The one time the morally bankrupt NYT actually takes a position that is ethical and factual and no one will pay any attention, as the almost demonic obsession with overhyped cases continues to be all that the irresponsible media and CYA politicians focus on.
Here's another case study on what you reference in this article. The results below are from the Cornell University current testing program- these are the last two weeks results:
9/13- 2,924 Tests; 0 Positives
9/14- 5,987 Tests; 0 Positives
9/15- 5,231 Tests; 0 Positives
9/16- 4,981 Tests; 1 Positive
9/17- 5,528 Tests; 0 Positives
9/18- 5,501 Tests; 1 Positive
9/19- 2,717 Tests; 0 Positives
9/20- 2,816 Tests; 1 Positives
9/21- 5,973 Tests: 2 Positives
9/22- 5,286 Tests; 1 Positive
9/23- 5,227 Tests; 1 Positive
9/24- 5,884 Tests; 0 Positives
9/25- 5,772 Tests; 1 Positive
9/26- 2,677 Tests; 1 Positive
9/27- 3,107 Tests; 0 Positives
You have to ask yourself how in the world can these numbers be like this based on what we are seeing elsewhere? Cornell does in-house testing using the PCR labs at their Vet school. They also use a more expensive taqman reagent- cheaper reagents are not as specific. The key question of course is what are the Ct values that they use and getting the answer to this has not been easy.
I work there and get tested twice weekly, swab tests, and use different sites in order to ask different supervisors about the Ct values. None of them know the answer. I am pursuing this answer presently through some molecular biologists I know who work there. They too are having a hard time finding the answer.
Of course PCR tests should not be used for this in the first place. Even an actual positive means nothing without clinical diagnosis.
I live in Denton County, Texas. I read the NYTimes article August 29 & have been asking Denton County Public Health for the Ct info since August 30 on their Facebook page. They have ignored, evaded, or side-stepped the question. They assert Ct is not important in contact tracing or determining infectiousness/viral load. I recently submitted an Open Records Requests for communication within the department and county commissioners. Turns out, DCPH sent an email to AXIOS on Sept 4 & within 45 min received a reply that the Ct is 40. To this day, DCPH refuses to publicly provide this information to citizens. They are withholding information.
Just came across this article...and website. Thank you for being an informed contrarian and assisting those of us ready to lose sanity over the psyops involved in this level of deceit. has an actual cT value come forth among the NFL? My state uses 2 different PCR manufacturers...one cT of 37 and the other 40. This leaves plenty of misinterpretation capability which is picked up the sycophants in local media. Thanks again.
The one time the morally bankrupt NYT actually takes a position that is ethical and factual and no one will pay any attention, as the almost demonic obsession with overhyped cases continues to be all that the irresponsible media and CYA politicians focus on.
Hi Jordan,
Here's another case study on what you reference in this article. The results below are from the Cornell University current testing program- these are the last two weeks results:
9/13- 2,924 Tests; 0 Positives
9/14- 5,987 Tests; 0 Positives
9/15- 5,231 Tests; 0 Positives
9/16- 4,981 Tests; 1 Positive
9/17- 5,528 Tests; 0 Positives
9/18- 5,501 Tests; 1 Positive
9/19- 2,717 Tests; 0 Positives
9/20- 2,816 Tests; 1 Positives
9/21- 5,973 Tests: 2 Positives
9/22- 5,286 Tests; 1 Positive
9/23- 5,227 Tests; 1 Positive
9/24- 5,884 Tests; 0 Positives
9/25- 5,772 Tests; 1 Positive
9/26- 2,677 Tests; 1 Positive
9/27- 3,107 Tests; 0 Positives
You have to ask yourself how in the world can these numbers be like this based on what we are seeing elsewhere? Cornell does in-house testing using the PCR labs at their Vet school. They also use a more expensive taqman reagent- cheaper reagents are not as specific. The key question of course is what are the Ct values that they use and getting the answer to this has not been easy.
I work there and get tested twice weekly, swab tests, and use different sites in order to ask different supervisors about the Ct values. None of them know the answer. I am pursuing this answer presently through some molecular biologists I know who work there. They too are having a hard time finding the answer.
Of course PCR tests should not be used for this in the first place. Even an actual positive means nothing without clinical diagnosis.
I live in Denton County, Texas. I read the NYTimes article August 29 & have been asking Denton County Public Health for the Ct info since August 30 on their Facebook page. They have ignored, evaded, or side-stepped the question. They assert Ct is not important in contact tracing or determining infectiousness/viral load. I recently submitted an Open Records Requests for communication within the department and county commissioners. Turns out, DCPH sent an email to AXIOS on Sept 4 & within 45 min received a reply that the Ct is 40. To this day, DCPH refuses to publicly provide this information to citizens. They are withholding information.
Just came across this article...and website. Thank you for being an informed contrarian and assisting those of us ready to lose sanity over the psyops involved in this level of deceit. has an actual cT value come forth among the NFL? My state uses 2 different PCR manufacturers...one cT of 37 and the other 40. This leaves plenty of misinterpretation capability which is picked up the sycophants in local media. Thanks again.
And btw ... Great article Jordan. Very enlightening ...
M