Chit Chat
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Fewer than one in five healthcare workers who suspected they had coronavirus actually tested positive for the disease, according to one of the first published UK studies of mass testing on NHS workers.
Scientists from Sheffield, which started testing all symptomatic healthcare workers a fortnight before much of the rest of the UK, have published research showing that 81% of staff reporting symptoms tested negative.
Some 1,533 staff were tested over the two weeks from 17 March. Of these, just 282 (18%) tested positive. Five (< 1%) had an indeterminate result.
More than a third of staff had completed at least one shift while symptomatic.
Twenty-five were nursing staff, eight were doctors, nine were other patient-facing clinical staff, nine were laboratory or secretarial staff and one worked in cleaning services.
On 17 March, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (STH) started testing any staff who were complaining of an “influenza-like illness”. This was defined as anyone with a reported fever and one of: cough, sore throat, runny nose, myalgia, headache.
They were directed to self-swab in the on-site assessment pods and given written and pictorial instructions to show how to do it correctly.
Four times a day the swabs were transported to the laboratory at the Northern General Hospital, where they were tested.
The majority of test results were communicated to staff on the same or the next day. Staff with a negative test were able to return to work if they felt well enough to do so.
Concluding their study, the Sheffield scientists said:
In a time where healthcare systems are particularly stretched, it is important to be able to maximise the available workforce. Facilitating testing may substantially decrease absence in staff when [coronavirus] can be excluded.
They added:
While it is important that the provision of testing is carefully balanced with consideration of laboratory capacity, increasing laboratory capacity to allow widespread testing of NHS staff could be a vital tool in achieving adequate staffing during the Covid-19 outbreak, and reducing the risk of transmission to vulnerable patients.
Earlier on in the UK’s Coronavirus crisis, Sheffield was one of the local authorities with the highest number of cases – a fact local virologists attributed to Sheffield testing more people, earlier, than almost anywhere else.
On 1 April, a consultant virologist in the city claimed Sheffield was carrying out 10% of all tests in the UK.
Scientists from Sheffield, which started testing all symptomatic healthcare workers a fortnight before much of the rest of the UK, have published research showing that 81% of staff reporting symptoms tested negative.
Some 1,533 staff were tested over the two weeks from 17 March. Of these, just 282 (18%) tested positive. Five (< 1%) had an indeterminate result.
More than a third of staff had completed at least one shift while symptomatic.
Twenty-five were nursing staff, eight were doctors, nine were other patient-facing clinical staff, nine were laboratory or secretarial staff and one worked in cleaning services.
On 17 March, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (STH) started testing any staff who were complaining of an “influenza-like illness”. This was defined as anyone with a reported fever and one of: cough, sore throat, runny nose, myalgia, headache.
They were directed to self-swab in the on-site assessment pods and given written and pictorial instructions to show how to do it correctly.
Four times a day the swabs were transported to the laboratory at the Northern General Hospital, where they were tested.
The majority of test results were communicated to staff on the same or the next day. Staff with a negative test were able to return to work if they felt well enough to do so.
Concluding their study, the Sheffield scientists said:
In a time where healthcare systems are particularly stretched, it is important to be able to maximise the available workforce. Facilitating testing may substantially decrease absence in staff when [coronavirus] can be excluded.
They added:
While it is important that the provision of testing is carefully balanced with consideration of laboratory capacity, increasing laboratory capacity to allow widespread testing of NHS staff could be a vital tool in achieving adequate staffing during the Covid-19 outbreak, and reducing the risk of transmission to vulnerable patients.
Earlier on in the UK’s Coronavirus crisis, Sheffield was one of the local authorities with the highest number of cases – a fact local virologists attributed to Sheffield testing more people, earlier, than almost anywhere else.
On 1 April, a consultant virologist in the city claimed Sheffield was carrying out 10% of all tests in the UK.
Show More
Very likely to be similar with the general public i.e. many who think they have had it, haven't.
That said, self swabbing is a bit worrying.
That said, self swabbing is a bit worrying.
I am not convinced by how accurate all the different tests are.
What are they actually testing for?
What are they actually testing for?
Evidence of the virus being present in your nose or throat.
Watch the Horizon special on i-Player.
Watch the Horizon special on i-Player.
Philip Schofield had his throat swabbed after feeling an irritation there but it turned out to be some lost sperm.
many who think they have had it, haven't...uuummmm where have i heard that before ? is it 80% or 75.5% Angoose ?
No idea what the number will be, no tests.
But we have data that shows more than 80% of NHS staff who thought they had it actually did not.
We also know that out of 243,421 people in the UK who have been tested, only 26.7% returned a positive result, 73.3% negative.
When you consider that testing is only performed when symptoms become extremely severe, I would suggest that the majority of those who didn't progress to that stage but believed they were positive actually were not.
Only a anti gen test will confirm this one way or the other, if and when they can produce a reliable version.
But we have data that shows more than 80% of NHS staff who thought they had it actually did not.
We also know that out of 243,421 people in the UK who have been tested, only 26.7% returned a positive result, 73.3% negative.
When you consider that testing is only performed when symptoms become extremely severe, I would suggest that the majority of those who didn't progress to that stage but believed they were positive actually were not.
Only a anti gen test will confirm this one way or the other, if and when they can produce a reliable version.
Just watched it Angoose.
The whole thing was caveat-ed with 'could' and 'maybe'.
There are no actual scientific experiments that have proved anything yet.
The whole thing was caveat-ed with 'could' and 'maybe'.
There are no actual scientific experiments that have proved anything yet.
Just don't tell Emit..
Eric.Cartman
06 Apr 20 14:11
Joined: 07 May 14
| Topic/replies: 271 | Blogger: Eric.Cartman's blog
Emit You fookwitted tool...lets start again nice and slowly
We have tested nearly 200,000 people, virtually all to people already in hospital who are sick with virus symptons. There not testing people with broken arms, slipped discs of any other injury/illness. They are testing them as they have a high chance of having Covid-19 and yet 75% of the test are negative. So you tell me fella, people at home with lesser symptoms and therefore not in hospital, do you think its is likely that they've got Covid or not ????
Simple question that even you should be able to answer
Eric.Cartman
06 Apr 20 14:11
Joined: 07 May 14
| Topic/replies: 271 | Blogger: Eric.Cartman's blog
Emit You fookwitted tool...lets start again nice and slowly
We have tested nearly 200,000 people, virtually all to people already in hospital who are sick with virus symptons. There not testing people with broken arms, slipped discs of any other injury/illness. They are testing them as they have a high chance of having Covid-19 and yet 75% of the test are negative. So you tell me fella, people at home with lesser symptoms and therefore not in hospital, do you think its is likely that they've got Covid or not ????
Simple question that even you should be able to answer
Apr 10, 2020 -- 2:07PM, InsiderTrader wrote:
Just watched it Angoose.The whole thing was caveat-ed with 'could' and 'maybe'.There are no actual scientific experiments that have proved anything yet.
That's the nature of it, there is much more not known about the virus than there is known.
Which makes you think that there should be a coordinated global response to developing an understanding rather than nations largely working independantly.
The big hope that a large proportion of people may have had the virus with milder symptoms (therefore have not been tested) seems to be a fantasy(look at Germanys testing) as does the 1% death toll...SARS was the same, initially 1% quoted but ended up close to 10%...reckon KungFlu might get close to 5%...desperately need a vaccine or at least better treatment methods that might take the edge off it, otherwise its herd immunity, and those figures are horrific.
| Virus | Cases | Deaths | Territories |
| SARS 2002/3 | 8,096 | 774 | 28 |
| MERS 2012-20 | 1,360 | 527 | 26 |
| COVID-19 | 1,622,778 | 97,205 | 203 |
Looks like youre right Eric and every country with all these lockdown measures are wrong.
Can we hold back on the abusive, petty name calling
Can we hold back on the abusive, petty name calling
sorry fella...seriously i hope you have had covid and come through it
99% sure i have...
Interested in what your theories are?
Interested in what your theories are?
Firstly I apologise for offending the true NHS workers who put life on the line, but sadly I feel quite a few are going to be found out to be telling fibs.Get rid off those I suggest as iam quite sure if their absence was check over the years a pattern of abuse of the system would be clear. How the NHS could do with this theft off funds returned and the culprits taken tou court for theft and dealt with appropriately. My bet is millions and millions.
Starts off with an apology before proceeding to launch a sweeping and unsubstantiated accusation that even the Daily Mail would be too ashamed to print.
Angoose, the unsubstantiated accusation I believe is YOUR'S.Are you suggesting iam wrong?
It's the German testing that is most worrying...they have the most broad testing, at GP's as well as in hospital. Over 90% are negative and although some of the testing will be mandatory on health workers (symptoms or not) which slighlty skew the results...most will be on people with symptoms. At face value you have got to question how many cases (mild/asymptomatic) there actually are. Its almost certainly a lot smaller than scientists hoped for. Theres a chance that the testing is flawed (?? German's..doubt it !) or that younger people are simply breezing through this virus with virtually no symptoms and therefore not getting tested (probably a fair chunk)..i think as we get further along with the virus you have to look at deaths/recovered ratio a lot more to get some sort of true sense of whats going on. A lot of these ratios at the moment are fackin grim, but again Germany offers a glimmer of hope 2600 deaths to 52,000 recovered, so at least there testing is picking up some milder cases..but even this 5% ratio is rising rapidly. The whole picture just seems a lot worse than was first envisaged.
20% of Americans testing positive, 17% of Italians, 9% of Germans, 1% of Russians, 0.5% in the UAE 
Theres a chance that the testing is flawed (?? German's..doubt it !)
This is my concern.. All I've read is that testing results are totally inaccurate.. Unless they're selling tests (seems like big business).
It's traveled completely round the planet in no time. I deduce from this, It's very contagious
66 million people UK More than 1/3 (at least imo) would already be infected.
This is my concern.. All I've read is that testing results are totally inaccurate.. Unless they're selling tests (seems like big business).
It's traveled completely round the planet in no time. I deduce from this, It's very contagious
66 million people UK More than 1/3 (at least imo) would already be infected.
All countries with more than 200k reported tests.
| Country | Cases | Tests | Case % |
| USA | 475,237 | 2,416,650 | 19.7% |
| Germany | 119,401 | 1,317,887 | 9.1% |
| Russia | 11,917 | 1,090,000 | 1.1% |
| Italy | 143,626 | 853,369 | 16.8% |
| UAE | 2,990 | 593,095 | 0.5% |
| S. Korea | 10,450 | 503,051 | 2.1% |
| Canada | 20,765 | 370,315 | 5.6% |
| Spain | 157,022 | 355,000 | 44.2% |
| Australia | 6,203 | 338,346 | 1.8% |
| France | 117,749 | 333,807 | 35.3% |
| UK | 65,077 | 298,169 | 21.8% |
| Turkey | 42,282 | 276,338 | 15.3% |
| Iran | 68,192 | 242,568 | 28.1% |
| TOTAL | 1,240,911 | 8,988,595 | 13.8% |
COVID: two vital experiments that have never been done
Why not? Because they would expose this vicious farce, the criminals perpetuating it, and end the lockdowns.
by Jon Rappoport https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/
April 10, 2020
The first experiment would confirm or deny the accuracy of the PCR diagnostic test. The experiment would reveal whether this widespread test for COVID-19 can actually predict illness in the real world, in humans, not in the lab.
This experiment has never been done. It should have been done before the PCR was ever permitted to make claims about THE QUANTITY OF VIRUS that is replicating in a patient’s body.
Quantity is vital, because, in order to even begin talking about whether a virus can cause disease, millions and millions of virus must be actively replicating in a patient’s body.
Here is the experiment. Assemble a group of 500 volunteers, some sick, some healthy. Take tissue samples from them, and give the samples to PCR technicians. The technicians will never see or know who the 500 volunteers are.
The techs run these samples through the PCR. For each sample, they report which virus they found, and how much of it they found.
“In patients 34, 57, 83, 165, and 433, we found a great deal of the following disease-causing viruses.”
Now we un-blind those specific patients. By the test results, they should all be sick. Are they? Aren’t they? Then we would know. We would know how accurate and relevant the test is in the real world.
Of course, this is not the end of the experiment. The same samples should have been given to a whole other set of PCR techs to run. Did they come up with the same results the first set of PR techs did?
Several new groups of 500 patients each should be enlisted, and still more sets of lab techs should repeat the experiment, ending up with confirmation or rejection of the initial findings. This is the way the scientific method is supposed to work.
In the absence of this experiment, the quantitative PCR must be looked at as a rogue hypothesis that should never have been foisted on the public. It should never be used as the basis for determining case numbers of any disease.
In the “COVID-19 crisis,” all case numbers derived from the PCR should be thrown out.
The second vital experiment concerns the discovery of a new virus—in this case, COVID-19.
First of all, there is no lab procedure that can climb inside the human body in real time and record the active replication of millions of virus. The closest you can come involves the use of electron microscopy.
Suspecting the existence of a new disease-causing virus, researchers should line up, at the very least, several hundred people who seem to have the new disease. Tissue samples should be taken from them. Using correct steps of centrifuging these samples, specimens of the results should be examined and photographed under the electron microscope.
In every one of the several hundred photos, do the researchers see many identical particles of a virus they’ve never seen before; and do the researchers see that these many particles are the same from photo to photo?
If so, and if more than one group of researchers independently carrying out this procedure on the patients’ tissue samples achieves the same result…then, this is as close as you can come to saying you’ve discovered a new disease-causing virus.
Other researchers with other patients should attempt to replicate the above findings.
This vital experiment has never been done in the case of COVID-19. Not even close. Therefore, researchers can’t make a true claim to have discovered a new disease-causing virus.
In the absence of the two vital experiments I’ve described in this article, all you’re left with, concerning a single “COVID-19” pandemic and a single new cause, are: anecdote, rumor, gossip, conjecture, speculation, bad science, and lies.
Plus the horrendous damage from all the consequences of lockdowns based on those lies.
TURN ON THE ECONOMY.
Out of interest. Nothing more nothing less.
Why not? Because they would expose this vicious farce, the criminals perpetuating it, and end the lockdowns.
by Jon Rappoport https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/
April 10, 2020
The first experiment would confirm or deny the accuracy of the PCR diagnostic test. The experiment would reveal whether this widespread test for COVID-19 can actually predict illness in the real world, in humans, not in the lab.
This experiment has never been done. It should have been done before the PCR was ever permitted to make claims about THE QUANTITY OF VIRUS that is replicating in a patient’s body.
Quantity is vital, because, in order to even begin talking about whether a virus can cause disease, millions and millions of virus must be actively replicating in a patient’s body.
Here is the experiment. Assemble a group of 500 volunteers, some sick, some healthy. Take tissue samples from them, and give the samples to PCR technicians. The technicians will never see or know who the 500 volunteers are.
The techs run these samples through the PCR. For each sample, they report which virus they found, and how much of it they found.
“In patients 34, 57, 83, 165, and 433, we found a great deal of the following disease-causing viruses.”
Now we un-blind those specific patients. By the test results, they should all be sick. Are they? Aren’t they? Then we would know. We would know how accurate and relevant the test is in the real world.
Of course, this is not the end of the experiment. The same samples should have been given to a whole other set of PCR techs to run. Did they come up with the same results the first set of PR techs did?
Several new groups of 500 patients each should be enlisted, and still more sets of lab techs should repeat the experiment, ending up with confirmation or rejection of the initial findings. This is the way the scientific method is supposed to work.
In the absence of this experiment, the quantitative PCR must be looked at as a rogue hypothesis that should never have been foisted on the public. It should never be used as the basis for determining case numbers of any disease.
In the “COVID-19 crisis,” all case numbers derived from the PCR should be thrown out.
The second vital experiment concerns the discovery of a new virus—in this case, COVID-19.
First of all, there is no lab procedure that can climb inside the human body in real time and record the active replication of millions of virus. The closest you can come involves the use of electron microscopy.
Suspecting the existence of a new disease-causing virus, researchers should line up, at the very least, several hundred people who seem to have the new disease. Tissue samples should be taken from them. Using correct steps of centrifuging these samples, specimens of the results should be examined and photographed under the electron microscope.
In every one of the several hundred photos, do the researchers see many identical particles of a virus they’ve never seen before; and do the researchers see that these many particles are the same from photo to photo?
If so, and if more than one group of researchers independently carrying out this procedure on the patients’ tissue samples achieves the same result…then, this is as close as you can come to saying you’ve discovered a new disease-causing virus.
Other researchers with other patients should attempt to replicate the above findings.
This vital experiment has never been done in the case of COVID-19. Not even close. Therefore, researchers can’t make a true claim to have discovered a new disease-causing virus.
In the absence of the two vital experiments I’ve described in this article, all you’re left with, concerning a single “COVID-19” pandemic and a single new cause, are: anecdote, rumor, gossip, conjecture, speculation, bad science, and lies.
Plus the horrendous damage from all the consequences of lockdowns based on those lies.
TURN ON THE ECONOMY.
Out of interest. Nothing more nothing less.
^^ Utter horseshíte. These guys are great at asking questions but never provide answers just vague suggestions which are enough to convince a lot of mugs.
Who are the criminals perpetuating the farce? Why would they do that? Why would they organise a worldwide hoax with millions of people in on the scam? If they are powerful enough to organise that, surely it would be a lot easier to develop a virus in a lab and release it, saving themselves the bother of having to organise such a massive hoax which could fall apart at any stage. They are presumably the super rich 1% elites who stand to gain what? They've already lost bucketloads of wealth in the market crash, so presumably they're going to make it all back and more by having us all locked down? Go on. enlighten us all as to how 'they' are going to profit from this?
Seriously, why don't you use your head before posting nonsense like this? Are you incapable of independent thought?
Who are the criminals perpetuating the farce? Why would they do that? Why would they organise a worldwide hoax with millions of people in on the scam? If they are powerful enough to organise that, surely it would be a lot easier to develop a virus in a lab and release it, saving themselves the bother of having to organise such a massive hoax which could fall apart at any stage. They are presumably the super rich 1% elites who stand to gain what? They've already lost bucketloads of wealth in the market crash, so presumably they're going to make it all back and more by having us all locked down? Go on. enlighten us all as to how 'they' are going to profit from this?
Seriously, why don't you use your head before posting nonsense like this? Are you incapable of independent thought?
What if the super elites were short sellers on the stock market?
They would have made 'bucket loads'
Does someone with doubts about the official narrative have to lay it all out to you?
Who is incapable of independent thought?
They would have made 'bucket loads'
Does someone with doubts about the official narrative have to lay it all out to you?
Who is incapable of independent thought?
things that were trotted out as basic facts 6/8 weeks ago by dr,s scientists etc seem to get debunked by the day by the same people who put them out there
80% of public will get it,now thought to be much lower
will disappear when the sun comes out
once you've had it,you can get it again
anti body test will be quick and easy,weve bought 3/5 million ordered 17 million blah,blah,
after 3/4 months we basically no very little
80% of public will get it,now thought to be much lower
will disappear when the sun comes out
once you've had it,you can get it again
anti body test will be quick and easy,weve bought 3/5 million ordered 17 million blah,blah,
after 3/4 months we basically no very little
i reckon (25 x total deaths) will give you a reasonably guess at the total cases 2 weeks ago (4% death rate)
A phlebotomist working at Roseland Community Hospital said Thursday that 30% to 50% of patients tested for the coronavirus have antibodies while only around 10% to 20% of those tested have the active virus.
Sumaya Owaynat, a phlebotomy technician, said she tests between 400 and 600 patients on an average day in the parking lot at Roseland Community Hospital. Drive-thru testing is from 9 a.m. to noon and 1 to 4 p.m. each day. However, the hospital has a limited number of tests they can give per day.
Owaynat said the number of patients coming through the testing center who appear to have already had coronavirus and gotten over it is far greater than those who currently have the disease.
“A lot of people have high antibodies, which means they had the coronavirus but they don’t have it anymore and their bodies built the antibodies,” Owaynat told Chicago City Wire. Antibodies in the bloodstream reveal that a person has already had the coronavirus and may be immune to contracting the virus again.
If accurate, this means the spread of the virus may have been underway in the Roseland community - and the state and country as a whole - prior to the issuance of stay at home orders and widespread business closures in mid-March which have crippled the national economy.
In addition, those who show signs of already having had the illness should be able to re-enter society -- albeit with some modified social distancing measures in place -- rather than sheltering at home as they are no longer in danger. Of those who contract the coronavirus, around 25 percent may be asymptomatic.
A recent study of 1,000 people in the Heinsberg District of Bonn, Germany found that 15% of the population had contracted the virus, many unknowingly and without symptoms. Of those, only 0.37% died from COVID-19, a figure much lower than those previously cited.
Sumaya Owaynat, a phlebotomy technician, said she tests between 400 and 600 patients on an average day in the parking lot at Roseland Community Hospital. Drive-thru testing is from 9 a.m. to noon and 1 to 4 p.m. each day. However, the hospital has a limited number of tests they can give per day.
Owaynat said the number of patients coming through the testing center who appear to have already had coronavirus and gotten over it is far greater than those who currently have the disease.
“A lot of people have high antibodies, which means they had the coronavirus but they don’t have it anymore and their bodies built the antibodies,” Owaynat told Chicago City Wire. Antibodies in the bloodstream reveal that a person has already had the coronavirus and may be immune to contracting the virus again.
If accurate, this means the spread of the virus may have been underway in the Roseland community - and the state and country as a whole - prior to the issuance of stay at home orders and widespread business closures in mid-March which have crippled the national economy.
In addition, those who show signs of already having had the illness should be able to re-enter society -- albeit with some modified social distancing measures in place -- rather than sheltering at home as they are no longer in danger. Of those who contract the coronavirus, around 25 percent may be asymptomatic.
A recent study of 1,000 people in the Heinsberg District of Bonn, Germany found that 15% of the population had contracted the virus, many unknowingly and without symptoms. Of those, only 0.37% died from COVID-19, a figure much lower than those previously cited.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539