Testing Megathread Part 4 - See OP for threadbans

Martina1991

Martina1991 wrote: »

Hospitalised cases are falling, 10s of thousands of vaccines are being administered daily, restrictions are easing.

Our personal freedoms are looking better by the day.

This is Germany.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2021/04/26/german-coronavirus-new-lockdown-rules-could-last-until-june.html

Sorry but I take my updates directly from the German press and Government websites, not from CNBC.
Lockdowns in Germany are very pragmatic. My city was in lockdown for a few days as they monitored the infection rate within the boundaries of the city. It climbed above 100 per 100000 over 7 days(not 14) for 5 days in sequence so they locked down. It droped below 100 and lockdow i.e. curfew lifted. Very reasonable, very clear rules which only the Querdenkers and Rightwingers looking to make some political capital complain about.

Martina1991

If you live in Germany why worry about personal freedoms that don't affect you personally


:pac:

Martina1991

Martina1991 wrote: »

If you live in Germany why worry about personal freedoms that don't affect you personally
:pac:

I'm an Irish citizen and I'm horrified how the personal freedoms of Irish citizens have been trampled upon. I'm also very annoyed that the Antigen test which I can get for free in a Doctor's surgery is not accepted on entry to Ireland so a PCR test will be required.
MOST IMPORTANTLY, I am disgusted that Friends and Family in Ireland who are in risk groups were needlessly exposed to additional risk of infection due to NPHETs arrogance refusing to follow international best practice and have still not embraced Antigen testing.

normanoffside

Martina1991 wrote: »

Ireland had a scientific committee that assessed all these rapid tests, and none were good enough for mass use on asymptomatic people so they're not recommended because it would be a waste of resources.

Perhaps asymptomatic people are not a big problem and only Ireland hasn't realised that.

I see Dr Tony's objection to Antigen tests as akin to a Catholic Bishop advising against Condoms in the 1980's because they are not 100% effective in preventing pregnancy so it's better just not to have sex at all.

Here Dr Ferguson explains the difference between Antigen tests and PCR tests in plain language.
It's pointless to compare one against the other as they are different and should be used for different and appropriate purposes.

https://twitter.com/Cwitter86/status/1390052664831004673

Martina1991

Antigen testing was/is used in settings where it is more suitable such as retirement homes and meat factories.

It was used in these settings because
A) the elderly are at the greatest risk and the factories were prominent sources of outbreaks.

professionals can visit these sites on a regular basis and perform the tests properly and record the results

C) repeated measurement can improve the accuracy of these tests if they are performed on a regular basis.

This is an example of the proper use of antigen tests being used in Ireland.



The product says it has to be used by professionals in symptomatic people.
To use them on anyone, anywhere, uncontrolled and undocumented is daft.
You can't expect a product to perform well when it is not even been used properly.

Martina1991

normanoffside wrote: »

Perhaps asymptomatic people are not a big problem and only Ireland hasn't realised that.

I see Dr Tony's objection to Antigen tests as akin to a Catholic Bishop advising against Condoms in the 1980's because they are not 100% effective in preventing pregnancy so it's better just not to have sex at all.

Asymptomatic people are still vectors for transmission.
There was an increasing amount of asymptomatic close contacts testing positive when the Briisth variant became rampant.

This isn't me saying, well antigen isn't as good as pcr so let's not use it.

I'm saying, it shouldn't be used for mass testing because that isn't what it was made for or recommended for use by the manufacturers themselves.

normanoffside

Martina1991 wrote: »

Antigen testing was/is used in settings where it is more suitable such as retirement homes and meat factories.

It was used in these settings because
A) the elderly are at the greatest risk and the factories were prominent sources of outbreaks.

professionals can visit these sites on a regular basis and perform the tests properly and record the results

C) repeated measurement can improve the accuracy of these tests if they are performed on a regular basis.

This is an example of the proper use of antigen tests being used in Ireland.



The product says it has to be used by professionals in symptomatic people.
To use them on anyone, anywhere, uncontrolled and undocumented is daft.
You can't expect a product to perform well when it is not even been used properly.

Ok then, you and NPHET are right and every other country is wrong.

Got it.

Martina1991

Martina1991 wrote: »

To use them on anyone, anywhere, uncontrolled and undocumented is daft.

German Health Ministry have a different view.
They are using it on anyone anywhere but they certainly aren't using it in an uncontrolled and undocumented manner.

The German Health Ministry are not daft and they have performed much better than their counterparts in Ireland.

Martina1991

normanoffside wrote: »

Ok then, you and NPHET are right and every other country is wrong.

Got it.

:rolleyes:

Yeah that's it.

The people that MAKE the antigen tests that lidl are selling say these tests are not for personal use.

But go ahead. Buy away if you want.

Martina1991

Deleted User wrote: »

German Health Ministry have a different view.
They are using it on anyone anywhere but they certainly aren't using it in an uncontrolled and undocumented manner.

The German Health Ministry are not daft and they have performed much better than their counterparts in Ireland.

Well good for Germany then.
I don't really care what other countries are doing.

Martina1991

Martina1991 wrote: »

Well good for Germany then.
I don't really care what other countries are doing.

That's hardly an enlightened outlook, now is it?
Do you just hope that your leaders in Ireland never look abroad to learn from the experience of others and instead have an epiphany whenever they are faced with a crisis.

Martina1991

Martina1991 wrote: »

:rolleyes:

Yeah that's it.

The people that MAKE the antigen tests that lidl are selling say these tests are not for personal use.

But go ahead. Buy away if you want.

I provided a link which you probably can't read because it is in German which shows it is in the short term approved for personal use in Germany.

Martina1991

I expect our appointed medical and scientific leaders to make assessments and recommendations based on trial, fact, statistics and projections.

I know people don't have time for NPHET but I find their briefings informative and well explained.

I live in Ireland so don't tend to look outward to what other countries are doing.

I take heart from seeing more people I know getting vaccinated and planning trips away to other parts of ireland to look forward to. That's my outlook at the moment.

normanoffside

The CDC are wrong too.

https://twitter.com/IATA/status/1390766324826230791

Martina1991

Deleted User wrote: »

I provided a link which you probably can't read because it is in German which shows it is in the short term approved for personal use in Germany.

Grand then! The lidl one for sale here isn't though, which is why I was on about that one.

LostinKildare

Martina1991 wrote: »

The one that is for sale I believe is from Boson Biotech.
The instructions for use that come with the kit include the following:

Intended use
Rapid SARS-COV-2 antigen test card is an immunochromatography based one step in vitro test. It is designed for the rapid qualitative determination of sars-CoV-2 antigen in nasopharyngeal swabs from individuals suspected of covid19 by their healthcare provider within the first seven days of symptom onset. Rapid SARS-COV-2 antigen test card can not be used as the basis to diagnose or exclude SARS-COV-2 infection.

Precautions
1. For professional in vitro diagnostic use only
2. The product is strictly for medical professional use only and not intended for personal use.

Martina1991 wrote: »

They are intended for use by professionals on symptomatic people, but if the public choose to ignore that and spend their own money on them, the onus is on the public for buying them.

Martina1991 wrote: »

The product says it has to be used by professionals in symptomatic people.
To use them on anyone, anywhere, uncontrolled and undocumented is daft.
You can't expect a product to perform well when it is not even been used properly.

Martina1991 wrote: »

The people that MAKE the antigen tests that lidl are selling say these tests are not for personal use.

But go ahead. Buy away if you want.

Where are you getting this from? Have you bought one of these kits on sale from Lidl, because I have, and the instructions do not say what you say they do -- that the tests are for professional use. The text you "quote" is nowhere in the instructions, which are very clearly written to walk non-professionals through the steps to perform the test on themselves.

The FAQs include "When should/can I test myself?" and "My result is positive/negative, what should I do?" They tell you that children under 14 will need the help of an adult. And it says,

"A feasibility study demonstrated that
-99,10% of non-professionals carried out the test without requiring assistance
-97,87% of the different types of results were interpreted correctly"

Martina1991

LostinKildare wrote: »

Where are you getting this from? Have you bought one of these kits on sale from Lidl, because I have, and the instructions do not say what you say they do -- that the tests are for professional use. The text you "quote" is nowhere in the instructions, which are very clearly written to walk non-professionals through the steps to perform the test on themselves.

The FAQs include "When should/can I test myself?" and "My result is positive/negative, what should I do?" They tell you that children under 14 will need the help of an adult. And it says,

"A feasibility study demonstrated that
-99,10% of non-professionals carried out the test without requiring assistance
-97,87% of the different types of results were interpreted correctly"

From the pictures in articles I've seen, the company is called Xiamen Boson Biotech. They are a chinese company.

This is the product information :
https://cdn02.plentymarkets.com/8ufygep7ztd4/propertyItems/99_86_Boson_Biotech_Schnelltest.pdf

Page 6 has the IFU (instructions for use).

drunkmonkey

Tony didn't say the Lidl ones are only 50% accurate, he said some antigen tests are. He should have named them as any of the ones i've purchased for work claim 98%+ accuracy on active Covid cases.
Tony is taking about Covid cases, finding inactivate Covid cases is pointless, it leads me to believe the pcr test is reporting 50% of cases that aren't infectious by the same logic.
I really think he's going to get pulled up on Monday for this deliberate attempt to mislead if Pat Kenny hasn't chocked eating his cornflakes after seeing the article.

LostinKildare

Martina1991 wrote: »

From the pictures in articles I've seen, the company is called Xiamen Boson Biotech. They are a chinese company.

This is the product information :
https://cdn02.plentymarkets.com/8ufygep7ztd4/propertyItems/99_86_Boson_Biotech_Schnelltest.pdf

Page 6 has the IFU (instructions for use).

The tests sold by Lidl are also from Xiamen Boson Biotech. The contents are similar but not exactly the same (somewhat simplified), and the directions for use are not the same -- in this kit the instructions are in English, German, French, Spanish, and Italian yet all on one large page, front in back, certainly written for self-use by non-professionals.

It's wrong to say that the company says the tests are not for personal use, or that they are only for use in symptomatic people. From the insert:

"When should/can I test myself?
You can test yourself whether you have symptoms or not. Studies show that earlier testing within the first 4 days of illness typically means a higher viral load, which is easier to detect. Since the test result is a snapshot valid for that point in time, testing should be repeated as recommended by local authorities."

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Tony didn't say the Lidl ones are only 50% accurate, he said some antigen tests are. He should have named them as any of the ones i've purchased for work claim 98%+ accuracy on active Covid cases.
Tony is taking about Covid cases, finding inactivate Covid cases is pointless, it leads me to believe the pcr test is reporting 50% of cases that aren't infectious by the same logic.
I really think he's going to get pulled up on Monday for this deliberate attempt to mislead if Pat Kenny hasn't chocked eating his cornflakes after seeing the article.

I agree. Some of the antigen tests are less accurate than others, and they are less likely to detect the virus after the first week of illness, when the viral load is lower, as well as less likely to detect it in asymptomatic persons --- the lowball figure of 58% combines all these negative factors. See here:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/mar/24/covid-rapid-lateral-flow-tests-should-not-be-used-for-test-and-release


But if you had to go do something unavoidable and you were asymptomatic or had only, say, a headache or sore throat, you probably wouldn't go to a testing center for a PCR test first. You might do this home test though, and there is a not insignificant chance it would detect the virus and push you to confirm with PCR.

I understand his concern, that people might rely on the home test too much and discard masks and distancing, but that is not their purpose. In my family's case, we have to bury a family member in a couple of days. Testing ourselves gives us a small degree of peace of mind, but we are still going to mask, sanitize, distance, etc. Of course if anyone tests positive they will not attend.

drunkmonkey

That low-ball figure is just in relation to people with 0 symptoms, if you've 0 symptoms your chances of infecting someone is slim, it's still not at the 50% quoted by Tony, I can't see how he got that figure from any product available on the Irish market as if your buying from a legitimate business these tests need approval before sale.

He's completely missing the point, like your example above it's just an extra layer of security which should be encouraged at events. If he's that worried about it missing an infectious case why doesn't he suggest two tests.

I wonder what the real motivation is, anything that can break transmission even if its only half the time is a good thing. As you said the people using them wouldn't be going for a pcr test especially as Tony suggested when they're getting a pound of sausages.

normanoffside

drunkmonkey wrote: »

That low-ball figure is just in relation to people with 0 symptoms, if you've 0 symptoms your chances of infecting someone is slim, it's still not at the 50% quoted by Tony, I can't see how he got that figure from any product available on the Irish market as if your buying from a legitimate business these tests need approval before sale.

When he says antigen tests miss 50% of asymptomatic infections; the studies they use are based on PCR tests.
But 50% of the positive and asymptomatic PCR tests are most likely from past infections i.e. no disease to spread.

The whole idea of using PCR positives as a 'gold standard' to measure everything else against is fundamentally flawed.

Martina1991

normanoffside wrote: »

When he says antigen tests miss 50% of asymptomatic infections; the studies they use are based on PCR tests.
But 50% of the positive and asymptomatic PCR tests are most likely from past infections i.e. no disease to spread.

The whole idea of using PCR positives as a 'gold standard' to measure everything else against is fundamentally flawed.

You are making a complete blind assumption.
Any dead viral material would yield weak positive result which has to be repeated to be confirmed.

If a lab releases a positive result it is valid, and the swab contained a sufficient amount of viral RNA to confirm the presence of the virus.

drunkmonkey

Nobody is saying it's not picking up the virus, the only thing that matters are active transmissible cases. The PCR tests people are offered for free does not distinguish between past and active virus. Colm Henry is on public record confirming the same.

drunkmonkey

I'll let the man himself explain it..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xc0Kysti6Kc

Martina1991

You're only thinking about the results in isolation. No test is ever requested and interpreted on its own with no other contributing factors.

Symptoms, exposure and areas of high incidence together with a positive result (and all the laboratory quality control procedures, controls and validations) all point to positive result being a legitimate, active positive case.

Your caught up in the technicalities. You're ignoring all the processes that go into confirming what positive swabs are confirmed as cases.

Martina1991

drunkmonkey wrote: »

I'll let the man himself explain it..

:rolleyes:

the man who died before the pandemic.

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-pcr-idUSKBN24420X

https://fullfact.org/online/pcr-test-mullis/

https://www.aap.com.au/pcr-inventor-who-died-in-2019-did-not-say-his-test-wont-work-for-covid-19-infections/

drunkmonkey

I'm not, Colm Henry confirmed the pcr testes are reporting figures from long gone infection.
You can throw in as many variables as you like the fact of the matter is it's happening and officially acknowledged.

The real question that everyone is asking is why do NPHET refuse to acknowledge the positive role antigen tests can provide.

As far as i'm aware in the UK everyone is entitled to 4 free antigen tests a week that can be picked up in a pharmacy.

What is Houlihans problem, why is he so anti this?

drunkmonkey

Martina1991 wrote: »

:rolleyes:

the man who died before the pandemic.

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-pcr-idUSKBN24420X

https://fullfact.org/online/pcr-test-mullis/

https://www.aap.com.au/pcr-inventor-who-died-in-2019-did-not-say-his-test-wont-work-for-covid-19-infections/

The Nobel prize winner that Invented it:rolleyes: have a look at his thoughts on Fauci and his abuse of PCR.

Martina1991

drunkmonkey wrote: »

I'm not, Colm Henry confirmed the pcr testes are reporting figures from long gone infection.
You can throw in as many variables as you like the fact of the matter is it's happening and officially acknowledged.

The real question that everyone is asking is why do NPHET refuse to acknowledge the positive role antigen tests can provide.

As far as i'm aware in the UK everyone is entitled to 4 free antigen tests a week that can be picked up in a pharmacy.

What is Houlihans problem, why is he so anti this?

Colm Henry said: "it can pick up a residual RNA weeks after active infection and after a person is no longer infectious.” He did not say we are reporting cases from previous infections.

That isn't some "gotcha" quote. All tests have limitations.
Just because a test has that limitation does not mean that all positive results are suddenly called into question, dismissed and played down as insignificant.

NPHET do not think they can play a significant role in mass testing from the studies, trials and reports they have conducted. They are being used in specific healthcare settings.




You and I are never going to agree on it.
We can volley over back about it but neither you or I make the decisions.
If people want to use antigen tests, now they can buy them.

NPHET review them and provide advice to government.
I agree with them, you don't, and that is fine.


The bigger picture for me is that we'll likely have less than 100 people in hospital with Covid by this time next week and hopefully another 250,000 vaccinations administered.

Restrictions are easing without the need for these tests anyway. I just don't think there's a need for them.

drunkmonkey

Martina1991 wrote: »

NPHET review them and provide advice to government.
I agree with them, you don't, and that is fine.

Here's another person that disagrees with Tony and yourself

Professor Mark Ferguson, director general of Science Foundation Ireland, and chief scientific advisor to the Government.
"Prof Ferguson said home antigen tests are perfectly fine and usually accurate in determining if someone is infectious with Covid-19 at the moment of testing."

I don't see why your following Tony's lead on this one, you understand testing and you know these have a pretty good chance of picking up a transmissible case.