Battersbox

Sorry, I'm confused with all the tickers being thrown out in here--which one is switching it's ticker to FOMO?

Excellent, good luck. It's a lot of fun. I'm hoping to get out there tomorrow morning for the first time in about 6 weeks. Hoping the snow is down enough not to swallow discs.

I saw that. It's awesome. He truly is amazing. Hopefully some others get nice paydays as well.

.

Thank you for the links. The New York Times story I remember quite well, which specifically mentions 40 cycles. I knew I'd seen that before.

Thank you.

Thank you. Makes sense. Careful you don't get labeled as a right-wing, Qanon nutjob. My understanding also is that higher cycle thresholds can also detect viral particles from recovered people as well, not just asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic.

I'm not implying anything. Feels like you are inferring plenty. That's really what it means? Read the instructions? The line which states 'The cycle threshold (Ct) needed to detect virus is inversely proportional to the patient’s viral load'...that means 'read the instructions'?

Okay, then what does this mean? WHO guidance Diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2 states that careful interpretation of weak positive results is needed (1). The cycle threshold (Ct) needed to detect virus is inversely proportional to the patient’s viral load. Where test results do not correspond with the clinical presentation, a new specimen should be taken and retested using the same or different NAT technology.

Thank you. This is helpful. From the WHO's release yesterday, I thought it was clear they were recommending the lowering of cycles to determine infection. If that's not what they are recommending, what else could it be?

Doug B...thank you for your input. Culdeus: your answer was unhelpful at best.

I have no interest in conspiracy theories regarding the WHO. I am curious, however, if anyone knows if 40 cycle amplification which has been used all along for Covid (and is now being advised against by the WHO) was common prior to 2020? Does anyone know? And if it is a common threshold, why drop it?

Well, of course 'lockdown' is an arbitrary term, and there is a wide spectrum of what it could mean. But with that said, MY state has been more 'locked-down' than at any point in its entire existence, so you can't dismiss what has been done. Someone up-thread questioned where we've locked down in this country, and my answer is Illinois. If your belief that the only thing that qualifies as a lockdown is welding people into apartment buildings that's your prerogative.

https://www.newsweek.com/covid-lockdowns-have-no-clear-benefit-vs-other-voluntary-measures-international-study-shows-1561656?utm_term=Autofeed&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1610642799 COVID Lockdowns Have No Clear Benefit vs Other Voluntary Measures, International Study Shows

I'm unfamiliar with those data. Question: do they get granular enough with that data to determine if mobility is private vs public? ie- travel to work, or restaurants & pubs vs travel to private residences? I ask because it seems to me, by default, any area with fewer closures of leisure type place would have more mobility.