Covid 19 - counter arguments

jakehake

Preachs PA
Staff member
Patron
This is the part I took note of..
"The asymptomatic/presymptomatic secondary attack rate is not statistically different from zero, and the confidence interval is technically 0.7 ± 4.2, resulting in a range of -3.5%-4.9%, but attack rates cannot be negative, so it is truncated at 0."
Have you read the newspaper story that was pulled or the study? If you can point to the section of the study where they discuss the above point. Cheers. Thanks.

1609239726065.png

I mean even reading the above it says symptomatic cases were 18.0% with a 95% confidence interval it was between 14.2 and 22.1% and for asymptomatic cases it was 0.7% with a 95% confidence interval that it is between 0-4.9%. So basically asymptomatic cases have a possibility of being 0%.

But nothing like the twaddle written in the Alachua Chronicle by Len Cabrera who had his article pulled and removed from view.

What's your working out from the study?
 
OP
sliper

sliper

Forum Patron
Patron
People can catch Covid 19 from other people who have Covid I don't think that is in dispute.. the point of my post was to challenge claims of "asymptomatic transmission." The claim that "asymptomatic and pre symptomatic transmission cannot be ruled" is the basis for Government restrictions on the population. If people without symptoms cannot pass on Covid there is little or no need for most of the restrictions

This study (and at least one other) refute the claims by Sage and repeated by Hancock... "that asymptomatic transmission cannot be ruled out."


"These findings are consistent with other household studies that reported asymptomatic index cases as having limited or no role in household transmission, although many studies acknowledged that asymptomatic index cases are likely under-represented"

 
Last edited:

jakehake

Preachs PA
Staff member
Patron
the reason the link doesn't work is because he deleted his website but you can download the tarball whilst you still have a chance

1609240385651.png

interesting what the normal google searches are for the Chronicle

1609240449917.png
 

jakehake

Preachs PA
Staff member
Patron
I think its pretty clear people can catch Covid 19 from other people who have Covid I don't think that is in dispute.. the point of my post was asymptomatic transmission.

Again, read the study and find the section on asymptomatic cases that says there is "zero" probability of transmission? I've shown my take on it which may be incorrect but you seem convinced by Len rather than the actual study
 
OP
sliper

sliper

Forum Patron
Patron
So the figures of infection are made up?

Really?

I don't think the figures for "new infections/cases" are accurate... the figures given every night by the media are not infections they are PCR positives test results...

I refer you to Post 794.
 
OP
sliper

sliper

Forum Patron
Patron

IMO I think she gets close to describing what we are actually facing here ? When someone with her background and contacts in business and government says this it really needs to be considered seriously.
 
Last edited:

raefil

Shit Fan
Patron
 
OP
sliper

sliper

Forum Patron
Patron

How many of these hospital admissions were admitted for other health issues and became a "Covid hospitalisation" statistic after a PCR positive result in hospital ? I note the "with Covid" label...surely you would want to know the accurate figure for patients needing Covid treatment as opposed to patients being treated for some other condition ?

1. Can PCR tests differentiate between live and dead virus ?
2. Can the PCR test differentiate between different types of corona virus ?
3. How many cycles were used in these tests ? (According to PCR's inventor anything above 30 is meaningless)
4. And if PCR can't differentiate how do you know what the true numbers of "infection" are ?
5. What is the False Positive Rate for these tests ?
6. Why would anyone call PCR positives a "case" or an "infection" if the answer to 1 & 2 is "no" and 3 is "above 30" ?

Is an attempt at discrediting scientists you disagree with more important than obtaining accurate data ?

Amazing we have a virus that seems reluctant to cross a non existent Irish border.
 
Last edited:
OP
sliper

sliper

Forum Patron
Patron
Im not going to let you hide from the fact that you were the person, right at the start of this, who pushed the use of, "Face Nappies," for the "Psuedo Virus."

Yes sliper you. You encouraged us all to follow Dr Campbell who, back then and even now, still gives the single best expalanations of where we are at.

All your own work, sliper.

His latest video.


I don't think it is any secret that in the early days of this I posted generally helpful info in the face of what appeared to be a very deadly virus...

I may be wrong but I don't recall ever specifically recommending the wearing of facemasks.. in fact I think you posted an angry response to my suggestion way back in May (?) that "people should return to normal life"

Still in on bitcoin ?
 
Last edited:

portisheadpete

Forum Patron
Patron

The sad thing is that these charlatans will continue to infect our mainstream media and appear on breakfast tv. Unassuming viewers will assume they have integrity and the cycle will continue. They would have been put in the stocks in 1665 for treachery during the Great Plague. We've so much to learn that we've forgotten from earlier centuries. We fool ourselves we've progressed
 
Top