I suppose it depends on what level of understanding weāre talking about here. Iād like to think I understand it as much as I need to, and at least as well as you. But you know this, hence deliberately misrepresenting what I said.
You shouldnāt carry resentment around with you like this. Bad for the immune system, or so Iāve read somewhere.
1 Like
Thatās true
Thatās not true
Whatever works for you, Iāll leave you to imagine and make up other stuff that I said, decide whatās true etc. Enjoy your day.
1 Like
They should put egghead Donnelly in charge of the shambolic eu vaccine rollout, he would do a better job than those clowns there now
Youāve started early today boys
Thatās what happens when you put women in charge.
1 Like
Good explanation, I learned from that 
. Rather than parrot on about accuracy too, which there are many claims on the Internet. The PCR test was initially used as it was the first quick way to detect the virus, in fairness at the time 12 months ago we didnāt give a shit about accuracy and just wanted a result. But we now have better research and diagnostic tests for covid so why continue with a test that is known to be in accurate. I had this discussion with a colleague who is in our lab and asked them of we introduced a test with the accuracy of the PCR to our processes via a TMV Test Method Validation what would be the reaction of a regulatory auditor FDA etc? They said they would laugh at it as the evidence for its indented use is terrible and we most certainly will be getting a warning letter (published as public knowledge so effects share prices). Long story short PCR testing methods are a COD
1 Like
Imagine Boris Johnson running rings around you
What are the better tests you reference?
If you had Covid back in November and recovered or just didnāt know you had it, are there any Viral RNA hanging around that can be detected in a test carried out today?
Have you tried sticking a swab up yer holes?
Iām struggling with that one from @mickee321 though I see another poster has endorsed it.
1 in 108?
Does it mean 1 in 108 deaths a year are in car accidents?
Or that for every person born in a given year, say 1980, that 1 in 108 will die in a car accident
In Ireland
Or is it another way??
1 in every 108 car journeys ends up in death
I find probability interesting
How many randomly chosen people would need to be in a room in order for there to be a 50/50 chance that two share a birthday
366? Think I heard this before and itās way lower isnāt it
Iād imagine thatās probably even less likely to be true than what I had assumed he meant. Population 4.9m means surely, at least twice that many car journeys. In reality if say a far bigger multiple. How many people would make No car journeys in a year
23 I think
24
2 Likes
Itās kind of like covid though they just need to have been in a car in the previous 14 days for it to be counted.