It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Your Coronavirus Test Is Positive. Maybe It Shouldn’t Be.

page: 1

log in


posted on Dec, 3 2020 @ 05:49 PM
This article is from August of this year and updated in September. If anyone has posted about this, I can’t find it, so let me know if they have and I will remove this.
This seems to be an overlooked piece that says everything at least some folks in this country would rather we not pay attention to even though it was in the New York Times. The article has one main point that can be summed up in brief…

“In three sets of testing data that include cycle thresholds, compiled by officials in Massachusetts, New York and Nevada, up to 90 percent of people testing positive carried barely any virus…”

How they arrived at this conclusion is another matter, and I suggest you read the article before commenting, because I cannot do it justice in this short OP.

How they arrived at this conclusion has to do with the sensitivity threshold of the tests being used. When the test is too sensitive, it identifies subjects as infected who have so little of the virus that they are not “likely” to be contagious…

The standard tests are diagnosing huge numbers of people who may be carrying relatively insignificant amounts of the virus.

…because the tests are designed as yes or no when they should be designed to detect levels of the virus a subject has.

Most of these people are not likely to be contagious, and identifying them may contribute to bottlenecks that prevent those who are contagious from being found in time.

One doctor likened it to…

…finding a hair in a room long after a person has left…

Oddly enough, neither the FDA or the CDC ask manufacturers or laboratories to specify what threshold they are using, so testing positive could mean different things within a range of sensitivity and levels of the virus.

It’s just kind of mind-blowing to me that people are not recording the C.T. values from all these tests, that they’re just returning a positive or a negative…
It would be useful information to know if somebody’s positive, whether they have a high viral load or a low viral load…

“Testers” do not typically know the sensitivity threshold of the tests they’re using, so if the test has a high sensitivity, obviously the numbers go up dramatically. This, in my opinion, has likely been used to drive up numbers artificially by those who do know the sensitivity of the tests being used by manufacturers, because lowering the sensitivity of tests across the board would lower the numbers dramatically across the country and expose this virus for what it is and isn’t.

Highly sensitive PCR tests seemed like the best option for tracking the coronavirus at the start of the pandemic. But for the outbreaks raging now, he said, what’s needed are coronavirus tests that are fast, cheap and abundant enough to frequently test everyone who needs it — even if the tests are less sensitive.
“It might not catch every last one of the transmitting people, but it sure will catch the most transmissible people, including the superspreaders,” Dr. Mina said. “That alone would drive epidemics practically to zero.

Note the main doctor in this article feels there should be more testing rather than less, but he also believes in lowering the sensitivity of the tests so as to weed out those who have miniscule levels of the virus, and find those who are so-called “superspreaders”. He also believes in using faster testing, which Bill Gates of all people has been preaching for months, as well as less invasive testing. Not that I’m a fan, but he was right if an individual believes the WuFlu exists at all.
Article Link
edit on 12/3/2020 by Klassified because: wording

posted on Dec, 3 2020 @ 05:56 PM
Yes, all in line with the new President:

See, our lock down for 2 weeks work. Testing positive now is at an all time low. Go back to school and work people .

posted on Dec, 3 2020 @ 05:57 PM
I really like what Dr. Michael Yeadon (former Pfizer VP) has been saying on this topic, according to him, the PCR testing is completely worthless...

I have explained how a hopelessly-performing diagnostic test has been, and continues to be used, not for diagnosis of disease but, it seems, solely to create fear. (Dr. Michael Yeadon)

"I think the evidence is unequivocal that we are in a PCR false positive pseudo-epidemic..." (Dr. Michael Yeadon)

COVID Pandemic Is Over, No Need For Vaccines, Says Former Vice President Of Pfizer

"...what is the probability a person testing positive in Pillar 2 actually has COVID-19? The awful answer is 11% (10 divided by 80 + 10).The test exaggerates the number of covid-19 cases by almost ten-fold (90 divided by 10). Scared yet? That daily picture they show you, with the ‘cases’ climbing up on the right-hand side? Its horribly exaggerated. Its not a mistake, as I shall show. This test is fatally flawed and MUST immediately be withdrawn and never used again in this setting unless shown to be fixed. The examples I gave are very close to what is actually happening every day as you read this."

Lies, Damned Lies and Health Statistics – the Deadly Danger of False Positives

A PCR false positive pseudo-epidemic looks just like a real epidemic, but isn’t... I have to tell you that there is more than common-or-garden doubt about the PCR mass testing that purports to identify the virus. We have very strong evidence that the PCR mass testing as currently conducted is completely worthless.

In brief: the pandemic was over by June and herd immunity was the main force which turned the pandemic and pressed it into retreat. In the autumn, the claimed “cases” are an artefact of a deranged testing system, which I explain in detail below. That’s it. All the rest is a PCR false positive pseudo-epidemic. The cure, of course, as it has been in the past when PCR has replaced the pandemic itself as the menace in the land, is to stop PCR mass testing.

In case you’re still not convinced and think several hundred people are dying of COVID-19 each day, please watch this 10 min explainer video, created by data scientist Joel Smalley.

edit on 12.3.2020 by Murgatroid because: Felt like it...

posted on Dec, 3 2020 @ 06:10 PM
Been say'n this for even other countries and their courts are realizing the testing scam
Portugal court ruling

posted on Dec, 3 2020 @ 06:24 PM
Coronavirus testing has declined and therefore coronavirus cases have declined. The media is begging people to get tested more frequently.

I didn't hear the details, but Joe Biden said today that people will have to endure some very strict Corona regulations for at least 100 days when he is sworn into office.
edit on 12/3/2020 by carewemust because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 3 2020 @ 06:29 PM
My friends test came back negative, but he has all the symptoms, still does a week in..who the hell knows.

posted on Dec, 3 2020 @ 06:34 PM
a reply to: Zrtst

VERY good source, appears to jive with what Dr. Yeadon said above as well...

"...the court concludes that “if someone is tested by PCR as positive when a threshold of 35 cycles or higher is used (as is the rule in most laboratories in Europe and the US), the probability that said person is infected is less than 3%, and the probability that said result is a false positive is 97%.”

posted on Dec, 3 2020 @ 07:38 PM
a reply to: Murgatroid
There's a lot of bogus information out there seemingly meant to keep the public ignorant and fearful.

posted on Dec, 3 2020 @ 07:48 PM
I'm having a procedure on Monday so I had to have a Covid test today. I won't know the results for a few days I'm sure, but I haven't had any symptoms nor have I been around anyone that has. My luck it'll test positive.

posted on Dec, 3 2020 @ 07:59 PM
a reply to: HalWesten

However the results come back, stay positive and treat them just as you would Dominion election results... Fear is the goal here, do NOT give them the satisfaction...

"The actual covid death rate is between .1% and .2%, that means the actual death rate is 22 1/2 to 45 times less deadly than we were originally told..."

What It's Like to Believe Everything the Media Tells You (@ 2 1/2 min.)

In stunning new findings, researchers working in Los Angeles County contend that the number of people who have been infected with coronavirus could be as much as 55 times higher than the levels experts originally believed. The numbers indicate the virus could be far less deadly than believed.

posted on Dec, 3 2020 @ 09:04 PM
a reply to: Murgatroid
I think his point is, he will not get his procedure

posted on Dec, 4 2020 @ 06:43 AM
Anger? Yes. Fear? No. I haven't had any despite the repeated claims of annihilation by the virus from Democrats and the media. If my procedure is delayed it could mean severe consequences for me so I'm hoping this test is negative.

posted on Dec, 5 2020 @ 12:23 PM
Just got the results, negative. My procedure can happen Monday.

top topics


log in