Jump to content

COVID 19 GLOBAL


grayray

Recommended Posts

Do your knuckles drag on the ground?

 

The major genetic risk factor for severe COVID-19 is inherited from Neanderthals

A recent genetic association study identified a gene cluster on chromosome 3 as a risk locus for
respiratory failure after infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARSCoV-2).
A separate study (COVID-19 Host Genetics Initiative) comprising 3,199 hospitalized
patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and control individuals showed that this
cluster is the major genetic risk factor for severe symptoms after SARS-CoV-2 infection and
hospitalization. Here we show that the risk is conferred by a genomic segment of around
50 kilobases in size that is inherited from Neanderthals and is carried by around 50% of people
in south Asia and around 16% of people in Europe.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2818-3

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/28/2020 at 10:03 AM, fygjam said:

It is not up to me to provide the evidence to support your bogus argument.

You want to claim high false positive rates, provide the evidence or accept you are wrong.

You never answered the question you quoted which was:

"Are you honestly saying your googling didn't throw up any discussions which emphasised a reasonable possibility of false positives?"  Safe to say they did I think but you chose to ignore them for your own petty reasons.

The Lancet published an interesting one at the end of last month which said preliminary estimates were false positives of between 0.8% and 4%  which it described as a "significant proportion".

It's not 30% - 40% but I never mentioned these numbers just that there were "lots" and The Lancet report seems to agree.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, KWA said:

You never answered the question you quoted which was:

"Are you honestly saying your googling didn't throw up any discussions which emphasised a reasonable possibility of false positives?"  Safe to say they did I think but you chose to ignore them for your own petty reasons.

The Lancet published an interesting one at the end of last month which said preliminary estimates were false positives of between 0.8% and 4%  which it described as a "significant proportion".

It's not 30% - 40% but I never mentioned these numbers just that there were "lots" and The Lancet report seems to agree.

Ok, I'll answer your question.

The first result which had actual numbers was the Australian evaluation.  0.0-2.5% false positives.

The second was the Lancet article. 0.8-4.0% false positives.

As I already had a figure of about 2.0% already in my mind, I've been keeping abreast of RT-PCR technology since the pandemic was declared, why would I need to look any further.

Remember, back on March 10 I started a thread and the first post was about RT-PCR.

If you think 4.0% false positives is a lot you'll really start screaming when you see the false negatives.

From the Australian figures, 0.6-5.8% false negatives.

A false positive might mean a bit of inconvenience for someone. A false negative could mean a person infecting 10, 20, 30 or more and possibly people dying.

Going by the Australian figures and I can't be arsed looking any further, with false negatives greater than false positives the stats are probably understated.

Let's see you and others start complaining about the false negative rate and the understated stats. Go on.

 

 

  • Sad 1
  • Surprised 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Stillearly said:

Parisians taking the virus to the countryside 

 

 

Ever heard of "La Toussaint" ?  Or "All Saints Day" in English ? 

It's a long weekend in France.

https://www.afrenchcollection.com/all-saints-day-la-toussaint-a-french-tradition/

As the lockdown starts from Friday, the Parisians probably decided to leave on Thursday.... as they know even under lockdown it is autorised to travel BACK home anytime later.

You should know we're a bunch of very disciplined people 😁😁😁😁😁

More seriously, same happened in March / April, creating some frictions in the provinces. Same happens on every long weekend, july / august cris cross, etc...  And if you go back earlier, same happened in 1939.....

 

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, fygjam said:

Ok, I'll answer your question.

Thank you.  Glad to see you admit there is an issue.

 

16 hours ago, fygjam said:

Let's see you and others start complaining about the false negative rate and the understated stats. Go on.

Any false results are a cause for concern, and I made a comment on the false positives as a response where it was in context (mention of false positives in another test type).

False negatives of course have far greater potential repercussions if infected Joe goes home or out in the street or to the pub and infects many more, but I wasn't responding to a post about that.  I may if one turns up.

The medical side is currently a subject with many grey areas and decrying valid points that don't entirely support your way of thinking ("Christ, not this bullshit again") does not advance the discussion IMO.

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Yessongs said:

Heard last night Taiwan has had no positive infections now for 200 straight days? 

Impressive if really true.

Having gone through SARS & H1NI they had a aggressive plan in place to deal with a serious pandemic.

Being an island country also helps when controlling borders.

Smart folks... the Taiwanese.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Yessongs said:

Heard last night Taiwan has had no positive infections now for 200 straight days? 

Impressive if really true.

Agree mate.. . other counties are doing well.... even if they are an island or not.

cheers

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...