News Brief by Kip Hansen – 7 August 2020
Dr. Michael Mina, an epidemiologist at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, says that “The standard tests are diagnosing huge numbers of people who may be carrying relatively insignificant amounts of the virus… Tests with thresholds so high may detect not just live virus but also genetic fragments, leftovers from infection that pose no particular risk — akin to finding a hair in a room long after a person has left”.
My analogy would be the testing of a Motel 6 room for DNA samples, a month after a crime had been committed in it.
Just how over-sensitive does Dr. Mina think that these PCR Covid tests are? 100 to 1,000 times too sensitive for the test to return a positive result “— at least, one worth acting on.”
According to a report in the NY Times: “In three sets of testing data that include cycle thresholds, compiled by officials in Massachusetts, New York and Nevada, up to 90 percent of people testing positive carried barely any virus, a review by The Times found.” [ my bold – kh ]
The technical point is that:
“The PCR test amplifies genetic matter from the virus in cycles; the fewer cycles required, the greater the amount of virus, or viral load, in the sample. The greater the viral load, the more likely the patient is to be contagious.” “This number of amplification cycles needed to find the virus, called the cycle threshold, is never included in the results sent to doctors and coronavirus patients, although it could tell them how infectious the patients are.” “On Thursday, the United States recorded 45,604 new coronavirus cases, according to a database maintained by The Times. If the rates of contagiousness in Massachusetts and New York were to apply nationwide, then perhaps only 4,500 of those people may actually need to isolate and submit to contact tracing.” [ NY Times article ]
The New York Times math wizards have under-stated the over-estimation. If Dr. Mina is correct, the number of people who may need to isolate or submit to contact tracing could be as small as 45 of those 45,604 – 1,000 times less than the total reported.
The current number of PCR amplification cycles needed to report a Positive Test is 40.
Any test with a cycle threshold above 35 is too sensitive, agreed Juliet Morrison, a virologist at the University of California, Riverside. “I’m shocked that people would think that 40 could represent a positive,” she said.
Dr. Morrison stated that “A more reasonable cutoff would be 30 to 35.” Dr. Mina said he would set the figure at 30, or even less.
I tried and failed to create a graphic that would clearly illustrate the difference between the Real Positive Test Rate and the 100- to 1,000-times Exaggerated Positive Test Rate. The real rate is simply too small to visualize if one shows the 1,000 times error. This is the best I could do – the smallest bar is over-size due to the limits of your screen.
William Briggs recounts that the Governor of California has mandated that in order for “Most business to open with modifications” a California county must have “Less than 1 Daily New cases (per 100k)” and “Less than 2% Positive Tests”. With a 100- to 1,000-times over count of true positives, California is doomed to remain locked-down forever.
Of course, the CDC is “helping” (quoting the Times’ article): “The C.D.C.’s own calculations suggest that it is extremely difficult to detect any live virus in a sample above a threshold of 33 cycles. Officials at some state labs said the C.D.C. had not asked them to note threshold values or to share them with contact-tracing organizations.”
So, in the Mad Mad Mad World of Covid Madness, they are not only reporting Covid Deaths that are not caused by Covid; they are not only reporting all positive tests as “New Covid Cases” despite lack of illness and totally ignoring the known false positive rate; they are reporting numbers for “positive tests” that are known to be anywhere from 100 to 1,000 times too high.
One only wishes that this report had come from some nut-case conspiracy theory web site. But the Times has sourced the story well – even though it runs counter to the Times’ usual panic-driven editorial narrative on the Covid Pandemic.
Had this come from any less powerful source, Tweety, Facepalm, and Goggles would have suppressed the facts immediately, labeling it “Misinformation”.
Welcome to the world of Medicine-in-Support-of-Politics.
# # # # #
Author’s Comment:
This section is opinion.
Reporting positive Covid tests at two and three orders of magnitude too high is simply criminal – much akin to shouting “Fire!” in a crowded theater. What this is doing to the United States and other nations is also criminal.
I can only hope that the citizenry becomes aware enough of the facts to remember them on election day. Those responsible for the suppression of the economy and the destruction of so many individual lives — by the act of throwing millions out of work unnecessarily — need to be held to account and turned out of positions of power.
Read more — Read widely – Read Critically
# # # # #
As icisil write, many died of iatrogenesis. I would add to that the discouragement of using HCQ/Zn due to TDS.
How could anyone trust the infection count and is it at all relevant? – These figures will be subject to wide spread interpretation.
The only figure less subjective would be the excess mortality as a whole. The general mortality rate also has the advantage that it can be compared to previous years and is a no brainier for layman and may even be comprehended by the press.
Carl ==> “may even be comprehended by the press.” — only those from this galaxy and my generation. The rest of the press is doomed.
Non-establishment media comprised of old and young are alive and well, and they see very clearly.
What is also criminal is that the CDC is not releasing any Wuhan Cold antibody test data (which has been testable since the middle of February) which would give a much more accurate picture of the Wuhan Cold’s actual lethality, and also how close we are to reaching nationwide herd immunity…
Since NYC’s Wuhan Cold deaths have dropped to near zero, it seems highly likely that herd immunity could be as low as 25%, and not the unsubstantiated “70%” which Dr. Fauci and other CDC political hacks have been propagandizing since March…
I wouldn’t be at all surprised if 60+ million Americans already have Wuhan Cold antibodies, but, of course, the CDC refuses to announce any antibody test result data, or what the actual herd immunity threshold is, because it doesn’t help their political agenda of defeating Trump, regardless of the costs in human life or economic destruction.
Good posting Kip.
I’ve been saying that the world we’re living in is a Monty Python skit where half the participants believe it’s real! And it’s not just covid but includes about everything from ‘global warming’ to ‘news’ reporting, politics, and well… just about everything. It’s like half of the country is tripping on acid!
eyesonu ==> Thanks — don’t we all miss those Monty Python skits!
Kip
Yes, I miss the idyllic Sunday drives, out looking for sheep sleeping in the trees.
“It’s like half of the country is tripping on acid!”
I grew up in the 60s, the last crazy period in the history of the USA, so I can concur that this is a really good metaphor to describe what is happening today. Unfortunately, we are not dealing here with acid/LSD. We instead deal with a blind and fanatic ideology that thrives on the will-to-power, i.e., the desire to acquire power and control over all of humanity at all costs. They who subscribe to this ideology have no God other than themselves, no willingness to acknowledge a higher or greater power than themselves or the rest of humanity.
We can see what has happened as a result of the brainwashing, giving rise to apocalyptic thinking, extreme risk aversion, and a fondness for central government action and control as a replacement for self-reliance and local community institutions that help socialize and humanize people. It will take a generation or two to overcome this unfortunate set of developments, but overcome we must. Or else we are heading for the darkest of the New Dark Age.
Larry ==> Pete Seeger said it best:
“Oh, newspapermen meet such interesting people!
He wallows in corruption, crime, and gore
Ting-a-ling-a-ling, city desk;
Hold the press, Hold the press;
Extra! Extra! Read all about it!
It’s a mess, meets the test
Oh, newspapermen meet such interesting people!
It’s wonderful to represent the press”
https://genius.com/Pete-seeger-newspapermen-lyrics
Yes. More like 80% plus have drunk the koolaid and fallen firvthe gaslighting. As Goebbels said, tell a lie a thousand times and people will believe it. The bigger the lie, the better.
#RapidHomeTests have a number of advantages over the “more sensitive” PCR.
1) It may be administered at home. Anyone who has symptoms of a cold (mild fever, coughing) can test daily or when exposure is suspected. Many more of these will be done compared to the 15-minute-result test which must be hospital administered. The downside to epidemiologists is that the epidemiologists do not get data to judge the degree of spread. Death-rate would then be available only by estimating excess (over no epidemic) as is done for flu. We don’t use PCR to get perfect numbers for flu.
2) A different mask protocol could be used. No mask would be required if the test were negative. If positive, or not taken, wear a mask (or self-isolate) until negative. Under this protocol you “know” that an unmasked has tested negative today. Relatively dangerous would be visibly identifiable.
3) Any workplace from a meat packing plant to a restaurant could require the test upon arrival and sent home with a mask if positive.
4) The economy could be reopened the same week the tests were made available to all who want them.
5) As Dr. Mina points out in a separate video 100% compliance is not required. The more the better, of course. At worst, herd-immunity would take its normal course as would happen with no masks ever.
6) We are well on our way to herd immunity in the US already. R-nought will be less than 1 by Halloween. At less than one a virus epidemic decreases exponentially.
It seems to me that they have been applying the LNT ideology to the virus.
Tom ==> I’m guessing you don’t mean “Alliant Energy Corporation NASDAQ: LNT” so I’ll go with the hiking and camping “Leave No Trace”.
I generally agree with reasonable and pragmatic LNT, but not the radical “wash your fire circle rocks” versions.
I was referring to the Linear No Threshold ideology.
I know LNT is used for radiation, that is why is said “ideology” because it appears that “no level is safe” mantra is prevailing.
Tom ==> Ah! The dangers of acronyms….
THAT LNT has always been nutty….
Kip
You said, “THAT LNT has always been nutty….” Yes, if it was valid, then there should be a clear correlation between the altitude that people live and work at and the prevalence of ionizing radiation-induced chronic diseases.
Clyde ==> This discussion is really about the Non-Science stance of so many scientific bureaucrats at EPA etc.
Any second-year medical student (or even a Human Physiology major) knows that the Linear No Threshold concept is not valid.
I think he probably meant the Linear No-Threshold model of harm that is erroneously applied to nuclear radiation. i.e. damage is assumed to be linearly correlated with exposure, and there is defined to be no lower-limit safe threshold – every tiniest bit of radiation is considered harmful. Coronavirus is being treated the same way!
It isn’t as new as it seems:
To Interpret the SARS-CoV-2 Test, Consider the Cycle Threshold Value Published: 21 May 2020
Krishna Gans ==> Thanks for the link. The more data we get on the issue, the worse it seems.
If real epidemiologists have ALWAYS known that the PCR Tests standards were set way way way too sensitive for real world use — why has it continued for so long and is only now being made public?
Kip – read my comment to Ann in LA above. Perhaps your question is rhetorical. The reason this has continued is in my opinion rather obvious. This is the worst of the politicized disease outbreaks in human history, along with a massive failure of political leadership at all levels of government in just about every country in the world (South Dakota, Sweden, and South Korea being the notable exceptions). This is not coincidental; it is why some have started to conflate the reaction to what needs to happen in the realm of “climate change.” Once the US presidential election is over after Nov. 3, watch the COVID-19 thing die out. Sorry for sounding so conspiratorial, but the mounting evidence suggests only one conclusion.
Larry ==> You are not alone in the belief that once the US Presidential election is over — either way, oddly — Covid madness will fade into the background.
many think that if Trump remains the President he will simply mandate away the madness by edict . . and only Democratic Governors will continue to try to rule their States by fiat.
On the other hand, many think that if Biden wins, then he will declare victory over Covid and the madness will also stop.
“This is the worst of the politicized disease outbreaks in human history”
BTW, the duty2warn petition is NOT a regular petition to the Government, it’s an attempt to delegitimize the President under the pretext of medical care and in their latest attempt to unseat him and give Presidential executive power to the CDC!
Is anybody doing anything about their signers? I don’t say they can be jailed (although they probably should, it’s in nature a call to insurrection), but the loss of their licences to practice … well anything (hairdressing included) is the absolute minimum that can be done.
So here in France they’re attempting to roll out the antigen quick tests as fast as possible because the labs are completely overwhelmed.
They say 8O% of the RT-PCR test results are back in 36 hours, but I call government BS on that one.
They are talking about a saliva test as well which might get approval this week.
All this from the incompetent ministers who told us at the start that masks were useless, now telling us we legally have to wear them outside….they’ll have us sleeping with them on next, morons.
Situation so far in Europe (EU)…..
Population: 447,706,209
Deaths: 182,839
Percentage = 0.04%
From health.com:
During a March 11 hearing of the House Oversight and Reform Committee on coronavirus preparedness, Anthony Fauci, MD, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, put it plainly: “The seasonal flu that we deal with every year has a mortality of 0.1%,” he told the congressional panel, whereas coronavirus is “10 times more lethal than the seasonal flu”
Am I missing something here or is this the biggest panic attack the world has ever known?
Extract of press release from Young Medical Biologists Union
POLITIQUE CONSUMERISTE DE RT-PCR : TROP C’EST TROP !
Biologists can’t keep up. Testing went from 300 000/week (early in July) to >1 million/week (early in September).
Testing capacity are overwhelmed. People have to wait more and more.
Reactants producers are not keeping up. Some labs will have to stop testing altogether.
The conclusion “que les français sans indications n’aillent pas se faire dépister inutilement.”:
French people: don’t get unneeded tests!
Health authorities: stop systematic testing!
niceguy ==> The French have know about HCQ-Azi-Zn — en effective anti-Covid treatment when given at first indication — almost all year.
There is an excellent discussion of the difference between the tests and an interview with Dr. Mina on the Medcram website. Here’s the YouTube link to the 17 min. long presentation/discussion.
TheHeaterGuy ==> Thanks for the link.
I one of the knowledgeable people who addresses this issue would help, it would be good to know the extent to which miocarditis has arisen with respect to CR and IR? The reports from the University of Michigan mention 30% of “infected” may have hart-related symptoms.
Donald ==> This essay is simply about over-sensitive PCR tests being used to tag New Cases.
In general, nearly all serious cases of viral diseases tend to have long-lasting side effects in some patients. There are good Covid web sites that collect all relevant news and papers.
This is New Jersey USA PCR positives today about 500/day https://www.nj.gov/health/cd/topics/covid2019_dashboard.shtml So if the sensitivity 100-1000X too great does that mean New Jersey has virtually no PCR positives?
Mkie ==> It might have as many as 5 infectious cases — but those will need to be retested for confirmation with a less sensitive test method.
The author misunderstands deeply the point about sensitivity.
Dr. Mina’s concept is about contagiousness reflected by Ct values. The PCR can detect the virus way before somebody becomes infectious and way after somebody was infectious. It is still an accurate test for the presence of the virus, it just doesn’t translate directly into information if somebody should be quarantined or not.
Dr. Mina argues we could use cheap and fast antigen tests and still catch the majority of infectious people without using the more sensitive and expensive PCR tests cause the antigens tests are 100-1000x less sensitive than the threshold of the PCR test but that is where the viral load becomes sufficient to infect other people. That is all.
The PCR test is NOT too sensitive in a way that false positives are generated if properly done with the right control samples.
Ron ==> Actually, I do not misunderstand at all. The current standards for positive tests using RT_PCR are set so sensitive that the number of “positives” are overwhelming — and are not returning results, to quote Dr. Mina directly, ““— at least, one worth acting on.”
If we can no ACT ON the results, they are worthless — worse than worthless because they are being used to create and maintain panic.
We test people to find those that can be infectious to others — those we need to isolate — those we need to do contact tracing on.
There may be some academic value to the current standard, but it should be confined to academics concerned with such matters.,
PCR tests are exactly done for contact tracing. Antigen tests will have a high number of false negatives so they are not suited for contact tracing.
Dr. Mina’s point is that PCR tests are mainly too slow to stop spreading if people don’t self-isolate if they don’t have symptoms but are indeed contagious. Antigen test are in his opinion sufficiently sensitive to detect contagious asymptomatic people or people who don’t know if they have just the flu or a cold and to fill that gap of rapid testing that PCR tests cannot.
So antigen tests are not for the detection of all currently infected people but for currently infectious people. Infected vs. infectious is the important discrimination here. All infectious people are infected but not all infected are already or still infectious.
Ron ==> And not all people who have a positive PCR test under current standards (40 cycles)_ are infected.
They are if the PCR product is specific which can be proven by sequencing. RNA is not exceptionally stable outside of a cellular protective environment because of the presence of secreted RNases, RNA degrading enzymes, so a positive PCR is an indicator for viral particles.
The chances the viral particles are present because of a very recent exposure not infection is negligible.
Ron ==> s always, everyone is welcome to their own opinions. You apparently aren’t reading the supporting links.
I’m working with RNA. I know from experience that our environment is contaminated with RNases. It’s one part of our own and our microbiome viral defence mechanism.
RNA on itself is a surprisingly thermodynamically stable molecule.
Ron ==> With apologies, I am having trouble understanding your point(s).
You are onboard with Drs. Mina and Morrison (and many others) stating that basing a “positive” test result on 37-40 cycles is returning to many positives that are not “worth acting on.”? Too many being in the range of 100 to 1000 time too many? Yes? No?
[I ask because that is the topic of this News Brief….]
I know that Dr. Mina has a whole speil about what he thinks we ought to do about that … but that’s another topic for another time.
I read that people working with cows have been found positive for “cowrona” – but they never catch it. It’s simple contamination.
Break the chains
Get out of the cave
Breath the fresh air
In UK at the moment an entirely different method of controlling the infection rate is happening.
If you have symptoms and request a test, you cannot get one!
As to deaths caused by Covid 19 :- well all tests and statistics have uncertainty. But if the absolute number of excess deaths is in the same order as the paradigm derived “Covid 19 deaths” then I begin to believe the statistics are correct.
John ==> In the US, “Total Deaths” are below normal deaths for the time of year. — thus “Excess Deaths” are negative. see William Briggs’ blog.
If that’s caused by less car accidents and workplace accidents, all “other” things being equal, that’s a very bad thing. Car and workplace death being a side effect of beneficial activities. Relevant values are (d driving-accidents/dt)_{driving}
and (d workplace-accidents/dt)_{full-time-jobs}
All other things being equal: you could decrease car accident with less distracted driving, all “other” things being equal, but that is not what happened; value of (d distracted-driving / dt)_{driving}
Epilogue:
Obviously, Covid-19 and SARS-CoV-2 hot topics. A great deal of useful discussion, a lot of readers have supplied good links to other sources of supporting information.
The beauty of WUWT is that people are allowed to state their opinion, their view, and as long as they are minimally polite and follow these very relaxed commenting rules [ https://wattsupwiththat.com/policy/ ], everyone else reading here gets to see them. The Management and Moderators almost never censor or delete — you really have to step very far out of line for that to happen. Readers are allowed to be pugnacious, persistent, pesteracious and rude. Even light rank name-calling is overlooked.
I try to be patient with even the worst offenders…..albeit, not always successfully.
I wish everyone commenting would use their own real names — I am annoyed by those who don’t do so. We even have one long-dead famous English angler commenting on this thread. I acknowledge that there are some instances — some individuals – who can not do so for social/political reasons — like fear of Tweety-mobbing or damage to their careers.
I would prefer if each comment started with the name of the person being addressed (if this is the case — some comments are addressed to everyone). Some other blogs use the artifice of beginning your comment with “@JoeBlow” if you hit the reply link under JoeBlow’s comment. I encourage you to use whatever system you prefer, but do start your comment with the name of the person to whom you are “speaking”.
Thanks for reading.
# # # # #
late to the discussion but here is an idea… blind sampling.. take 1% of all tests don at all testing labs.. use samples varying from distilled water to pure virus and that will give a measure of the accuracy of the tests..
Ideas??
Slyrik ==> The issue disussed here is not “accuracy” but rather whether the tests (the RT-PCR tests) being done represent actionable information when they give a “positive” result.
Surely the two are linked… if they are not accurate they have no value??
Slyrik ==> As currently being done and reported in most places, the tests are of NEGATIVE value — they mislead rather than inform.
These tests do have some academic value — but are less than worthless in the public health fight against SARS-CoV-2.
I agree Kip thats why I suggested “testing the tests”… that would clearly show their unreliability and inappropriate use for measuring the level of infection in the population and so being used to justify these draconian policies.
I am no conspiracy theorist but all this is known. The only conclusion I van come to is that there is something else going on… another agenda.
I believe the new $5 15 minute tests will be a game changer.
ie; every office building, retail store you go into, sporting event, you will pay your $5 and wait 15 minutes. only people testing negative will get it. and can do anything with your negative test the entire day. No masks needed. Life almost back to normal.
On the flip side, our politicians won’t want to give up their power so easily. They will regulate these tests, or something stupid to keep their power over us.
Don ==> Great! We get to pay $5 for the privilege of going to work….
With the $1 home test, only go maskless if you test negative today. (Perhaps the test comes with stickers that say “I tested NEGATIVE today.”)
It does rely on about half (or more) of the people doing this.
Old George ==> A lot cheaper just to make a homemade tag to wear that just says:
“I’m OK — I tested NEGATIVE today”
and wear it every day. Save all that testing money.
“Save all that testing money.”
Some will cheat, I suppose. But, then again, people often pull masks below the nose. Others wear vented N95’s too. But how many, do you suppose, would forge an “I tested today” sticker to save $1.00. I daresay very few.
Old George ==> I’m not very confident that there will be ubiquitously available $1 Covid tests anytime soon ( or ever ).
Even if they develop and mass produce them, they will be a waste of even that little bit of money.
See the last comment in from me at the bottom .. starts with UPDATE.
And, the $5 15-minute test means a trip to the hospital or a doctor’s office which has the equipment, so an additional medical charge.
UPDATE: Readers interested in this subject should read this post at Susan Crockford’s blog. and then read the full paper – How Likely is a Second wave? — here.