Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Over half of Covid hospitalisations tested positive after admission

telegraph.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 241 posts

Re: Over half of Covid hospitalisations tested positive after admission

#171

Post by forcry »

ianhawes wrote: post #128
forcry wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The only metric the public should be concerned about is whether they have or have not been vaccinated. That would be quite stupid. Because if the risk of the disease is low, vaccines does not make sense when you do risk/benefit calculation. Hence the people should know about the cases. Of course, instead, if you are looking to push vaccines no matter what, you would say something like >The only metric the public sho…

> That would be quite stupid. Because if the risk of the disease is low, vaccines does not make sense when you do risk/benefit calculation. The risk of symptomatic illness is low if you are vaccinated. The risk of symptomatic illness is high if you are unvaccinated. The risk of death is high if you are unvaccinated and have pre-existing conditions and are under the age of 65. The risk of death is very high if you are…

Please cite studies with randomised control trials to justify these claims.

Re: Over half of Covid hospitalisations tested positive after admission

#172

Post by forcry »

nradov wrote: post #146
forcry wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The only metric the public should be concerned about is whether they have or have not been vaccinated. That would be quite stupid. Because if the risk of the disease is low, vaccines does not make sense when you do risk/benefit calculation. Hence the people should know about the cases. Of course, instead, if you are looking to push vaccines no matter what, you would say something like >The only metric the public sho…

Regardless of number of cases, most of us will be exposed to SARS-CoV-2 eventually. Just like with other endemic coronaviruses such as HCoV-OC43.

>Regardless of number of cases, most of us will be exposed to SARS-CoV-2 eventually.

If the no of cases is nearly zero, that means the virus is no longer dangerous, so it does not really matter at that point.

Re: Over half of Covid hospitalisations tested positive after admission

#173

Post by themark »

blywi wrote: post #161
mizzack wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I strongly suspect that the goal was to cast a wide net (i.e. bias toward false positives) at the expense of accuracy, but then "cases" became some kind of top-line media metric... Then in January the WHO updated the diagnostic protocol [1] because of that false positive/low confidence problem. Unsurprisingly, case counts plummeted in the following weeks. [1] https://www.who.int/news/item/20-01-2021-who-information…

This WHO statement has been widely misinterpreted, is is not the case that PCR tests were resulting in inflated numbers of false positives, see Reuters fact check [1] from February 4, 2021, and [2] from April 8, 2021. [1] https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-who-instruction... [2] https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-who-pcr-idUSL1N2M1...

“The WHO information notice is not a retraction; rather, it is a clarification for laboratory professionals on how to interpret PCR results.”

Why would WHO feel the need to tell people to read the operating manuals closely? I’m sure its not because the accuracy was too high.

Re: Over half of Covid hospitalisations tested positive after admission

#174

Post by killjoywashere »

a9h74j wrote: post #63
killjoywashere wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I ran one of the first labs to validate the original CDC assay (we got the controls to work). Ct numbers were a slippery slope we should never have gone down for COVID-19 PCR tests because snot is not like blood, a homogenous substance with well known homeostatic parameters that are under tight physiologic control. Do you know someone went swimming? Do you know if they were crying? Did they just eat some particularly…

I would like to see QC statistics from some of the large test-processing centers which have IIRC been established. Surely they send a blind fraction of known-negative or control samples through, to get good statistics on false-positive rates?

Yes, CMS requires clinical labs to submit to external proficiency testing under CLIA'88. The College of American Pathologists is a designated accrediting body and the one I'm used to using. You are not allowed to do anything out of the ordinary with proficiency testing samples. You can't send them out to someone else and report what they reported to you. You just report the results. If you fail, they test you again. If you fail again, you're on probation. If you fail a third time, you're not allowed to report that analyte any more. Results of proficiency testing are reviewed on site in a bi-annual inspection. Officially there are 3 inspections: Joint Commission, CAP, and FDA, that all inspect the lab. Generally, the Joint Commission folks and FDA folks ask for your CAP certificate, and if it's good, they just skip all those items. CAP does not mess around. They will fly to the ends of the earth, they will cite you, they may decertify you. And then no one in the lab gets paid and they have to find new jobs.

So, yeah, rest assured, labs work really hard to make sure they report honestly and accurately. Better to fail an occasional proficiency test and repeat, than get sideways on the inspection.

Re: Over half of Covid hospitalisations tested positive after admission

#175

Post by betwixthewires »

kook_throwaway wrote: post #109
leereeves wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Instead you're just talking about a left-wing conspiracy to lie to the public in order to take control of the government. Things like that make people suspicious, and make it easy for people who don't know the difference between a quantum dot[1] and a microchip to misunderstand when Bill Gates calls for a national tracking system[2]. 1: (a quantum dot to store medical information beneath the skin really was funded by…

>Instead you're just talking about a left-wing conspiracy to lie to the public in order to take control of the government. To take control of the government or for good PR/propaganda? Governments have never had any issues conspiring and lying to the public, remember when Fauci said not to use masks because they didn't help? Or those WMDs that we will surely find any day now?

I'm not who you're replying to, but I'd like to know, what reason would WHO or anyone else have to maintain a high false positive rate under one admin and correct it for the next, other than to lessen the chances of the previous admin's reelection? It wasn't "good PR" it was bad PR, specifically for the previous admin in an election year. That sounds a lot like "lie to the public in order to take control of government" to me.

Re: Over half of Covid hospitalisations tested positive after admission

#176

Post by javagram »

areyousure wrote: post #165
javagram wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Note that it was hardly “delayed” since all initial predictions for the vaccine to be approved were around 12 months, in the end it only took about 10 months. Reports last year indicated Trump’s own FDA was responsible for setting out the needed time for data gathering and review that pushed it into mid-November. https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/white-house-okays-fda-months... Meanwhile other countries including China…

Both Russia and China started using their vaccines in August 2020: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/putin-claims-first-corona... https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-china-...

As your article notes, Russia was similar to allowing people to join the phase 3 trial. It was not a widespread deployment of vaccines and was not analogous to the EUA for Pfizer and moderna. “In effect, Russia will be conducting its Phase 3 trials live, treating it more as a demonstrator group than a control group meant to ensure there is nothing dangerous awaiting the larger population.

The first two phases involved just a few dozen volunteers.

Phase 3 trials will be conducted not only in Russia but in partner countries including the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia, Dmitriev said in Tuesday's statement.”

According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sputnik_V_COVID-19_vaccine#Aut... the first authorizations outside Russia occurred in December 2020.

Similarly for the Chinese vaccine it took time for the trial results to arrive. Sinovac was approved for general use in February 2021, months after the FDA had authorized Moderna and Pfizer vaccines. https://www.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/3120855/covi...

Re: Over half of Covid hospitalisations tested positive after admission

#177

Post by javagram »

washadjeffmad wrote: post #168
javagram wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Note that the background for this is that Kary Mullis believed AIDS wasn’t caused by HIV and was therefore angry at Fauci and the entire medical/scientific establishment for linking HIV and AIDS. He died in 2019 so his criticisms of Fauci were related to HIV, not SARS-CoV-2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kary_Mullis#Views_on_HIV/AIDS_...

Denialism and skepticism are often used as slurs in the absence of strong evidence by those who favor popular consensus over evidence. A PI once confided in me that he didn't believe in the big bang. I was startled because creationism was on the rise, and I knew that he was Catholic. However, I also knew he was a natural empiricist, and after taking a quiet moment to think things through, I realized I was being teste…

> Denialism and skepticism are often used as slurs in the absence of strong evidence by those who favor popular consensus over evidence.

OK? That doesn’t change the massive weight of evidence in favor of HIV causing AIDS.

Re: Over half of Covid hospitalisations tested positive after admission

#178

Post by javagram »

themark wrote: post #151
javagram wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Note that the background for this is that Kary Mullis believed AIDS wasn’t caused by HIV and was therefore angry at Fauci and the entire medical/scientific establishment for linking HIV and AIDS. He died in 2019 so his criticisms of Fauci were related to HIV, not SARS-CoV-2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kary_Mullis#Views_on_HIV/AIDS_...

The video they are referring to has a very specific part about pcr testing (relevant to the discussion here). I think it is reasonable to trust his opinion on the matter regardless of what he thinks about AIDS.

The video pretty clearly shows that his view is that testing for HIV is a conspiracy by the CDC to get funding to fight AIDS.[1] Unless you agree with him that AIDS isn’t caused by HIV, it doesn’t make much sense to trust him rather than all the scientific experts who have worked on PCR testing and virus detection in the last few decades. ( edit: Moreover, suppressing HIV using drugs has been successfully treating AIDS, which wouldn’t make sense if the disease wasn’t actually caused by the virus. )

Moreover, PCR testing during the covid epidemic, which he was not alive for, has clearly been working well. High cases later correspond to high hospitalizations and high covid-19 deaths and high excess deaths across many different countries.

Frankly I don’t put much trust in his Nobel, any more than Michael Levitt who is also a Nobel laureate and has repeatedly made falsified predictions about the Covid-19 pandemic.[2] It seems pretty clear that Nobel prize winners can later lose touch with reality.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MkqQIY7J0fQ

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Levitt#Covid-19

Re: Over half of Covid hospitalisations tested positive after admission

#179

Post by javagram »

nickthemagicman wrote: post #157
javagram wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> red death map visualizations for people to see with inflated death counts. There is no indication of inflated death counts. Death counts from covid correlate closely with excess deaths. Some have claimed that deaths did rise but because of lockdowns, however in “locked down” regions where reported Covid cases and deaths were low, so were excess deaths.

If you inflate infections, you are therefore are also inflating deaths, it's a 1 to X correlation.

Wrong, all-cause death statistics are tracked separately from infections. See for instance https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm

Re: Over half of Covid hospitalisations tested positive after admission

#180

Post by javagram »

jimmygrapes wrote: post #152
javagram wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Note that it was hardly “delayed” since all initial predictions for the vaccine to be approved were around 12 months, in the end it only took about 10 months. Reports last year indicated Trump’s own FDA was responsible for setting out the needed time for data gathering and review that pushed it into mid-November. https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/white-house-okays-fda-months... Meanwhile other countries including China…

It is worth considering that maybe Sinovac (and whatever the Russian one(s) is/are called) may have been released far earlier than they would have been if the U.S. and others had not developed their own faster. Think of space wars - even if you lose the race to first, you still want to be in 2nd vs 500th. If they were developed at a more traditional pace, would they be more effective? Would any of them be? And what w…

The alpha variant (B117) emerged in the UK in November 2020, there’s no indication it had anything to do with vaccines. The delta variant (B.1.617) was detected in India in October 2020. So saying the vaccines caused these variants to evolve would suggest that vaccination also has a time-travel component?
Post reply on HN