Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Health and Medicine
Reply to "Coronavirus good Uplifting and hopeful news only"
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]NYT story last weekend (sorry, I thought someone else had already mentioned it). The gist is that the PCR tests most commonly used in the US have a range of calibrations for what counts as positive, and NYT analysis was that 50-90 (!) percent of cases reported as "positive" are likely cases where the viral load is very unlikely to be high enough to make the individual sick or contagious. The article then reports that the cheaper, faster, less sensitive tests would likely be just as good at detecting cases where the viral load is high enough to be dangerous or contagious.[/quote] that's not exactly right. the article states that the low-viral load positives could just be early in the course of the infection. the main scientist quoted advocates for repeat testing, not declaring that there are actually 50% fewer cases than we actually think there are. [/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
