We must stop making policy based on PCR testing

[hamstersarse]

You may have heard discussion from scientists about how the tests we use are not fit for purpose.

This 10 minute video offers a very clear explanation as to why

m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=S_1Z8cSXI-Q

I know it seemed like testing was the answer, but that concept relied on the fact that the test was fit for purpose.

The casedemic we have right now will not go away ever if we continue to rely on this test as the barometer.

I am not sure policy is based solely on positive test numbers. Also there has been a pretty accurate correlation between cases now and hospitalisations later. Case numbers are harder to interpret of course but the govt scientists know this.

Much as I do not subscribe to the Covid hysteria, this is a pile of horse manure. Yes, any testing system for anything can result in false readings some of the time. However:
(a) quoting unnamed "experts" to support a wild theory that people shouldn't be tested is ridiculous and poor research practice. Where are these experts? Who are they? What credibility do they have? You can agree or disagree with experts opinions - there are plenty of opposing views on most things. But you can only judge such matters if you know who they are and their track record.
(b) try looking this guy up. He isn't an expert on anything relevant (possibly anything at all?). He's an insignificant lecturer on environmental health at a university in Thailand that nobody has ever heard of. Not an expert of anything under the sun and certainly not coronavirus.

This is fake news.

I think I'll continue listening to the World Health Organisation over some random on the internet, thanks.

Fake news?

Ok. Try Dr Michael Yeadon, a former colleague of Vallance, same qualifications

See what he says about PCR testing

lockdownsceptics.org/what-sage-got-wrong/

And if you actually say “I’m not reading it because it’s on Toby Young’s website’ you do not have an enquiring mind (I.e.scientific)

When the "evidence" comes in the form of a YouTube video you can almost guarantee it's absolute rubbish.

@WhyNotMe40

I think I'll continue listening to the World Health Organisation over some random on the internet, thanks.

The WHO have never got anything wrong?

Right.

@FallenSky

When the "evidence" comes in the form of a YouTube video you can almost guarantee it's absolute rubbish.

This.

@FallenSky

When the "evidence" comes in the form of a YouTube video you can almost guarantee it's absolute rubbish.

YouTube is a free speech platform (just about)

Unlike the BBC, and other MSM

But you go ahead and dismiss everything just because it’s on You Tube

The WHO who adjusted advice as more evidence became available.

I despair at the lack of enquiry people have

What has ‘being on YouTube’ got to do with whether something is accurate or not?

It’s a video platform which will include videos of every type - some rubbish, some valid.

To dismiss ‘YouTube’ is crazy stuff

If something on YouTube also appears as a peer reviewed article with supporting repeatable evidence, in a reputable journal - well then I'll consider it possibly accurate.

And I put that video up because it offers a very simple explanation of why the PCR test is not a good tool for where we are now with the virus

A lot of the other scientific articles on it are designed for immunologists and less consumable

But anyway, some people just want to defend the test at any cost....I don’t understand why.

Do you believe the PCR test is fit for purpose? And why?

@WhyNotMe40

If something on YouTube also appears as a peer reviewed article with supporting repeatable evidence, in a reputable journal - well then I'll consider it possibly accurate.

If you watched the video, it did include peer reviewed articles as evidence.

@hamstersarse

Fake news?

Ok. Try Dr Michael Yeadon, a former colleague of Vallance, same qualifications

See what he says about PCR testing

lockdownsceptics.org/what-sage-got-wrong/

And if you actually say “I’m not reading it because it’s on Toby Young’s website’ you do not have an enquiring mind (I.e.scientific)

I will not read anything on Toby Young’s website.

HTH

I think the policy is based more on hospital admissions and icu beds isnt it? The cases help a bit to predict what will happen with icu beds in a few weeks time but everyone knows thats 'cases' now are very different than cases in march.
I thought the main aim of all the testing was to isolate to stop spread but that bit isnt workinv well.

Then link the articles rather than some random on YouTube.

I think a Corona Virus Sceptics thread would be really helpful to a lot of people out there. A safe place to share YouTube videos and talk about experts and freedom and sheeple and muzzles. A space to debate the intricacies of the bigger questions: if Donald Trump and I come to the same conclusions does it mean he is, practically a genius? Or does it say something about me?

MN please give the ones who know a platform to demand their freedom to shop unmasked, to congregate in groups of 7, to lick doorknobs at will, to rally the lost sheeple to think for themselves!!!

I'm highly skeptical about the usefulness and long term effectiveness of lockdowns. However, I can't get on board with the idea that PCR tests pick up Covid when people don't have it or whatever, because of the ONS random sample survey. If there were a lot of false positives then that survey would show much higher rates than it does or did. (There will of course be some false positives as no test is perfect.)

However, that does mean that we can conclude from testing of, e.g. students, that about 90% of cases, at least in this age group, are asymptomatic. It would be nice if some policy makers could take that into account.

Ok, you won’t read Toby Young’s website —predictable—

Try Yeadon’s Twitter account twitter.com/MichaelYeadon3

His pinned tweet will be a start

Or, do you not trust anything on Twitter either?

@MillieEpple

I think the policy is based more on hospital admissions and icu beds isnt it? The cases help a bit to predict what will happen with icu beds in a few weeks time but everyone knows thats 'cases' now are very different than cases in march. I thought the main aim of all the testing was to isolate to stop spread but that bit isnt workinv well.

But it isn’t based on hospital admissions

Hospital admissions are the same as they always are at this time of year, slightly under indeed

@110APiccadilly

I'm highly skeptical about the usefulness and long term effectiveness of lockdowns. However, I can't get on board with the idea that PCR tests pick up Covid when people don't have it or whatever, because of the ONS random sample survey. If there were a lot of false positives then that survey would show much higher rates than it does or did. (There will of course be some false positives as no test is perfect.)

However, that does mean that we can conclude from testing of, e.g. students, that about 90% of cases, at least in this age group, are asymptomatic. It would be nice if some policy makers could take that into account.

If you listen to this podcast with Dr Michael Yeadon he explains all of this. In some detail.

podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/the-delingpod-the-james-delingpole-podcast/id1449753062?i=1000495618783

@hamstersarse oh. I thought they were increasing. All the routine stuff keeps being cancelled.

I read this article today about the failures in Covid data in the U.K. which has led to government policy being made on the basis of information that is either very inaccurate or flatly incorrect.
www.spectator.co.uk/article/The-ten-worst-Covid-data-failures

Can you link to the hospital admissions figures for me? I can find last years, but none for this year?

Hospital admissions always increase at this time of year.

Add to this the spurious results from the PCR test and its unclear as to whether there is anything unusual at all