4 ms·

I did read your linked explanation, I did not get a chance to read your sources however but I will when I get a chance. You don't need to be so condescending. A

I did read your linked explanation, I did not get a chance to read your sources however but I will when I get a chance. You don't need to be so condescending. Are you in the medical field by chance? Anyhow my concerns around the virus aren't so much with the tests but with the lack of data on the long term effects of the new vaccines. Since I am not in an elderly age group, I am reluctant to take the vaccine without at least waiting a few years to observe if there are any other effects.

tripletao 5y ago
Please do read the sources. My background is math/CS, though I've done statistical work for life sciences. Evidence like the excess mortality requires zero medical knowledge though, just the ability to count deaths and compare that count year over year. Whatever the PCR test is doing, PCR-confirmed COVID deaths track reasonably well with excess deaths in regions hard enough hit for the excess deaths to be statistically distinguishable: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2778361 https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2778361 In fact excess mortality usually exceeds COVID deaths, suggesting there are more false negative PCR tests (at least on dead/dying people) than false positive. The vaccine is an entirely different topic. There's certainly a higher risk that the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine will have unforeseen long-term effects than for other, longer-studied vaccines; but there's also a higher risk that SARS-CoV-2 itself will have unforeseen long-term effects than for other, longer-studied diseases. I'm not elderly, but I've placed my bet on the vaccine. I don't mean to be condescending. I'm just frustrated that I've spent considerable time explaining why I believe the PCR test for SARS-CoV-2 is almost always accurate, and received zero engagement with any of that. The evidence is there for anyone willing to invest the effort to understand it.

tripletao 5y ago

Please do read the sources. My background is math/CS, though I've done statistical work for life sciences. Evidence like the excess mortality requires zero medical knowledge though, just the ability to count deaths and compare that count year over year. Whatever the PCR test is doing, PCR-confirmed COVID deaths track reasonably well with excess deaths in regions hard enough hit for the excess deaths to be statistically distinguishable: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2778361 https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2778361 In fact excess mortality usually exceeds COVID deaths, suggesting there are more false negative PCR tests (at least on dead/dying people) than false positive. The vaccine is an entirely different topic. There's certainly a higher risk that the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine will have unforeseen long-term effects than for other, longer-studied vaccines; but there's also a higher risk that SARS-CoV-2 itself will have unforeseen long-term effects than for other, longer-studied diseases. I'm not elderly, but I've placed my bet on the vaccine. I don't mean to be condescending. I'm just frustrated that I've spent considerable time explaining why I believe the PCR test for SARS-CoV-2 is almost always accurate, and received zero engagement with any of that. The evidence is there for anyone willing to invest the effort to understand it.