3 ms·
But it's not just about there being correlation between the variant appearing, and there being a new wave. That is a pretty weak data point by itself. We have m
by jsnell 6y ago
But it's not just about there being correlation between the variant appearing, and there being a new wave. That is a pretty weak data point by itself. We have more evidence and everything so far is pointing in the same direction.
The big deal to me is that this variant is muscling out others in sequencing (+ PCR tests which by coincidence can tell the difference between this variant and the previously dominant ones), despite there being a high prevalence.
And while the details are sparse, the NERVTAG minutes refer to evidence showing that the patients infected by the new variant have higher viral loads.
- raadore 6y agoOn dec 10 WHO released a statement on their website admitting that PCR tests are faulty, will detect anything we want them to detect and therefore medical staff need to look for symptoms which basically means you’re sick if you have symptoms. https://www.who.int/news/item/14-12-2020-who-information-notice-for-ivd-users https://www.who.int/news/item/14-12-2020-who-information-not... As a scientist that information tells me that all cases have to be considered faulty since the foundation is faulty. The results cannot be trusted.
- sradman 6y agoNot relevant. Variants are detected using full sequencing.
- fsh 6y agoThe statement you linked to says no such thing.
- thanatosmin 6y agoYou are misrepresenting the WHO statement. It’s covering a small technical issue that setting the Ct threshold for PCR tests can vary the false positive rate, particularly when there is low prevalence. Because use of this, it can be helpful to consider the Ct value of a positive result. It does not say the Ct threshold has been set incorrectly, or that PCR tests “are faulty.”