Anarchy occurs when bad kitties don't realise what havoc they've caused by spreading a bad meme that CDC was putting a thumb on the scale of PCR ,comparing vaccinated to unvaccinated. Come on, El Gato, you know you misinterpreted the CDC advice to use PCR Ct <= 28 for selection of vaccine breakthrough cases to send for genomic sequencing…
Anarchy occurs when bad kitties don't realise what havoc they've caused by spreading a bad meme that CDC was putting a thumb on the scale of PCR ,comparing vaccinated to unvaccinated. Come on, El Gato, you know you misinterpreted the CDC advice to use PCR Ct <= 28 for selection of vaccine breakthrough cases to send for genomic sequencing, and which was not intended for comparing vaccinated to unvaccinated. Your bad meme is close to viral. Even good kitties make mistakes. I promise you a saucer of warm milk if you publish a retraction.
Ronald, have you ever asked yourself why CDC put a limit of <=28 cycles for the genomic analysis of +PCR tests? If they can't identify the genome beyond 28 cycles, what might that mean?
There is no problem for the CDC to set a more stringent PCR Ct, if the intention is to identify vaccine breakthrough variants, and not to compare case by case to unvaccinated. You don't have to identify all the variant cases, it's statistical sampling. You've gone too far to CDC conspiracy.
If CDC can't identify the genome beyond 28 cycles, what are the chances that the person is contagious? We were told that the PCR test was being used to detect who had active infection (which the test cannot do) to prevent the spread of the virus...not to determine who might have encountered and dealt with the virus weeks ago. By limiting the PCR cycle cutoff for breakthrough infections that are submitted for genomic analysis...CDC admitted the flaw. Most of the "case" data...and therefore death data...is rubbish. Apparently, Kary Mullis said anything beyond 20 cycles was not reliable. He also said the PCR test should not be used for diagnostic testing.
Anarchy occurs when bad kitties don't realise what havoc they've caused by spreading a bad meme that CDC was putting a thumb on the scale of PCR ,comparing vaccinated to unvaccinated. Come on, El Gato, you know you misinterpreted the CDC advice to use PCR Ct <= 28 for selection of vaccine breakthrough cases to send for genomic sequencing, and which was not intended for comparing vaccinated to unvaccinated. Your bad meme is close to viral. Even good kitties make mistakes. I promise you a saucer of warm milk if you publish a retraction.
Ronald, have you ever asked yourself why CDC put a limit of <=28 cycles for the genomic analysis of +PCR tests? If they can't identify the genome beyond 28 cycles, what might that mean?
There is no problem for the CDC to set a more stringent PCR Ct, if the intention is to identify vaccine breakthrough variants, and not to compare case by case to unvaccinated. You don't have to identify all the variant cases, it's statistical sampling. You've gone too far to CDC conspiracy.
If CDC can't identify the genome beyond 28 cycles, what are the chances that the person is contagious? We were told that the PCR test was being used to detect who had active infection (which the test cannot do) to prevent the spread of the virus...not to determine who might have encountered and dealt with the virus weeks ago. By limiting the PCR cycle cutoff for breakthrough infections that are submitted for genomic analysis...CDC admitted the flaw. Most of the "case" data...and therefore death data...is rubbish. Apparently, Kary Mullis said anything beyond 20 cycles was not reliable. He also said the PCR test should not be used for diagnostic testing.
I'm not arguing that PCR is not a disaster. Please stick to the point of thumb on scale of vaccinated versus unvaccinated.