That's a big jump simply from me testing negative. I was informed that while I tested negative, it's possible that I'm still a carrier. Until antibody tests can correlate a negative with a positive, there's not really any full way of knowing if I'm virus free, just asymptomatic. I could have had the virus as early as mid-Feb. I won't know until the aforementioned antibody tests are available in greater numbers.

My assertion is that people being contagious for almost two months after their initial contraction of CV19 is something being drastically overlooked, currently - especially with the push for everything to get back to normal ASAP.

Fair enough, but even her positive test or anyone's positive test can be questioned based on what the guy who invented the test said about his own test.

---

They tested a homeless shelter in Boston. Out of 400 people, 50% tested positive for COVID-19. None of them had any symptoms.
Either the test is inaccurate or the general public was already exposed months ago.

---

That's a big jump simply from me testing negative. I was informed that while I tested negative, it's possible that I'm still a carrier. Until antibody tests can correlate a negative with a positive, there's not really any full way of knowing if I'm virus free, just asymptomatic. I could have had the virus as early as mid-Feb. I won't know until the aforementioned antibody tests are available in greater numbers.

My assertion is that people being contagious for almost two months after their initial contraction of CV19 is something being drastically overlooked, currently - especially with the push for everything to get back to normal ASAP.

And yet projections of cases, deaths, resource utilization all continue to plummet. The more we know the less we have to worry about with this thing because it turning out that everyone's had it at some point the last 4 to 6 months. If you assertion was real concern then we'd have the millions dead they forecasted.

Fair enough, though I'd suggest that social distancing and stay-at-home measures have made an impact; and we haven't seen a true peak yet. My assertion is that it should be a real concern to avoid more than the 60k death toll Trump is already patting himself on the back for. 

That's a big jump simply from me testing negative. I was informed that while I tested negative, it's possible that I'm still a carrier. Until antibody tests can correlate a negative with a positive, there's not really any full way of knowing if I'm virus free, just asymptomatic. I could have had the virus as early as mid-Feb. I won't know until the aforementioned antibody tests are available in greater numbers.

My assertion is that people being contagious for almost two months after their initial contraction of CV19 is something being drastically overlooked, currently - especially with the push for everything to get back to normal ASAP.

Fair enough, but even her positive test or anyone's positive test can be questioned based on what the guy who invented the test said about his own test.

The article you linked to called CV19 a boutique epidemic created by corporate media and predicted it would vanish. At the time of its publishing, 19 Americans died with 400+ "confirmed" cases nationally. Since then, over 41,000 US citizens have died. Even if there was a percentage of CV19 death inflation via hospitals like some of the board's conspiracy theorists claim, this article was wayyyyyy wrong.

---

I'll play you in ping pong. 

Fair enough, but even her positive test or anyone's positive test can be questioned based on what the guy who invented the test said about his own test.

The article you linked to called CV19 a boutique epidemic created by corporate media and predicted it would vanish. At the time of its publishing, 19 Americans died with 400+ "confirmed" cases nationally. Since then, over 41,000 US citizens have died. Even if there was a percentage of CV19 death inflation via hospitals like some of the board's conspiracy theorists claim, this article was wayyyyyy wrong.

I wasn't saying I agreed with the entire article or his prediction.  You didn't address the specific part that I posted and what it talked about, which is what the inventor of the PCR test says about his own test.  And if true, perfectly explains why there are so many positive tests and every single attributed death is based on those positive tests.

He states that the PCR test only tests for specific genetic sequences of a virus, not a virus itself.  Genetic sequences that could be shared by many viruses including other coronaviruses.  Yet all of the data you cited is based on these tests.  That would be like using a small sequence of genetic material (that could be shared by a significant percentage of the population) to convict someone of a crime and not the entire DNA profile.

---

They tested a homeless shelter in Boston.  Out of 400 people, 50% tested positive for COVID-19.  None of them had any symptoms.
Either the test is inaccurate or the general public was already exposed months ago.

Biggest evidence failure in history.

---

The article you linked to called CV19 a boutique epidemic created by corporate media and predicted it would vanish. At the time of its publishing, 19 Americans died with 400+ "confirmed" cases nationally. Since then, over 41,000 US citizens have died. Even if there was a percentage of CV19 death inflation via hospitals like some of the board's conspiracy theorists claim, this article was wayyyyyy wrong.

I wasn't saying I agreed with the entire article or his prediction.  You didn't address the specific part that I posted and what it talked about, which is what the inventor of the PCR test says about his own test.  And if true, perfectly explains why there are so many positive tests and every single attributed death is based on those positive tests.

He states that the PCR test only tests for specific genetic sequences of a virus, not a virus itself.  Genetic sequences that could be shared by many viruses including other coronaviruses.  Yet all of the data you cited is based on these tests.  That would be like using a small sequence of genetic material (that could be shared by a significant percentage of the population) to convict someone of a crime and not the entire DNA profile.

A Corona virus genome is about 30 kB of data. I don't know if the PCR test looks for the entire genetic code or just parts of it, but if the test is done correctly, getting the target proteins to replicate without the target genes would be like finding act one of Hamlet in a patch of randomly generated text.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

The article you linked to called CV19 a boutique epidemic created by corporate media and predicted it would vanish. At the time of its publishing, 19 Americans died with 400+ "confirmed" cases nationally. Since then, over 41,000 US citizens have died. Even if there was a percentage of CV19 death inflation via hospitals like some of the board's conspiracy theorists claim, this article was wayyyyyy wrong.

I wasn't saying I agreed with the entire article or his prediction.  You didn't address the specific part that I posted and what it talked about, which is what the inventor of the PCR test says about his own test.  And if true, perfectly explains why there are so many positive tests and every single attributed death is based on those positive tests.

He states that the PCR test only tests for specific genetic sequences of a virus, not a virus itself.  Genetic sequences that could be shared by many viruses including other coronaviruses.  Yet all of the data you cited is based on these tests.  That would be like using a small sequence of genetic material (that could be shared by a significant percentage of the population) to convict someone of a crime and not the entire DNA profile.

He knows that.  He cant argue that.  He has to find a phrase or quote to discredit the article.  Let him be.

---

I wasn't saying I agreed with the entire article or his prediction.  You didn't address the specific part that I posted and what it talked about, which is what the inventor of the PCR test says about his own test.  And if true, perfectly explains why there are so many positive tests and every single attributed death is based on those positive tests.

He states that the PCR test only tests for specific genetic sequences of a virus, not a virus itself.  Genetic sequences that could be shared by many viruses including other coronaviruses.  Yet all of the data you cited is based on these tests.  That would be like using a small sequence of genetic material (that could be shared by a significant percentage of the population) to convict someone of a crime and not the entire DNA profile.

A Corona virus genome is about 30 kB of data. I don't know if the PCR test looks for the entire genetic code or just parts of it, but if the test is done correctly, getting the target proteins to replicate without the target genes would be like finding act one of Hamlet in a patch of randomly generated text.

Ehhhhhhh...   with the fact that we have all interacted with a myriad of corinaviruses and still have remnants of that genetic material it be more akin to finding bits of hamlet in a random library.

---

They tested a homeless shelter in Boston.  Out of 400 people, 50% tested positive for COVID-19.  None of them had any symptoms.
Either the test is inaccurate or the general public was already exposed months ago.

Biggest evidence failure in history.

Will always be second in history behind " Socialism works."

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Biggest evidence failure in history.

Will always be second in history behind " Socialism works."

Given the nature of the steps being advocated to deal with this situation it beg the question....  

Is it really behind "socialism works" or an extension thereof?

---

---

A Corona virus genome is about 30 kB of data. I don't know if the PCR test looks for the entire genetic code or just parts of it, but if the test is done correctly, getting the target proteins to replicate without the target genes would be like finding act one of Hamlet in a patch of randomly generated text.

Ehhhhhhh...   with the fact that we have all interacted with a myriad of corinaviruses and still have remnants of that genetic material it be more akin to finding bits of hamlet in a random library.

I think that's a legitimate concern and a good extension of my metaphor. But I have to think that the people who do this for a living have compared the "signal" of this virus to the "noise" that was there before 2019.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Even if there was a percentage of CV19 death inflation via hospitals like some of the board's conspiracy theorists claim, this article was wayyyyyy wrong.

Maybe you should watch the daily briefings.  Dr. Birx explained why the CV19 deaths would be inflated.

---

---

Ehhhhhhh...   with the fact that we have all interacted with a myriad of corinaviruses and still have remnants of that genetic material it be more akin to finding bits of hamlet in a random library.

I think that's a legitimate concern and a good extension of my metaphor. But I have to think that the people who do this for a living have compared the "signal" of this virus to the "noise" that was there before 2019.

U mean the same people who blew the food pyramid for 3 decades and helped cause the obesity and diabetes that is causing the skewed auto immune response in covid patients?

---

The article you linked to called CV19 a boutique epidemic created by corporate media and predicted it would vanish. At the time of its publishing, 19 Americans died with 400+ "confirmed" cases nationally. Since then, over 41,000 US citizens have died. Even if there was a percentage of CV19 death inflation via hospitals like some of the board's conspiracy theorists claim, this article was wayyyyyy wrong.

I wasn't saying I agreed with the entire article or his prediction.  You didn't address the specific part that I posted and what it talked about, which is what the inventor of the PCR test says about his own test.  And if true, perfectly explains why there are so many positive tests and every single attributed death is based on those positive tests.

He states that the PCR test only tests for specific genetic sequences of a virus, not a virus itself.  Genetic sequences that could be shared by many viruses including other coronaviruses.  Yet all of the data you cited is based on these tests.  That would be like using a small sequence of genetic material (that could be shared by a significant percentage of the population) to convict someone of a crime and not the entire DNA profile.

I don't discount that he said it nor his justification. But he did state that over 20 years ago. I tend to think that if we're using PCR as our lone viral detection analysis tool, we've worked to improve its quality since Mullis' issues. Using something the test's creator said over 20 years ago to discount the virus itself (that's the overall slant of the article) in turn discounts scientific progress made since then. 

For example: We've been able to sequence certain iterations of CV19 (specifically in the pacific NW) and detect the genetic specifics of it since the outbreak occurred in revised PCR tests. Everything I'm reading is that the presence of any false positive now is either related to sample contamination or the misuse of reaction chemicals (something I acknowledge the CDC recognized early on). Not saying Mullis' assessment of PCR as a tool wasn't inadequate (or even misused) at the time he said it, but things have vastly improved in the scientific community since the OJ trial. I don't believe the test is perfect, FWIW, but I don't believe Mullis' previous critique discredits it's current validity as it relates to purported false positives in CV19. FWIW 2: the 2014 article referencing Mullis' 1996 quote has since been retracted by Frontiers in Public Health. 

JJ is, however, spot on about me: I admit that a subjectively written slant piece using old quotes to apply to a current situation will activate my BS meter more often than not, for better or worse. Sorry I didn't address your counter argument earlier - being this close to CV19 can be stressful and I don't envy those it has affected much, much worse.

---

I'll play you in ping pong. 

A positive PCR test means that the virus RNA was found in the sample. But the RNA is just one part of the virus. You need a whole, active virus to infect new cells. The white blood cells may have already eaten up all the viruses but their RNA might remain for some time after.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

A positive PCR test means that the virus RNA was found in the sample.  But the RNA is just one part of the virus.  You need a whole, active virus to infect new cells. The white blood cells may have already eaten up all the viruses but their RNA might remain for some time after.

By page 200 someone will bring up Koch's postulates.

---

In January the Wuhan Institute of Virology tried to patent the Gilead drug Remdesivir. In the patent application, they claim they had illegally reverse engineered the drug because it was a national emergency. So they knew 3 months ago that Remdesivir was effective but neglected to share this information with the world and instead tried to rename the drug "Redoxivir" and control worldwide sales of it.

https://www.trialsitenews.com/wuhan-inst...emdesivir/

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/04...plication/

---

In January the Wuhan Institute of Virology tried to patent the Gilead drug Remdesivir.  In the patent application, they claim they had illegally reverse engineered the drug because it was a national emergency.  So they knew 3 months ago that Remdesivir was effective but neglected to share this information with the world and instead tried to rename the drug "Redoxivir" and control worldwide sales of it.

https://www.trialsitenews.com/wuhan-inst...emdesivir/

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/04...plication/

Welp, time for regime change.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

In January the Wuhan Institute of Virology tried to patent the Gilead drug Remdesivir.  In the patent application, they claim they had illegally reverse engineered the drug because it was a national emergency.  So they knew 3 months ago that Remdesivir was effective but neglected to share this information with the world and instead tried to rename the drug "Redoxivir" and control worldwide sales of it.

https://www.trialsitenews.com/wuhan-inst...emdesivir/

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/04...plication/

What do we have intelligence agencies for?

---

In January the Wuhan Institute of Virology tried to patent the Gilead drug Remdesivir.  In the patent application, they claim they had illegally reverse engineered the drug because it was a national emergency.  So they knew 3 months ago that Remdesivir was effective but neglected to share this information with the world and instead tried to rename the drug "Redoxivir" and control worldwide sales of it.

https://www.trialsitenews.com/wuhan-inst...emdesivir/

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/04...plication/

What do we have intelligence agencies for?

To overthrow duly elected Presidents who unexpectedly defeat the rightful heir to the Democratic throne of power?

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

In January the Wuhan Institute of Virology tried to patent the Gilead drug Remdesivir.  In the patent application, they claim they had illegally reverse engineered the drug because it was a national emergency.  So they knew 3 months ago that Remdesivir was effective but neglected to share this information with the world and instead tried to rename the drug "Redoxivir" and control worldwide sales of it.

https://www.trialsitenews.com/wuhan-inst...emdesivir/

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/04...plication/

What do we have intelligence agencies for?

I'd be interested to see how much of America's intelligence machine is being illegally directed inwards rather than focused on the nations that are actually a threat to us.

---