Cases Gone Wild

There are a number of issues with testing that can, and probably are, greatly affecting the current case numbers.

To understand the problem it first must be understood that "cases" are in effect, a positive PCR test result for the virus.

To date, the majority of patients with Covid-19 have been diagnosed using a laboratory test called PCR, which detects the virus’ genetic material (i.e., RNA) in clinical samples (e.g., nasal swabs). PCR is a very sensitive laboratory method – meaning it can detect minute amounts of viral RNA – and has been used for nearly 2 decades to diagnose a variety of infectious diseases, including influenza and strep throat. Despite being a rapid and inherently sensitive test, PCR has certain limitations that need to be carefully considered when interpreting the results.

Many of the problems with case counts are due to this testing method. Not that there is anything inherently wrong with the test itself, just that it has never been used on such a large scale and the results of the tests are being misinterpreted. At the beginning of the crisis here in the United States, initial problems with the the test kits resulted in limited numbers of tests being done. Tests were pretty much limited to persons who had been exposed to the virus, in the hospital with symptoms, those who were prescribed to receive a test by doctors, and health care providers. Although there was a shortage of tests, the practice of testing only "at risk" patients is not unusual. In fact this is the first time in history that we have ever considered testing the general public en-mass for any disease. what is being done is unprecedented. Without even going into the reported misreporting of results from this unprecedented testing there are some "built in" or if you wish, systemic problems that have nothing to do with human error. Below is a summary of some for those problems, some having to do with with the PCR testing some for other reasons.

1. Many states including the three most populous, California, Texas and Florida and almost all states now experiencing a surge in cases, count "specimens tested" as cases rather than "people tested." This undoubtedly leads to an inflated case numbers since a person could be tested more than once and could test positive more than once.

2. The PCR test is so sensitive that it will pick up even fragments of the virus' genetic materials. The tested genetic material may or may not be live, in other words there is no way the test shows whether a person testing positive is infectious. A positive test does not mean a person is contagious to others.

3. These fragments can remain in an individual for an undetermined period of time, from days to weeks, it is not known. This means that a person could receive a positive test result even if they had already recovered from the virus and were no longer contagious.

4. It is not known whether there is any pre-infection immunity to the virus therefore all planning for the virus by public health officials assumes there is none. However if there is pre-existing immunity to the virus, that person too could test positive for the virus given the sensitivity of and scale of PCR testing. From the CDC.

"The relative infectiousness of asymptomatic cases to symptomatic cases remains highly uncertain as asymptomatic cases are difficult to identify and transmission is difficult to observe and quantify. The estimates for relative infectiousness are assumptions based on studies of viral shedding dynamics....the current estimates are an assumption."

The CDC currently estimates that 40% of all cases are asymptomatic. It is possible that some portion perhaps all of these asymptomatic cases are either persons who have been tested and who have pre-existing immunity or recovered cases that were unaware of their mild infection. or do not report them. These problems, along with others are greatly affecting the case counts in the United States or anywhere else in the world where PCR testing is used.

It seems to me that this ought to be publicized so that the general public is aware of these issues rather than being fed a continuous diet of fear porn.

It seems that there would be a solution to this. Give every "asymptomatic" person with a positive viral test result an antibody test. If the person has no symptoms, and does not claim to have ever have had symptoms or recalls only mild symptoms, test them for antibodies. If a person tests positive for the virus and has produced antibodies to Covid-19, more good would be done for society than shutting down bars and gyms, not to mention schools.

The Case(s) of Postsymptom Covid-19

They told us, that the more they tested the more cases they would find, what they didn't tell us is that many of those cases would be people who had already recovered.

My title is just being cute, though there is actually a medical term post symptomatic, however we generally refer to it as being "recovered." A disease that covers a range from no symptoms to fatal, with most cases being somewhere in between, leaves a tremendous amount of wiggle room in the whole epidemic scheme of things.

My title is to point out that there almost certainly are instances of "recorded" recovered cases. Meaning that people who have recovered from Covid-19 are recorded as cases. I do not mean former cases that have not yet been dropped from the rolls, so to speak, though that too could be a massive number. No I am talking about brand new, just been tested positive cases of recovered people.

Let's begin this little adventure into epidemiology malpractice with a "guideline" from the CDC. This is the CDC's recommendation regarding a person who has Covid-19 returning to work or back into society so to speak. This is as part of a very recent update:

Accumulating evidence supports ending isolation and precautions for persons with COVID-19 using a symptom-based strategy. This update incorporates recent evidence to inform the duration of isolation and precautions recommended to prevent transmission of SARS-CoV-2 to others, while limiting unnecessary prolonged isolation and unnecessary use of laboratory testing resources.

The CDC new recommendations are:

Duration of isolation and precautions

• For most persons with COVID-19 illness, isolation and precautions can generally be discontinued 10 days after symptom onset 1 and resolution of fever for at least 24 hours, without the use of fever-reducing medications, and with improvement of other symptoms.

  • A limited number of persons with severe illness may produce replication-competent virus beyond 10 days that may warrant extending duration of isolation and precautions for up to 20 days after symptom onset; consider consultation with infection control experts.

• For persons who never develop symptoms, isolation and other precautions can be discontinued 10 days after the date of their first positive RT-PCR test for SARS-CoV-2 RNA.

This may not sound like a big deal, over time public health officials have come to see that , "for most people" Covid-19 does not stay contagious after 10 days so they do not need to isolate. Which begs the question about the third group discussed, those persons who never develop symptoms, those asymptomatic people? Or as Dr Beda Stadler calls them, those "non-sick, sick people." These asymptomatic persons, are the ones that , by all reports, are so much trouble. They are so unwieldy, the entire nation has to wear masks. At least that is the official line. More likely it is because most people who contract Covid-19, their cases are so mild that they go on with their daily lives making the potential for infection of others greater.

Much like the normal flu or a cold, Covid-19 does not always, or even often, lay people up. There are not too many people who have not gone to work while sick from the flu or a cold. Rather than our public health overlords just saying that we cannot trust the public to do the right thing, in their minds the whole flu shot compliance proves it, they instead blame those asymptomatic people running loose in the land, so we must all wear masks. Like giant herds of predatory zombies the "silent spreaders" are laying waste to our land. This allows the citizens to identify and persecute those who don't follow the rules, those ravagers of mankind, the maskless. It is either that or Dr. Fauci would have to scold us, though he seems to enjoy it in his passive aggressive way.

So why is the CDC no longer requiring a negative test to release people, even the "silent spreaders" and releasing them back out among us? It has to do with the test itself, the test is so sensitive that it shows positive readings for fragments of the virus even after a person is post symptomatic, which we call, recovered.

Despite being a rapid and inherently sensitive test, PCR has certain limitations that need to be carefully considered when interpreting the results.

One of those key limitations of PCR is its inability to determine whether a patient is infectious, or not. This is because the test is designed to detect the virus’ RNA, which is generally present when a virus is causing an active infection. However, RNA can also be present, and therefore, detected by PCR after a virus has broken down (i.e., become non-infectious) and released its genome into host cells or body fluids. From prior experience with other infectious diseases, we know that PCR tests can be positive for days or weeks after a patient has recovered from the illness and is no longer infectious.

Before I go further, the "public health community" does not recognize pre-infection immunity for covid-19. Not that there is no preexisting immunity to the virus, just that they have not yet proved it. Since being immune most often means that your immune system breaks down the virus without ever harming the person, the virus' RNA would also be present, for an undetermined period of time, in a person who was immune to Covid-19. Which means that an immune person if tested during that undetermined period would show positive because of those virus fragments.

The real problem though, is that a recovered person would also test positive for an undetermined length of time, even if they never recognized that they had been ill or diagnosed with Covid-19.

Here is the CDC's official list of symptoms for Covid-19:

• Fever or chills

• Cough

• Shortness of breath or difficulty breathing

• Fatigue

• Muscle or body aches

• Headache

• New loss of taste or smell

• Sore throat

• Congestion or runny nose

• Nausea or vomiting

• Diarrhea

I could have more than one of some of those and never even think about having Covid-19, especially during allergy season or post large Mexican dinner. I was a carpenter, for a carpenter muscle or body aches, fatigue and an occasional headache are not a warning sign, they are a part of daily life. Same with a person with pollen allergies, congestion and runny nose even a cough is not only common, it is expected.

The question then is, if people who have actually recovered from Covid -19 can test positive for "days or even weeks" after, how many are there? According to the CDC's own Pandemic Planning Scenarios, they estimate that 40% of all infections are asymptomatic. Meaning they show and never will show symptoms. Sounds very much like someone who has recovered from the virus. Are tese large numbers of these "unsick, sick people" asymptomatic, or are they post-symptomatic IE: recovered. If a recovered "patient" can still test positive and might never have recognized that they had been infected, how would they even know whether we are counting asymptomatic or a recovered persons? They wouldn't and people who should be listed as recovered are instead new "cases." They are taken out of productive society and isolated because benign fragments of the virus remain in their system not harmful to anyone. Then they are added to the surge of new cases.

Where this becomes malpractice is this; "From prior experience with other infectious diseases, we know that PCR tests can be positive for days or weeks after a patient has recovered from the illness and is no longer infectious."

This is not an unknown, some weird little fluke of this so called novel virus, this the very nature of the test they run. They had to know, and they told us, that the more they tested the more cases they would find. What they didn't tell us, is that many of those cases would be people who had recovered.

Many states count positive tests as cases, not people

Some Coronavirus Patients Test Positive For Weeks. Interpret Those Results With Caution