Dr. Fauci Told the Truth About COVID-19 Tests in July and Has Been Misleading the Public Ever Since
One of the most frustrating aspects of COVID-19 coverage has been the emphasis on “cases,” reinforced by Dr. Anthony Fauci. In fact, he was wringing his hands about rising “case” numbers on CNN in early October. These numbers are actually positive tests. The New York Times and several experts admitted in late August that up to 90% of positive PCR tests were not indicative of the active illness that could be transmitted to others.
OK, I'm swamped with work and family stuff but wanted to take a minute to dig into this. As often happens with these opinion column publications, they take some actual facts (like the interview with Fauci over the summer), and spin it into something it's not.
Let's start with the title:
"Dr. Fauci Told the Truth about COVID -19 Tests in July" --this part is fine
"and Has Been Misleading the Public Ever Since" -- this is the part I disagree with.
So, YES, there was a lot of discussion over the summer that the way PCR tests are done can detect virus leftovers that are no longer viable. They also can detect relatively new infections that will be viable, as well as active infections that are a problem.
I talked to some doctors about this (liberals and conservatives!) and they all said the same thing. They wish that there was a quick test widely available that could tell if someone is infectious, today, such as the much discussed strip tests, but until those are available in the wild they ALL wanted the PCR test to remain super sensitive. One guy said he would rather have 10 "false positives" (note the quotes) rather than one false negative. The extra positives don't potentially kill anyone. And the "false positives" aren't false at all, they just mean an infection is on the way in or has already run its course, but that person still should know that they have/had the virus so they can figure out who they have been in contact with.
The article makes a fuss of the "up to 90%" might be not indicative of active transmissible illness, but in reality it is a much lower number. You have to be looking at some very select populations to get there... I don't have NYT access so can't read the source article right now.
It also goes on about the FDA knowing about the "glitch" of picking up old nonviable RNA... it's not a glitch. It's how PCR works.
They go on about the Ct score but the reality is that sampling differences can easily result in a three point Ct differential. Get a light sample due to a lot of these self-administered drive through test samplings happening very tentatively by the (potentially) sick person and a 34 active infection becomes a 37 "might be non-active" reading. Without knowing details of the sampling, and end user or even doctor can't tell where the cutoff should be (35? 37? 39?) for any one individual's test.
Moving on: This sentence suggests the US under Fauci's guidance is doing something aberrant: "why are labs in the United States still using up to 40 Ct. as the standard when it appears the right Ct is somewhere between 30 and 35? " Actually the worldwide standard is 40. Just about everywhere uses the same threshold, for the reasons I detailed above.
The test ain't great, but it's not Fauci's fault.
Fauci isn't misleading us when he expresses concern about the rising case counts. If you get a positive test, whether you HAVE an active infection now or HAD one and are over it, at some point you are/were infectious and need to figure out who you might have transmitted it to. Shit's hitting the fan quickly. It's not a few cities or rural enclaves that are spiking now... it's a wide ranging increase just about everywhere.
At the bottom there's a link to another article:
For gosh sakes, read what's happening in UTAH of all places:
coronavirus.utah.gov
So, the article BigRedFish posted had plenty of facts in it, arranged as a Fauci / Biden hit-job.
I'm trying to mostly stay out of the election stuff, as it gets too toxic and I haven't posted in that thread other than to thank BigRedFish for something nice he said of me, but here is a good wrap up of facts around many of the nuisance complaints around the election:
A barrage of lawsuits and investigations led by President Donald Trump's campaign and allies has not come close to proving a multi-state failure that would call into question his loss to President-elect Joe Biden.
apnews.com
Have a good evening folks.
www.wrtv.com
And blocking any interference on his preconceived thoughts. Textbook.
