Jump to content

Formerly DT: COVID-19 - Featuring Lots of Politics, now CR because political talk not going away

InkaUtexas

By InkaUtexas
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

Captainant

Captainant 28003

Posted
Posted

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10168531/

Measurements with the AEM confirmed the existence of larger sized droplets in the exhaled breath. In general, coughing produced the largest droplet concentrations and nose breathing the least, although considerable intersubject variability was observed.

Hooray for scientific studies!

  • Like 1
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 58.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • atomheartbevo

    2461

  • dcar00

    1722

  • Cheeseweasel

    1552

  • MNLonghornFUKM

    1324

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Uncle Boobs
Uncle Boobs

Against my better judgment and several beers deep, I have taken you up on this, potentially ending my streak of totally worthless posts. I have done 3 and 7 day averages only on the Worldometer data. 

Brisketexan
Brisketexan

Daughter’s home. A little PTSD, we’re picking up Whataburger to help.

Coelenterate Fuccboi
Coelenterate Fuccboi

Just try and imagine GreenspointTexas being the person to intubate you as you fight for your life against COVID-19. You’re laying there gasping for air while he chastises you for all the things you li

Posted Images

MonkeyDoughnut

MonkeyDoughnut 10487

Posted
Posted

Connecticut says it found testing flaw, 90 false positives - 62% inaccuracy

https://apnews.com/b98cf80c36d338f833f3a47d84141d11

How is this not bigger news? The tests are from Thermo Fisher Scientific which has been making millions upon millions of these tests.

One lab in Connecticut decides to double check the findings since the TFS tests were new to their specific lab and they found them to report false positives almost 2/3 of the time, yet millions of these same tests have and are being used all over the country.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
B00M

B00M 6603

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, MonkeyDoughnut said:

Connecticut says it found testing flaw, 90 false positives - 62% inaccuracy

https://apnews.com/b98cf80c36d338f833f3a47d84141d11

How is this not bigger news? The tests are from Thermo Fisher Scientific which has been making millions upon millions of these tests.

One lab in Connecticut decides to double check the findings since the TFS tests were new to their specific lab and they found them to report false positives almost 2/3 of the time, yet millions of these same tests have and are being used all over the country.

I mean, there was some reason we tried to develop our own test 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Lobo

Guest Lobo

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, MonkeyDoughnut said:

Connecticut says it found testing flaw, 90 false positives - 62% inaccuracy

https://apnews.com/b98cf80c36d338f833f3a47d84141d11

How is this not bigger news? The tests are from Thermo Fisher Scientific which has been making millions upon millions of these tests.

One lab in Connecticut decides to double check the findings since the TFS tests were new to their specific lab and they found them to report false positives almost 2/3 of the time, yet millions of these same tests have and are being used all over the country.

Because our testing is perfect.  Anybody that wants one, can get one.  We have testing skills...why can't you people understand that?  What the hell is the matter with you people?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
B00M

B00M 6603

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Lobo said:

Because our testing is perfect.  Anybody that wants one, can get one.  We have testing skills...why can't you people understand that?  What the hell is the matter with you people?  

Aren't we using the WHO's test? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TexasPride10

TexasPride10 580

Posted
Posted
On 7/21/2020 at 2:07 PM, Lobo said:

No, unless you're purposely trying to exhale harder through it.  The resting breathing pattern in the average human adult sees much more dispersal/spit droplets through mouth breathing than nasal breathing (on the exhale at least, not sure about inhale in terms of volume of air consumed).  Unless of course you've just done two lines of blow consecutively, in which case---all bets are off.  Plus, it's not exactly a pandemic saver, but again---just physics...the exhale from your nose goes more down than out (though certainly outward as well).  

Bottom line when air comes out  (nose, mouth, or otherwise) from the fat faces of Americans......it goes far out and stays out for awhile.  Your question is a good one and I hope someone here can speak to specific bio-physics.  What I hope doesn't happen though is a tens of millions of Americans start using as their excuse for not wearing a mask, "I only breathe with my nose"...because those people are mouthbreathers usually...in every sense of the term.

And I'll be the first pro-mask disciple to admit that when I wear my mask, I breathe more through my mouth than I do with my nose.  No mask, I'm a 90% nose breather (I've had to get tested for respiratory shit).  With my mask (haven't had the same tests obviously, kind of a waste during these times), I'm probably a 75% mouth breather.  Don't know why that is, maybe because my mask smells like female reproductive parts for some reason and I really need to talk to that flea market I get my medical supplies from

So what you're saying is; mouth breathers are going to kill us all? Just another reason to avoid College Station. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Not from Texas

Not from Texas 21

Posted
Posted

In my little neck of the woods in PA, three weeks ago we had a nursing home have twenty some cases.  The odd thing about it was, none of the positives were the residents, they were all nurses and workers.  They put out notices and contact traced them, and shut down several businesses in the area. All of them had no symptoms so they retested them last week, everyone was negative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23517

Posted
Posted
27 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

We do. Because making a big deal about this would hurt corporate interests and our country prioritizes the stock market over its people, of course.

You stretch much further and you might hurt something. 

If there was in fact a broad problem with false positives across the country at rate of 90/144, corporate interests would be more aligned with amplifying the finding. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BradInATX

BradInATX 9208

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

You stretch much further and you might hurt something. 

If there was in fact a broad problem with false positives across the country at rate of 90/144, corporate interests would be more aligned with amplifying the finding. 

Well then it's probably not a broad problem, is it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BradInATX

BradInATX 9208

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Anastasis said:

Begging the question. 

I think that the signal requires replication in other settings, as I suggested. 

Sure, and I don't disagree. It's interesting and I'd like to learn more about it and see it explored further. But you have to sort of follow the path of least resistance and, at least initially, assume that if it were a systemic problem the "open it up" people in power would be screaming from the mountaintops about it, which they are not. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23517

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

But you have to sort of follow the path of least resistance and, at least initially, assume that if it were a systemic problem the "open it up" people in power would be screaming from the mountaintops about it, which they are not. 

I think that the path of least resistance in understanding the finding is that this state lab ran a validation procedure that, at least based on what information is available from that article, would not likely be performed in most commercial labs that are under significant time pressure to pump out test results. Maybe there is something, maybe it is nothing.  But I think that following the path of least resistance leads me to believe that systematic evaluation of this potential finding has not been conducted. 

DPH said the false positive test results were discovered by DPH laboratory scientists while examining previously positive samples to determine the feasibility of testing “pooled” specimens at the state lab. Dr. Jafar Razeq, director of the state lab, said staff were looking at the “background information” of the specimens and “we realized that these specimens shouldn’t have not been reported as positive.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FondrenRoad

FondrenRoad 4378

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

I think that the path of least resistance in understanding the finding is that this state lab ran a validation procedure that, at least based on what information is available from that article, would not likely be performed in most commercial labs that are under significant time pressure to pump out test results. Maybe there is something, maybe it is nothing.  But I think that following the path of least resistance leads me to believe that systematic evaluation of this potential finding has not been conducted. 

DPH said the false positive test results were discovered by DPH laboratory scientists while examining previously positive samples to determine the feasibility of testing “pooled” specimens at the state lab. Dr. Jafar Razeq, director of the state lab, said staff were looking at the “background information” of the specimens and “we realized that these specimens shouldn’t have not been reported as positive.”

"shouldn't have not?"  So they should have then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BradInATX

BradInATX 9208

Posted
Posted (edited)
23 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

I think that the path of least resistance in understanding the finding is that this state lab ran a validation procedure that, at least based on what information is available from that article, would not likely be performed in most commercial labs that are under significant time pressure to pump out test results. Maybe there is something, maybe it is nothing.  But I think that following the path of least resistance leads me to believe that systematic evaluation of this potential finding has not been conducted. 

DPH said the false positive test results were discovered by DPH laboratory scientists while examining previously positive samples to determine the feasibility of testing “pooled” specimens at the state lab. Dr. Jafar Razeq, director of the state lab, said staff were looking at the “background information” of the specimens and “we realized that these specimens shouldn’t have not been reported as positive.”

I don't think I can take this much further without CR'ing it. But there is no noise around this. It's all quiet. Which leads me to believe people getting the information, even those who would benefit from this, know that it's nothing.

If there was any even tiny shred of a possibility that this is a widespread problem. we'd be hearing about it. It should be an innocent until proven guilty situation for any rational person.

Edited by BradInATX
Link to comment
Share on other sites
FondrenRoad

FondrenRoad 4378

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Dr. Razeq is Palestinian and English was not his primary language.  Please direct yourself immediately for cultural sensitivity re-training. 

I can direct myself "to" something, but I can't direct myself "for" something.

And Dr Razeq is doing alright with the English language otherwise.  There isn't a "used to could" or a "fixing to" in his statement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23517

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

I don't think I can take this much further without CR'ing it. But there is no noise around this. It's all quiet. Which leads me to believe people getting the information, even those who would benefit from this, know that it's nothing.

If there was any even tiny shred of a possibility that this is a widespread problem. we'd be hearing about it. It should be an innocent until proven guilty situation for any rational person.

Agree that we assume the null until compelling information exists.  Like I said, could just be a one off lab event. We should assume that to be the case until it is replicated. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BradInATX

BradInATX 9208

Posted
Posted (edited)

Well, maybe it is fucked up then.

I'm hoping not. This is not something we really need to add further fuel to the fire on this whole Covid thing. We're just starting to get the numbers heading back in the right direction, last thing we need is the gasoline for the "Covid is a hoax" crowd to go rile people up on Facebook and convince them that masks are murder. More fodder for division and trench mentality. Sucks.

Edited by BradInATX
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hate

Hate 20166

Posted
Posted

Maybe it’s time we just completely move away from “positive tests” as a metric of performance and base it only on hospitalizations and deaths if we can’t rely on the test we have. I’m also curious if other nations around the world are having issues with their test?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Surly Bevo

Surly Bevo 25542

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, dcar00 said:

here is the quandry,  if tons of false positives...

one side - "see it isn't widespread, nothing to see here"

other side - "death rate is 3x higher"

 

Logical middle - well wouldn't that mean that both numerator and denominator are potentially subject to decrease?

Nah....get the fuck out of here with that nuanced question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BradInATX

BradInATX 9208

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, Hate said:

Maybe it’s time we just completely move away from “positive tests” as a metric of performance and base it only on hospitalizations and deaths if we can’t rely on the test we have. I’m also curious if other nations around the world are having issues with their test?

Most of us who have been tracking the numbers a bit on these threads have primarily focused on hospitalizations as our key indicator. Even if we're assuming the test is accurate, there are too many other variables (number of tests available, mostly) to really use it as a barometer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bevo

Bevo 13659

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

Most of us who have been tracking the numbers a bit on these threads have primarily focused on hospitalizations as our key indicator. Even if we're assuming the test is accurate, there are too many other variables (number of tests available, mostly) to really use it as a barometer.

Barometer? Barometer? I was told there would be no meteorology.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
InkaUtexas

InkaUtexas 26401

Posted
  • Author
Posted

This is where I am at as well. Right now my county's numbers of positive reported cases has dropped dramatically, but then there is no open testing going on. Our hospitalizations and deaths are going up on a daily basis though. 

Only testing is IF you are sick and a doctor says to get tested. Results coming back between 5-21 days. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dcar00

dcar00 14630

Posted
Posted
24 minutes ago, Surly Bevo said:

Logical middle - well wouldn't that mean that both numerator and denominator are potentially subject to decrease?

Nah....get the fuck out of here with that nuanced question.

agreed.  I'm sure that is where most Americans would be but you'll only hear about the ends.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
MonkeyDoughnut

MonkeyDoughnut 10487

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Hate said:

Maybe it’s time we just completely move away from “positive tests” as a metric of performance and base it only on hospitalizations and deaths if we can’t rely on the test we have. I’m also curious if other nations around the world are having issues with their test?

Hospitalizations for what though?  If a person with underlying issues isn't feeling well to begin with and gets a "positive" test and goes to the hospital (logical)... the numbers still are messed up.  In times of a pandemic I would assume hospital rates are higher. I know if I start feeling bad from anything I'll be more likely to not wait before seeking treatment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...