Your argument, you provide the proof.Check how many times the CDC has changed its narrative.
Your argument, you provide the proof.Check how many times the CDC has changed its narrative.
Check how many times the CDC has changed its narrative.
Very self reflective of you.3. Can't fix stupid and evidently can't stop it from posting.
???A viral infection was once only defined by the physical manifestation of symptoms. Now it is defined by tests such as the PCR test which can identify a single molecule of a virus regardless of any sysmptoms. Is that still an "infection"?
You miss the point. The PCR test only measures the presence of the virus molecules it doesn't measure infection or infectiousness.2. The corona virus was difficult to diagnose and detect at first since a large % of those who had it (and were spreading it) were asymptomatic. Some never develop symptoms at all. This helps explain why the advice from the CDC and others has evolved as more is known. Easily transmissible and difficult to detect and track made this virus unique and not in a good way.
Never said they did nor does the presence of a virus.Not all virus causes disease, bonehead
WHICH SARS-CoV-2 vaccine? There is more than one and they all have different levels of effectiveness. As for any of the vaccines "knocking down the surging pandemic levels of the disease " (or do you mean "cases"?) that actually didn't happen during the second and third waves.The COVID vaccine is not as effective in this regard, but it is still more than 50% effective which makes it powerful tool to knock down surging pandemic levels of the disease.
So, you either have it or had it. Dumbass.You miss the point. The PCR test only measures the presence of the virus molecules it doesn't measure infection or infectiousness.
Never said they did nor does the presence of a virus.
Just because he creates a sock(s) for this forum to spam with?Trying to understand why Chief posts. Near as I can tell, he's got 'political' concerns rather than medical concerns per se.
Not at all. My interest is purely in the science. However it is clear that many of the so called "health" decisions have been political decisions rather than ones based on science. For example decades of science based pandemic planning was suddenly dumped. That planning was based on a potential virus far more severe than Covid-19 has ever been.Trying to understand why Chief posts. Near as I can tell, he's got 'political' concerns rather than medical concerns per se.
You'd have to ask Trump why he cut the funding for the pandemic response team. Oh yeah, that's right, Obama signed that one into law.Not at all. My interest is purely in the science. However it is clear that many of the so called "health" decisions have been political decisions rather than ones based on science. For example decades of science based pandemic planning was suddenly dumped. That planning was based on a potential virus far more severe than Covid-19 has ever been.
???You miss the point. The PCR test only measures the presence of the virus molecules it doesn't measure infection or infectiousness.
You are so wrong in that post.???
The PCR test measures the presence of the virus.
If the virus is present, you are infected, and you can spread it to others (ie "infectious").
Is there ANYthing that you "know" that is actually right?
For me this isn't a political debate. However I'd be interested to see a cite for what you are saying.You'd have to ask Trump why he cut the funding for the pandemic response team. Oh yeah, that's right, Obama signed that one into law.