you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]CompleteDoubterII[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

At a glance:

The first study considered people infected with SARS-COV-2 'by reverse transcription–polymerase chain reaction on swab test of the upper respiratory tract'. The first question, then, is how reliable this test is. That would be determined by the false positive rate of the test. I know nothing about it, and don't care to investigate further.

The second study was on elderly people. Every time I asked people who thought the measures taken were an overreach, they said the elderly should have been isolated (meaning that they were at risk) [1][2][3]. Nothing controversial there. It identified people as having Covid-19 'post mortem by quantitative reverse transcriptase–polymerase chain reaction to detect SARS-CoV-2 RNA and performed from pharyngeal swabs'. Again, the first question is how reliable this is; its false positive rate. I wonder why they mention they did the diagnosis post-mortem. Is that important? The only possibility I can think of is that their corpses passed the test, but their living bodies wouldn't have.

I only posted this to promote the side that isn't being looked into thoroughly enough, in my view. I've no care to investigate this further. Those interested in Covid-19 can...