Covid 19 testing for a virus

originally posted by: Extremistcontent
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Your post was utter nonsense, how does a PCR yield a positive IgG, they are completely separate tests. Sorry I couldn't translate your lack of communication.

Clearly a problem with your inability to understand English. Let's try again, pay attention.

If you don't understand how the IgG proves the PCR you shouldn't be posting on the subject.

Maybe you can tell me where I said anything about a PCR giving a positive IgG?

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

You can't diagnose because you can't tell if it is alive or dead or just a part of.
All you can say is after X number of cycles the particle was found.

That it not a diagnoses of anything.

It's like going in and saying you have a painful feeling in your leg. Pain exists but what is the diagnosis?

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

"an IgG proves a PCR"

That was your statement. Its not factually correct, like I've explained at least twice now, but I'm fairly certain we've been down this road before. You could have a positive PCR but not be infected currently. The IgG is just telling you if you have antibodies. That could be from 6 months ago also.

SARS-CoV-2 antibody (often referred to as serology) tests look for antibodies in a sample to determine if an individual has had a past infection with the virus that causes COVID-19. COVID-19 antibody tests can help identify people who may have been infected with the SARS-CoV-2 virus or have recovered from a COVID-19 infection.

www.fda.gov... consumers

Currently, SARS-CoV-2 infection is primarily diagnosed by detection of viral RNA via reverse transcription PCR (RT-PCR) or by viral culture and demonstration of cytopathic effect (20). Although RT-PCR identifies viral RNA and cannot determine whether infectious virus is present, infectiousness can be inferred from cycle threshold (Ct) values. The RT-PCR Ct value represents the number of PCR cycles required to detect SARS-CoV-2 RNA; lower values indicate higher viral load and imply higher infectiousness (20–22).

wwwnc.cdc.gov...

You'll note my statements were almost word for word out of the CDC quote above.

a reply to: Extremistcontent

Actually what you said was a PCR can't detect antibodies, which had literally nothing to do with what I said.

This is what you said ...

These tests dont tell if you are infected or have ever been infected

Now you move the goalposts to say it could be an old infection.

Next time don't jump in and say it doesn't mean you ever had SARS-CoV-2 if you are going to retreat back to 'it could be an old infection' admitting exactly what I said, the test can only tell if you have the virus.

Where I work a positive PCR means you don't come in and the hospital pays you to stay home, if anything thinks they are doing that when the PCR is unreliable they are insane.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

I realize you don’t have a good grasp of the conversation so I’ll try and explain one more time.

You may have never been infected. As in you fought it off and it’s just dead viral particles.

a reply to: Extremistcontent

So you fought it off, and were never infected. Those can't both be true. What was fought off if there was never an infection to begin with?

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

You can fight it off without any viral intrusion into the cells. Aka not infected.

Have you ever learned how the immune system works?

Lol. It’s like talking to a wall. That thinks it knows things.

Funny how you keep changing the subject but completely ignored the reply with the quotes from cdc and fda. Showing how very wrong you are.

But what would we expect?

originally posted by: Extremistcontent
Funny how you keep changing the subject but completely ignored the reply with the quotes from cdc and fda. Showing how very wrong you are.

Because I was being kind to you.

SARS-CoV-2 infection is primarily diagnosed by detection of viral RNA via reverse transcription PCR

Infection is diagnosed by PCR, which is what you are saying does not diagnose infection. It was too easy, which is why I ignored it.

SARS-CoV-2 antibody (often referred to as serology) tests look for antibodies in a sample to determine if an individual has had a past infection with the virus that causes COVID-19.

There is no way to have a positive IgG without having an infection.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Ok I'll try one more time. Honestly I'm sorry for being mean, you really don't have a clue.

An "IgG" will only tell you if there has been an infection in which you mounted a humoral immune response. It cannot tell you whether that infection is now or was sometime in the past.

They may say you diagnose an infection with a PCR, but as stated for the billionth time here, a PCR is not adequate on its own to confirm an active infection. You may infer it from the cycle count, but that is not being done, and not recommended by the CDC because they wouldn't want you to know most of the "asymptomatic positive tests" are not active infections but viral particles.

I won't reply to you because you don't even acknowledge when I post from the CDC and FDA exactly what I've been saying. Your continued insistence that an "IgG" proves a current infection, is clear that you are a bit slow.

something something about arguing with a fool