a PCR test that is cycled 35 times

I mean, I have an undergraduate degree in biochemistry, a medical degree, and two board certifications. So I think I understand science a bit more than most people.

The coronavirus is indeed a big deal. Sorry to burst your bubble.

No, there's not enough floating randomly around in the air to "pop" a PCR test that's cycled 35 times. If you're in a hospital or clinic, people have their faces covered. Aerosolization happens under some circumstances, like using NIPPV or sometimes singing loudly. Everything else is droplet, which fall out of the air in seconds. The swab is taken out of a vial, put into your nose and put back in a vial. The time it's exposed to air is miniscule.

What gives you the idea that you understand this issue? Do you even know how PCR works?

The corona virus being a big deal is an ethical question

Your degrees will not help you. And i'm not impressed by bio ethicists* anyway, that's not how we actually decide what is ethical at a political level. And quite frankly all the science applicable to this is so shallow and information* is so easy to access some one with a HS education could have just an accurate view as a MD at this point.

I didn't take gen eds so i had to bow to appeals to authority from overly sensitive data entry experts. Which is what most medical professionals are. I can read all the same stuff you can. You have no relevant expertise on these questions. We all know what PCR tests are now, time for your expertise to be relevant was about a year ago. We could all do your job with a few days training now.

Even if you take the tests seriously and consider ALL pneumonia deaths with a positive test as caused by covid. Which they no doubt are not. You're still only doubling normal numbers.

In a nation where 2.5 million die a year it's a meaningless blip, risk profiles have barely changed at all.

Nursing homes were just as vulnerable in 2019 just no one gave a fuck. New colds ripping through the nation all the time

And from what i've seen your peers disagree with you.

The only reason I brought up my credentials is because you intimated that I had no scientific knowledge.

You may indeed read the same stuff as me, but I doubt it. For starters, most people can’t access medical literate and those that do read it don’t necessarily have the background to understand it. I don’t understand construction blueprints because I’m not trained, so I wouldn’t offer my opinion over that or someone else’s.

I'm not one to respect IP

35 is from as far as i can see insane. Which is why most countries don't run them that high and we have reduced the recommended to 27

edit - Media has finally started admitting this too. I suspect everyone knew it long before tho

Your Coronavirus Test Is Positive. Maybe It Shouldn’t Be. (Published 2020)

The usual diagnostic tests may simply be too sensitive and too slow to contain the spread of the virus.

www.nytimes.com

What information led you to believe 35 is “insane”?

Besides, every lab has been setting their own standards.

Listening to people who aren't sheep?

You know 35 is high, they changed their guidance.

And it was never mandated so it doesn't surprise me labs were just ignoring the obviously shitty advice.

edit - Correlation Between 3790 Quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction–Positives Samples and Positive Cell Cultures, Including 1941 Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Isolates

3 fucking percent of values at 35 can be cultured. 3%.....?

ANd people wonder why we have the most cases in the world? Hmmm it's almost like that's the first fucking question that should come to mind as soon as anyhone starts comparing these stats. "i wonder what the standard is"

Yet somehow you don't know shit after a year?

What the fuck is wrong with you?

 

[Briss]

What happened to the flu this year?

It's down because people are taking precautions they've not taken in the past; such as social distancing, wearing masks, working remotely, avoiding crowded places, eating outdoors, washing their hands more regularly, gathering in smaller numbers, staying at home, etc...

I see. So, when it comes to the flu, we all did a great job doing all the shyt we were ordered to do. But when it comes to the coronavirus, we didn't do a great job doing all the shyt we were ordered to do. Okay.

 

[Briss]

No way!

BUSTED: CDC Inflated COVID Numbers, Accused of Violating Federal Law

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) stands accused of violating federal law by inflating Coronavirus fatality numbers, according to stunning information obtained by NATIONAL FILE. CDC illegally inflated the COVID fatality number by at least 1,600 percent as the 2020 presidential...

nationalfile.com

Why would the CDC want to inflate numbers?

LOL

You're right ... no way.

Your nationalfile.com article claims the CDC "stands accused" of falsifying fatality numbers, only when you actually read the article, they're the ones accusing the CDC and nationalfile.com is nothing but a rightwingnut conspiracy site. Even worse, if you actually read the article, their complaint is about PCR testing producing false negatives. That affects the number of cases.

I guess you didn't realize if the number of cases is really lower than what's being reported, that increases the fatality rate.

So tell me the ratio of false negatives to false positives given a cycle threshold of 40?

And why use a ct of 40 when it is common knowledge that anything over 35 is going to be meaningless?

It's relative. As the number of cases decreases and the number of deaths remains constant, the fatality rate increases.

Why use a ct of 40 when it is common knowledge that anything over 35 is going to be meaningless?

Oh, and since we've virtually eliminated the flu by wearing masks, are you going to advocate for masks next flu season? Or, are you going to ignore all of those preventable deaths from the flu, and go mask-free, threatening the lives of everyone around you?

 

[Faun]

What happened to the flu this year?

It's down because people are taking precautions they've not taken in the past; such as social distancing, wearing masks, working remotely, avoiding crowded places, eating outdoors, washing their hands more regularly, gathering in smaller numbers, staying at home, etc...

I see. So, when it comes to the flu, we all did a great job doing all the shyt we were ordered to do. But when it comes to the coronavirus, we didn't do a great job doing all the shyt we were ordered to do. Okay.

Coronavirus seems to spread easier than the flu.

 

[Faun]

No way!

BUSTED: CDC Inflated COVID Numbers, Accused of Violating Federal Law

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) stands accused of violating federal law by inflating Coronavirus fatality numbers, according to stunning information obtained by NATIONAL FILE. CDC illegally inflated the COVID fatality number by at least 1,600 percent as the 2020 presidential...

nationalfile.com

Why would the CDC want to inflate numbers?

LOL

You're right ... no way.

Your nationalfile.com article claims the CDC "stands accused" of falsifying fatality numbers, only when you actually read the article, they're the ones accusing the CDC and nationalfile.com is nothing but a rightwingnut conspiracy site. Even worse, if you actually read the article, their complaint is about PCR testing producing false negatives. That affects the number of cases.

I guess you didn't realize if the number of cases is really lower than what's being reported, that increases the fatality rate.

So tell me the ratio of false negatives to false positives given a cycle threshold of 40?

And why use a ct of 40 when it is common knowledge that anything over 35 is going to be meaningless?

It's relative. As the number of cases decreases and the number of deaths remains constant, the fatality rate increases.

Why use a ct of 40 when it is common knowledge that anything over 35 is going to be meaningless?

Oh, and since we've virtually eliminated the flu by wearing masks, are you going to advocate for masks next flu season? Or, are you going to ignore all of those preventable deaths from the flu, and go mask-free, threatening the lives of everyone around you?

I didn't condone using a ct of 40, so argue that with someone else who did. As far as wearing masks to help prevent the spread of the flu, no I would not advocate for that as I never have because there is a vaccine for the flu. Just as I won't be advocating for wearing masks because of covid once the vaccine becomes readily available to all who want it.

 

[Briss]

No way!

BUSTED: CDC Inflated COVID Numbers, Accused of Violating Federal Law

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) stands accused of violating federal law by inflating Coronavirus fatality numbers, according to stunning information obtained by NATIONAL FILE. CDC illegally inflated the COVID fatality number by at least 1,600 percent as the 2020 presidential...

nationalfile.com

Why would the CDC want to inflate numbers?

LOL

You're right ... no way.

Your nationalfile.com article claims the CDC "stands accused" of falsifying fatality numbers, only when you actually read the article, they're the ones accusing the CDC and nationalfile.com is nothing but a rightwingnut conspiracy site. Even worse, if you actually read the article, their complaint is about PCR testing producing false negatives. That affects the number of cases.

I guess you didn't realize if the number of cases is really lower than what's being reported, that increases the fatality rate.

So tell me the ratio of false negatives to false positives given a cycle threshold of 40?

And why use a ct of 40 when it is common knowledge that anything over 35 is going to be meaningless?

It's relative. As the number of cases decreases and the number of deaths remains constant, the fatality rate increases.

Why use a ct of 40 when it is common knowledge that anything over 35 is going to be meaningless?

Oh, and since we've virtually eliminated the flu by wearing masks, are you going to advocate for masks next flu season? Or, are you going to ignore all of those preventable deaths from the flu, and go mask-free, threatening the lives of everyone around you?

I didn't condone using a ct of 40, so argue that with someone else who did. As far as wearing masks to help prevent the spread of the flu, no I would not advocate for that as I never have because there is a vaccine for the flu. Just as I won't be advocating for wearing masks because of covid once the vaccine becomes readily available to all who want it.

Yeah, but since you believe that masking up has virtually eliminated the flu, thereby saving maybe 60,000 lives a year, how could you not agree to wear a mask next year?

Does the "vaccine" prevent infection and transmission? And if not, why are you going to take it?

 

[Juicin]

No way!

BUSTED: CDC Inflated COVID Numbers, Accused of Violating Federal Law

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) stands accused of violating federal law by inflating Coronavirus fatality numbers, according to stunning information obtained by NATIONAL FILE. CDC illegally inflated the COVID fatality number by at least 1,600 percent as the 2020 presidential...

nationalfile.com

Why would the CDC want to inflate numbers?

LOL

You're right ... no way.

Your nationalfile.com article claims the CDC "stands accused" of falsifying fatality numbers, only when you actually read the article, they're the ones accusing the CDC and nationalfile.com is nothing but a rightwingnut conspiracy site. Even worse, if you actually read the article, their complaint is about PCR testing producing false negatives. That affects the number of cases.

I guess you didn't realize if the number of cases is really lower than what's being reported, that increases the fatality rate.

So tell me the ratio of false negatives to false positives given a cycle threshold of 40?

And why use a ct of 40 when it is common knowledge that anything over 35 is going to be meaningless?

It's relative. As the number of cases decreases and the number of deaths remains constant, the fatality rate increases.

Why use a ct of 40 when it is common knowledge that anything over 35 is going to be meaningless?

Oh, and since we've virtually eliminated the flu by wearing masks, are you going to advocate for masks next flu season? Or, are you going to ignore all of those preventable deaths from the flu, and go mask-free, threatening the lives of everyone around you?

I didn't condone using a ct of 40, so argue that with someone else who did. As far as wearing masks to help prevent the spread of the flu, no I would not advocate for that as I never have because there is a vaccine for the flu. Just as I won't be advocating for wearing masks because of covid once the vaccine becomes readily available to all who want it.

You understand colds will never go away, right?

Neither will new strains of flu

There is no reason not to do this all 2021, 2022, and forever. ALl the same fears will apply forever.

They're already talking about multiople new strains and variants. Because that's the business we're in now. Tracking colds.

 

[Faun]

No way!

BUSTED: CDC Inflated COVID Numbers, Accused of Violating Federal Law

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) stands accused of violating federal law by inflating Coronavirus fatality numbers, according to stunning information obtained by NATIONAL FILE. CDC illegally inflated the COVID fatality number by at least 1,600 percent as the 2020 presidential...

nationalfile.com

Why would the CDC want to inflate numbers?

LOL

You're right ... no way.

Your nationalfile.com article claims the CDC "stands accused" of falsifying fatality numbers, only when you actually read the article, they're the ones accusing the CDC and nationalfile.com is nothing but a rightwingnut conspiracy site. Even worse, if you actually read the article, their complaint is about PCR testing producing false negatives. That affects the number of cases.

I guess you didn't realize if the number of cases is really lower than what's being reported, that increases the fatality rate.

So tell me the ratio of false negatives to false positives given a cycle threshold of 40?

And why use a ct of 40 when it is common knowledge that anything over 35 is going to be meaningless?

It's relative. As the number of cases decreases and the number of deaths remains constant, the fatality rate increases.

Why use a ct of 40 when it is common knowledge that anything over 35 is going to be meaningless?

Oh, and since we've virtually eliminated the flu by wearing masks, are you going to advocate for masks next flu season? Or, are you going to ignore all of those preventable deaths from the flu, and go mask-free, threatening the lives of everyone around you?

I didn't condone using a ct of 40, so argue that with someone else who did. As far as wearing masks to help prevent the spread of the flu, no I would not advocate for that as I never have because there is a vaccine for the flu. Just as I won't be advocating for wearing masks because of covid once the vaccine becomes readily available to all who want it.

Yeah, but since you believe that masking up has virtually eliminated the flu, thereby saving maybe 60,000 lives a year, how could you not agree to wear a mask next year?

Does the "vaccine" prevent infection and transmission? And if not, why are you going to take it?

Because there's a vaccine for the flu. I believe I already said that.

And of course I will get the covid vaccine. Even though there's a slight chance I can get covid anyway, if I do, it will most likely be less severe and fought off more quickly than had I not gotten the vaccine.

 

[Juicin]

No way!

BUSTED: CDC Inflated COVID Numbers, Accused of Violating Federal Law

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) stands accused of violating federal law by inflating Coronavirus fatality numbers, according to stunning information obtained by NATIONAL FILE. CDC illegally inflated the COVID fatality number by at least 1,600 percent as the 2020 presidential...

nationalfile.com

Why would the CDC want to inflate numbers?

LOL

You're right ... no way.

Your nationalfile.com article claims the CDC "stands accused" of falsifying fatality numbers, only when you actually read the article, they're the ones accusing the CDC and nationalfile.com is nothing but a rightwingnut conspiracy site. Even worse, if you actually read the article, their complaint is about PCR testing producing false negatives. That affects the number of cases.

I guess you didn't realize if the number of cases is really lower than what's being reported, that increases the fatality rate.

So tell me the ratio of false negatives to false positives given a cycle threshold of 40?

And why use a ct of 40 when it is common knowledge that anything over 35 is going to be meaningless?

It's relative. As the number of cases decreases and the number of deaths remains constant, the fatality rate increases.

Why use a ct of 40 when it is common knowledge that anything over 35 is going to be meaningless?

Oh, and since we've virtually eliminated the flu by wearing masks, are you going to advocate for masks next flu season? Or, are you going to ignore all of those preventable deaths from the flu, and go mask-free, threatening the lives of everyone around you?

I didn't condone using a ct of 40, so argue that with someone else who did. As far as wearing masks to help prevent the spread of the flu, no I would not advocate for that as I never have because there is a vaccine for the flu. Just as I won't be advocating for wearing masks because of covid once the vaccine becomes readily available to all who want it.

Yeah, but since you believe that masking up has virtually eliminated the flu, thereby saving maybe 60,000 lives a year, how could you not agree to wear a mask next year?

Does the "vaccine" prevent infection and transmission? And if not, why are you going to take it?

Because there's a vaccine for the flu. I believe I already said that.

And of course I will get the covid vaccine. Even though there's a slight chance I can get covid anyway, if I do, it will most likely be less severe and fought off more quickly than had I not gotten the vaccine.

There is a flu vaccine every year, waht are you talking about? And it's not some holistic thing that catches all flus. It's only certain strains

I guarantee you less people took the flu shot this year because they didn't wanna go out.

Not more. Our lack of flu has nothing to do with more vaccine than usual. Only can be less than what we normally have, and we normally lose tens of thousands to the flu

 

[Juicin]

So, you're saying that it's only conjecture that a PCR cycle threshold of 35 or above is going to be meaningless?

It is. Unless we see the data otherwise.

Well what if I produced a statement from Tony himself saying that a PCR test using a cycle threshold above 35 is going to be meaningless?

Be my guest. Good place to start conversation.

Okay.

". . . If you get a cycle threshold of 35 or more…the chances of it being replication-competent are miniscule…you almost never can culture virus from a 37 threshold cycle…even 36…it’s just dead nucleoids, period.”

That's what Tony said. Do you still contend that the meaninglessness of a PCR test set at over 35 replications is just conjecture?

Also, why did the FDA recommend a cycle threshold of 40? And more importantly, why didn't Tony fill them in on the misleading ct setting?

All that means is that they were previously infected within a marginal period of time. It does not mean that the DNA came from thin air.

I don't recall saying anything about DNA coming from thin air . . .

Anyway, are you telling me that a cycle threshold of 40 is reasonable?

Also, you said that every lab has been setting their own standards. Can you link me to where you learned this? Even more importantly, can you point me in the direction of information concerning which labs set which standards?

That was what the conversation was about. The idea that these people are false positives isn’t true. It’s just that the test reflects previous infection within the previous month, or so.

Fauci was saying that positive tests with high cycle counts are no longer infectious and therefore there’s burden of have to isolate.

Development or lab tests was decentralized from the FDA after they screwed the pooch early on. Part of a trend of the federal government not really taking the lead.

Op-Ed: Why PCR Cycle Threshold Is Useful in Coronavirus Testing

It can help better triage patients, physician argues

www.medpagetoday.com

Hey retard

Are you ashamed of yourself yet a layman knows more than you?

Fucking useless ****

So many medical professionals should die for this

 

[colfax_m]

So, you're saying that it's only conjecture that a PCR cycle threshold of 35 or above is going to be meaningless?

It is. Unless we see the data otherwise.

Well what if I produced a statement from Tony himself saying that a PCR test using a cycle threshold above 35 is going to be meaningless?

Be my guest. Good place to start conversation.

Okay.

". . . If you get a cycle threshold of 35 or more…the chances of it being replication-competent are miniscule…you almost never can culture virus from a 37 threshold cycle…even 36…it’s just dead nucleoids, period.”

That's what Tony said. Do you still contend that the meaninglessness of a PCR test set at over 35 replications is just conjecture?

Also, why did the FDA recommend a cycle threshold of 40? And more importantly, why didn't Tony fill them in on the misleading ct setting?

All that means is that they were previously infected within a marginal period of time. It does not mean that the DNA came from thin air.

I don't recall saying anything about DNA coming from thin air . . .

Anyway, are you telling me that a cycle threshold of 40 is reasonable?

Also, you said that every lab has been setting their own standards. Can you link me to where you learned this? Even more importantly, can you point me in the direction of information concerning which labs set which standards?

That was what the conversation was about. The idea that these people are false positives isn’t true. It’s just that the test reflects previous infection within the previous month, or so.

Fauci was saying that positive tests with high cycle counts are no longer infectious and therefore there’s burden of have to isolate.

Development or lab tests was decentralized from the FDA after they screwed the pooch early on. Part of a trend of the federal government not really taking the lead.

Op-Ed: Why PCR Cycle Threshold Is Useful in Coronavirus Testing

It can help better triage patients, physician argues

www.medpagetoday.com

Hey retard

Are you ashamed of yourself yet a layman knows more than you?

Fucking useless ****

So many medical professionals should die for this

Ah, casual threats of violence.

 

[Faun]

No way!

BUSTED: CDC Inflated COVID Numbers, Accused of Violating Federal Law

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) stands accused of violating federal law by inflating Coronavirus fatality numbers, according to stunning information obtained by NATIONAL FILE. CDC illegally inflated the COVID fatality number by at least 1,600 percent as the 2020 presidential...

nationalfile.com

Why would the CDC want to inflate numbers?

LOL

You're right ... no way.

Your nationalfile.com article claims the CDC "stands accused" of falsifying fatality numbers, only when you actually read the article, they're the ones accusing the CDC and nationalfile.com is nothing but a rightwingnut conspiracy site. Even worse, if you actually read the article, their complaint is about PCR testing producing false negatives. That affects the number of cases.

I guess you didn't realize if the number of cases is really lower than what's being reported, that increases the fatality rate.

So tell me the ratio of false negatives to false positives given a cycle threshold of 40?

And why use a ct of 40 when it is common knowledge that anything over 35 is going to be meaningless?

It's relative. As the number of cases decreases and the number of deaths remains constant, the fatality rate increases.

Why use a ct of 40 when it is common knowledge that anything over 35 is going to be meaningless?

Oh, and since we've virtually eliminated the flu by wearing masks, are you going to advocate for masks next flu season? Or, are you going to ignore all of those preventable deaths from the flu, and go mask-free, threatening the lives of everyone around you?

I didn't condone using a ct of 40, so argue that with someone else who did. As far as wearing masks to help prevent the spread of the flu, no I would not advocate for that as I never have because there is a vaccine for the flu. Just as I won't be advocating for wearing masks because of covid once the vaccine becomes readily available to all who want it.

Yeah, but since you believe that masking up has virtually eliminated the flu, thereby saving maybe 60,000 lives a year, how could you not agree to wear a mask next year?

Does the "vaccine" prevent infection and transmission? And if not, why are you going to take it?

Because there's a vaccine for the flu. I believe I already said that.

And of course I will get the covid vaccine. Even though there's a slight chance I can get covid anyway, if I do, it will most likely be less severe and fought off more quickly than had I not gotten the vaccine.

There is a flu vaccine every year, waht are you talking about? And it's not some holistic thing that catches all flus. It's only certain strains

I guarantee you less people took the flu shot this year because they didn't wanna go out.

Not more. Our lack of flu has nothing to do with more vaccine than usual. Only can be less than what we normally have, and we normally lose tens of thousands to the flu

I didn't say there were fewer cases of the flu because of the vaccine. I said I don't wear a mask because of the flu since there is a vaccine. I need not protect others from the flu when they can protect themselves. Until there is a vaccine for covid readily available for anyone who wants it, I wear a mask which decreases the potential of spreading it. I have no problem with that, it's not the end of the world. Anyone with a social conscience would.

 

[Juicin]

No way!

BUSTED: CDC Inflated COVID Numbers, Accused of Violating Federal Law

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) stands accused of violating federal law by inflating Coronavirus fatality numbers, according to stunning information obtained by NATIONAL FILE. CDC illegally inflated the COVID fatality number by at least 1,600 percent as the 2020 presidential...

nationalfile.com

Why would the CDC want to inflate numbers?

LOL

You're right ... no way.

Your nationalfile.com article claims the CDC "stands accused" of falsifying fatality numbers, only when you actually read the article, they're the ones accusing the CDC and nationalfile.com is nothing but a rightwingnut conspiracy site. Even worse, if you actually read the article, their complaint is about PCR testing producing false negatives. That affects the number of cases.

I guess you didn't realize if the number of cases is really lower than what's being reported, that increases the fatality rate.

So tell me the ratio of false negatives to false positives given a cycle threshold of 40?

And why use a ct of 40 when it is common knowledge that anything over 35 is going to be meaningless?

It's relative. As the number of cases decreases and the number of deaths remains constant, the fatality rate increases.

Why use a ct of 40 when it is common knowledge that anything over 35 is going to be meaningless?

Oh, and since we've virtually eliminated the flu by wearing masks, are you going to advocate for masks next flu season? Or, are you going to ignore all of those preventable deaths from the flu, and go mask-free, threatening the lives of everyone around you?

I didn't condone using a ct of 40, so argue that with someone else who did. As far as wearing masks to help prevent the spread of the flu, no I would not advocate for that as I never have because there is a vaccine for the flu. Just as I won't be advocating for wearing masks because of covid once the vaccine becomes readily available to all who want it.

Yeah, but since you believe that masking up has virtually eliminated the flu, thereby saving maybe 60,000 lives a year, how could you not agree to wear a mask next year?

Does the "vaccine" prevent infection and transmission? And if not, why are you going to take it?

Because there's a vaccine for the flu. I believe I already said that.

And of course I will get the covid vaccine. Even though there's a slight chance I can get covid anyway, if I do, it will most likely be less severe and fought off more quickly than had I not gotten the vaccine.

There is a flu vaccine every year, waht are you talking about? And it's not some holistic thing that catches all flus. It's only certain strains

I guarantee you less people took the flu shot this year because they didn't wanna go out.

Not more. Our lack of flu has nothing to do with more vaccine than usual. Only can be less than what we normally have, and we normally lose tens of thousands to the flu

I didn't say there were fewer cases of the flu because of the vaccine. I said I don't wear a mask because of the flu since there is a vaccine. I need not protect others from the flu when they can protect themselves. Until there is a vaccine for covid readily available for anyone who wants it, I wear a mask which decreases the potential of spreading it. Anyone with a social conscience would.

I just told you it doesn't stop all strains of flu, which is why we lose tens of thousands of people.

just like these cold vaccines won't stop all cold viruses. Each strain/variant has to get approved.

There is no reason not to wear a mask every year.

Your risk profile will not change substantively at all with this vaccine. TO believe it would would mean you would have to think that 1/1000 is different than 1/990 at best. We're talking very tiny increments in change here.

The masks don't change it much either. But at elast you're being consistent if you wear one forever

 

[Faun]

No way!

BUSTED: CDC Inflated COVID Numbers, Accused of Violating Federal Law

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) stands accused of violating federal law by inflating Coronavirus fatality numbers, according to stunning information obtained by NATIONAL FILE. CDC illegally inflated the COVID fatality number by at least 1,600 percent as the 2020 presidential...

nationalfile.com

Why would the CDC want to inflate numbers?

LOL

You're right ... no way.

Your nationalfile.com article claims the CDC "stands accused" of falsifying fatality numbers, only when you actually read the article, they're the ones accusing the CDC and nationalfile.com is nothing but a rightwingnut conspiracy site. Even worse, if you actually read the article, their complaint is about PCR testing producing false negatives. That affects the number of cases.

I guess you didn't realize if the number of cases is really lower than what's being reported, that increases the fatality rate.

So tell me the ratio of false negatives to false positives given a cycle threshold of 40?

And why use a ct of 40 when it is common knowledge that anything over 35 is going to be meaningless?

It's relative. As the number of cases decreases and the number of deaths remains constant, the fatality rate increases.

Why use a ct of 40 when it is common knowledge that anything over 35 is going to be meaningless?

Oh, and since we've virtually eliminated the flu by wearing masks, are you going to advocate for masks next flu season? Or, are you going to ignore all of those preventable deaths from the flu, and go mask-free, threatening the lives of everyone around you?

I didn't condone using a ct of 40, so argue that with someone else who did. As far as wearing masks to help prevent the spread of the flu, no I would not advocate for that as I never have because there is a vaccine for the flu. Just as I won't be advocating for wearing masks because of covid once the vaccine becomes readily available to all who want it.

Yeah, but since you believe that masking up has virtually eliminated the flu, thereby saving maybe 60,000 lives a year, how could you not agree to wear a mask next year?

Does the "vaccine" prevent infection and transmission? And if not, why are you going to take it?

Because there's a vaccine for the flu. I believe I already said that.

And of course I will get the covid vaccine. Even though there's a slight chance I can get covid anyway, if I do, it will most likely be less severe and fought off more quickly than had I not gotten the vaccine.

There is a flu vaccine every year, waht are you talking about? And it's not some holistic thing that catches all flus. It's only certain strains

I guarantee you less people took the flu shot this year because they didn't wanna go out.

Not more. Our lack of flu has nothing to do with more vaccine than usual. Only can be less than what we normally have, and we normally lose tens of thousands to the flu

I didn't say there were fewer cases of the flu because of the vaccine. I said I don't wear a mask because of the flu since there is a vaccine. I need not protect others from the flu when they can protect themselves. Until there is a vaccine for covid readily available for anyone who wants it, I wear a mask which decreases the potential of spreading it. Anyone with a social conscience would.

I just told you it doesn't stop all strains of flu

just like these cold vaccines won't stop all cold viruses. Each strain/variant has to get approved.

There is no reason not to wear a mask every year.

So? It stops much of it.

 

[Juicin]

So, you're saying that it's only conjecture that a PCR cycle threshold of 35 or above is going to be meaningless?

It is. Unless we see the data otherwise.

Well what if I produced a statement from Tony himself saying that a PCR test using a cycle threshold above 35 is going to be meaningless?

Be my guest. Good place to start conversation.

Okay.

". . . If you get a cycle threshold of 35 or more…the chances of it being replication-competent are miniscule…you almost never can culture virus from a 37 threshold cycle…even 36…it’s just dead nucleoids, period.”

That's what Tony said. Do you still contend that the meaninglessness of a PCR test set at over 35 replications is just conjecture?

Also, why did the FDA recommend a cycle threshold of 40? And more importantly, why didn't Tony fill them in on the misleading ct setting?

All that means is that they were previously infected within a marginal period of time. It does not mean that the DNA came from thin air.

I don't recall saying anything about DNA coming from thin air . . .

Anyway, are you telling me that a cycle threshold of 40 is reasonable?

Also, you said that every lab has been setting their own standards. Can you link me to where you learned this? Even more importantly, can you point me in the direction of information concerning which labs set which standards?

That was what the conversation was about. The idea that these people are false positives isn’t true. It’s just that the test reflects previous infection within the previous month, or so.

Fauci was saying that positive tests with high cycle counts are no longer infectious and therefore there’s burden of have to isolate.

Development or lab tests was decentralized from the FDA after they screwed the pooch early on. Part of a trend of the federal government not really taking the lead.

Op-Ed: Why PCR Cycle Threshold Is Useful in Coronavirus Testing

It can help better triage patients, physician argues

www.medpagetoday.com

Hey retard

Are you ashamed of yourself yet a layman knows more than you?

Fucking useless ****

So many medical professionals should die for this

Ah, casual threats of violence.

If you think should die is a threat you need to grow up, you're an american

you do deserve to die for your ignorance

hung up like the useless sack of shits you are. over socialized cowards who won't tell their peers the truth

The irony of you helping to perpetrate this absurd lie then blaming me for thinking you're a monster. Readily available information should tell you how absurd this all is.

"do no harm"

waht a fucking joke, to your own careers maybe

 

[AntonToo]

No way!

BUSTED: CDC Inflated COVID Numbers, Accused of Violating Federal Law

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) stands accused of violating federal law by inflating Coronavirus fatality numbers, according to stunning information obtained by NATIONAL FILE. CDC illegally inflated the COVID fatality number by at least 1,600 percent as the 2020 presidential...

nationalfile.com

Why would the CDC want to inflate numbers?

Nationalfile is junk source with zero jounalistic integrity.

Having said that, If Covid death numbers really are inflated then whats killing all the Americans abvove and boyond what we've seen in years before the pandemic?

Excess Deaths Associated with COVID-19

Figures present excess deaths associated with COVID-19 at the national and state levels.

www.cdc.gov

 

[Juicin]

No way!

BUSTED: CDC Inflated COVID Numbers, Accused of Violating Federal Law

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) stands accused of violating federal law by inflating Coronavirus fatality numbers, according to stunning information obtained by NATIONAL FILE. CDC illegally inflated the COVID fatality number by at least 1,600 percent as the 2020 presidential...

nationalfile.com

Why would the CDC want to inflate numbers?

LOL

You're right ... no way.

Your nationalfile.com article claims the CDC "stands accused" of falsifying fatality numbers, only when you actually read the article, they're the ones accusing the CDC and nationalfile.com is nothing but a rightwingnut conspiracy site. Even worse, if you actually read the article, their complaint is about PCR testing producing false negatives. That affects the number of cases.

I guess you didn't realize if the number of cases is really lower than what's being reported, that increases the fatality rate.

So tell me the ratio of false negatives to false positives given a cycle threshold of 40?

And why use a ct of 40 when it is common knowledge that anything over 35 is going to be meaningless?

It's relative. As the number of cases decreases and the number of deaths remains constant, the fatality rate increases.

Why use a ct of 40 when it is common knowledge that anything over 35 is going to be meaningless?

Oh, and since we've virtually eliminated the flu by wearing masks, are you going to advocate for masks next flu season? Or, are you going to ignore all of those preventable deaths from the flu, and go mask-free, threatening the lives of everyone around you?

I didn't condone using a ct of 40, so argue that with someone else who did. As far as wearing masks to help prevent the spread of the flu, no I would not advocate for that as I never have because there is a vaccine for the flu. Just as I won't be advocating for wearing masks because of covid once the vaccine becomes readily available to all who want it.

Yeah, but since you believe that masking up has virtually eliminated the flu, thereby saving maybe 60,000 lives a year, how could you not agree to wear a mask next year?

Does the "vaccine" prevent infection and transmission? And if not, why are you going to take it?

Because there's a vaccine for the flu. I believe I already said that.

And of course I will get the covid vaccine. Even though there's a slight chance I can get covid anyway, if I do, it will most likely be less severe and fought off more quickly than had I not gotten the vaccine.

There is a flu vaccine every year, waht are you talking about? And it's not some holistic thing that catches all flus. It's only certain strains

I guarantee you less people took the flu shot this year because they didn't wanna go out.

Not more. Our lack of flu has nothing to do with more vaccine than usual. Only can be less than what we normally have, and we normally lose tens of thousands to the flu

I didn't say there were fewer cases of the flu because of the vaccine. I said I don't wear a mask because of the flu since there is a vaccine. I need not protect others from the flu when they can protect themselves. Until there is a vaccine for covid readily available for anyone who wants it, I wear a mask which decreases the potential of spreading it. Anyone with a social conscience would.

I just told you it doesn't stop all strains of flu

just like these cold vaccines won't stop all cold viruses. Each strain/variant has to get approved.

There is no reason not to wear a mask every year.

So? It stops much of it.

Some of it, which again doesn't change your risk profile

Which means you should wear a mask forever

We don't have tiny micro grades of risk assessment at minuscule levels. You're not a fucking cyborg, your risk profile has not changed enough for you to change your behavior rationally. Same risks apply now, that did last year, and will next year. There will be no substantive change

To ratioanlly respond to the change in risk would require very miniscule changes in your life. Or an admittance that you're doing it wrong now.

 

[Briss]

No way!

BUSTED: CDC Inflated COVID Numbers, Accused of Violating Federal Law

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) stands accused of violating federal law by inflating Coronavirus fatality numbers, according to stunning information obtained by NATIONAL FILE. CDC illegally inflated the COVID fatality number by at least 1,600 percent as the 2020 presidential...

nationalfile.com

Why would the CDC want to inflate numbers?

LOL

You're right ... no way.

Your nationalfile.com article claims the CDC "stands accused" of falsifying fatality numbers, only when you actually read the article, they're the ones accusing the CDC and nationalfile.com is nothing but a rightwingnut conspiracy site. Even worse, if you actually read the article, their complaint is about PCR testing producing false negatives. That affects the number of cases.

I guess you didn't realize if the number of cases is really lower than what's being reported, that increases the fatality rate.

So tell me the ratio of false negatives to false positives given a cycle threshold of 40?

And why use a ct of 40 when it is common knowledge that anything over 35 is going to be meaningless?

It's relative. As the number of cases decreases and the number of deaths remains constant, the fatality rate increases.

Why use a ct of 40 when it is common knowledge that anything over 35 is going to be meaningless?

Oh, and since we've virtually eliminated the flu by wearing masks, are you going to advocate for masks next flu season? Or, are you going to ignore all of those preventable deaths from the flu, and go mask-free, threatening the lives of everyone around you?

I didn't condone using a ct of 40, so argue that with someone else who did. As far as wearing masks to help prevent the spread of the flu, no I would not advocate for that as I never have because there is a vaccine for the flu. Just as I won't be advocating for wearing masks because of covid once the vaccine becomes readily available to all who want it.

Yeah, but since you believe that masking up has virtually eliminated the flu, thereby saving maybe 60,000 lives a year, how could you not agree to wear a mask next year?

Does the "vaccine" prevent infection and transmission? And if not, why are you going to take it?

Because there's a vaccine for the flu. I believe I already said that.

And of course I will get the covid vaccine. Even though there's a slight chance I can get covid anyway, if I do, it will most likely be less severe and fought off more quickly than had I not gotten the vaccine.

But the new experimental "vaccine" has not been shown to prevent transmission. So how are you going to protect everyone from you while you're not wearing a mask?