EFL green light spectators this weekend

[Twaddle]

16 minutes ago, StudentOwl said:

OK, so that gives the figures for England (not the UK) and hospital deaths only (not including in the community/in care homes) and is a month old (though fortunately if you look at the last few weeks UK wide you're "only" looking at a total of a few hundred deaths thank goodness). And even with all these caveats in mind, it still comes to ~30,000. Which kind of corroborates with a UK-wide figure of ~42,000 if you include deaths outside of hospitals... doesn't it?

The deaths you are referring to are co-morbidities.

People are dying of cancer with Covid on the death certificate.

People are dying with heart problems and Covid is on the death certificate.

You do not have to fudge the numbers if this was like it is being portrayed.

As an example

A Sheffield paramedic told a police friend of mine that all sorts of deaths are being atributed to covid when it is not the case.

A fanily in Sheffield had a loved one die with Covid on the death certificate. The insurance company was not going to pay. They paid for a separate autopsy which showed the death certificate was incorrect and the insurance company paid.

A relative of a friend of mine went into hospital with leaking heart valve and Covid is on the certificate

[Halifax Owls]

4 minutes ago, StudentOwl said:

That's not true... the PCR test tests specifically for traces of the Covid-19 virus.

A very, very important distinction to make

 

No Sir, you have misquoted me.

[StudentOwl]

2 minutes ago, Halifax Owls said:

 

No Sir, you have misquoted me.

No I haven't...

The PCR test doesn’t specifically test for Covid 19, it highlights traces of Coronavirus. 

that's what you said, word for word... and it isn't true. 

Coronavirus is the family of viruses that Covid-19 belongs to, and it's very important to make the distinction between a PCR test that simply highlights traces of Coronavirus and one that specifically highlights traces of the Covid-19 virus only.

 

If the PCR test doesn't specifically test for Covid-19 and merely only traces of general Coronavirus, then you will get a lot of false-positives that would be gained from getting virus fragmentation from the common cold, bird flu or SARS etc.

However, the test uses primers that are unique to Covid-19, meaning you do not and can not get false-positive tests from SARS, MERS etc fragments

 

If you had said

The PCR test doesn’t specifically test for Covid 19, it highlights traces of Covid-19.

You would be spot on. But that one word discrepancy actually changes the semantic consequences quite massively.

[Hookowl]

2 minutes ago, StudentOwl said:

No I haven't...

The PCR test doesn’t specifically test for Covid 19, it highlights traces of Coronavirus. 

that's what you said, word for word... and it isn't true. 

Coronavirus is the family of viruses that Covid-19 belongs to, and it's very important to make the distinction between a PCR test that simply highlights traces of Coronavirus and one that specifically highlights traces of the Covid-19 virus only.

 

If the PCR test doesn't specifically test for Covid-19 and merely only traces of general Coronavirus, then you will get a lot of false-positives that would be gained from getting virus fragmentation from the common cold, bird flu or SARS etc.

However, the test uses primers that are unique to Covid-19, meaning you do not and can not get false-positive tests from SARS, MERS etc fragments

 

If you had said

The PCR test doesn’t specifically test for Covid 19, it highlights traces of Covid-19.

You would be spot on. But that one word discrepancy actually changes the semantic consequences quite massively.

 

That's a bit harsh Student............in laymans terms Covid-19 is commonly called Coronavirus.

You are obviously correct though 

[sonofbert2]

Covid related thread in Matchday section.........

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Halifax Owls]

4 minutes ago, StudentOwl said:

No I haven't...

The PCR test doesn’t specifically test for Covid 19, it highlights traces of Coronavirus. 

that's what you said, word for word... and it isn't true. 

Coronavirus is the family of viruses that Covid-19 belongs to, and it's very important to make the distinction between a PCR test that simply highlights traces of Coronavirus and one that specifically highlights traces of the Covid-19 virus only.

 

If the PCR test doesn't specifically test for Covid-19 and merely only traces of general Coronavirus, then you will get a lot of false-positives that would be gained from getting virus fragmentation from the common cold, bird flu or SARS etc.

However, the test uses primers that are unique to Covid-19, meaning you do not and can not get false-positive tests from SARS, MERS etc fragments

 

If you had said

The PCR test doesn’t specifically test for Covid 19, it highlights traces of Covid-19.

You would be spot on. But that one word discrepancy actually changes the semantic consequences quite massively.

 

Nah, you still intentionally misquoted me. Covid-19 belongs to the Coronavirus family. As I say that’s why the majority of people who test positive aren’t ill.

 

 

[sonofbert2]

Everyone going mental about 1000 tickets for which at least 900 have no chance have ever getting....

 

[DJMortimer]

1 minute ago, A12owl said:

I never suggested I was. 

 

I talk to myself. It's often the only way I can ensure an intelligent conversation.

 

 

Edited September 15, 2020 by DJMortimer

[sherlyegg]

1 minute ago, sonofbert2 said:

Everyone going mental about 1000 tickets for which at least 900 have no chance have ever getting....

 

So do ballet winners get a ticket or do they get a reprieve..

[DJMortimer]

3 minutes ago, sherlyegg said:

So do ballet winners get a ticket or do they get a reprieve..

 

Well, if that's how you get a ticket, I've got no chance.

 

 

Edited September 15, 2020 by DJMortimer

[StudentOwl]

Just now, Halifax Owls said:

 

Nah, you still intentionally misquoted me. Covid-19 belongs to the Coronavirus family. As I say that’s why the majority of people who test positive aren’t ill.

 

 

No, I'm not mate... I just don't think you're getting what I'm saying. Let me use an analogy.

 

There are two footballing Hirsts, George and David. Let's say I wanted to determine whether you had shook hands with specifically George, and I had a PCR test to determine whose genome you had on your hand. 

 

Your statement of 

The PCR test doesn’t specifically test for Covid 19, it highlights traces of Coronavirus [cDNA]

is analogous to saying

"The test doesn't specifically test for George, it highlights traces of Hirst [cDNA]"

 

That leaves ambiguity as to whether the test is detecting George or David. Its completely true that both are part of the Hirst family, but what it means is that you will get a lot of false-positives from people that have shook hands with David and never even seen George in the flesh.

 

A more accurate statement is 

The test doesn't specifically test for George, it highlights traces George Hirst [cDNA]

 

The PCR test does not test for the broad family of Coronaviruses, it tests specifically for Covid-19

[Dutch McLovin]

3 hours ago, Carbone said:

 

I'm not one of those who thinks this is a myth or not very serious, but it's just factually the case that healthy people have an incredibly small chance of getting seriously ill with this. Hopefully testing improves very soon and you can check yourself at home before you see those who are shielding, that's ultimately what we need to aim for.

I kinda agree with this, it’s here now and until we get a vaccine which won’t be anytime soon it’s not gonna go away, we have to live with it it’s like flu. Vulnerable people should shield, but the world has to go on and get back to normal. Let’s invest in temp guns at events like football and get fans back in.

[Halifax Owls]

9 minutes ago, StudentOwl said:

No, I'm not mate... I just don't think you're getting what I'm saying. Let me use an analogy.

 

There are two footballing Hirsts, George and David. Let's say I wanted to determine whether you had shook hands with specifically George, and I had a PCR test to determine whose genome you had on your hand. 

 

Your statement of 

The PCR test doesn’t specifically test for Covid 19, it highlights traces of Coronavirus [cDNA]

is analogous to saying

"The test doesn't specifically test for George, it highlights traces of Hirst [cDNA]"

 

That leaves ambiguity as to whether the test is detecting George or David. Its completely true that both are part of the Hirst family, but what it means is that you will get a lot of false-positives from people that have shook hands with David and never even seen George in the flesh.

 

A more accurate statement is 

The test doesn't specifically test for George, it highlights traces George Hirst [cDNA]

 

The PCR test does not test for the broad family of Coronaviruses, it tests specifically for Covid-19

 

10 minutes ago, StudentOwl said:

No, I'm not mate... I just don't think you're getting what I'm saying. Let me use an analogy.

 

There are two footballing Hirsts, George and David. Let's say I wanted to determine whether you had shook hands with specifically George, and I had a PCR test to determine whose genome you had on your hand. 

 

Your statement of 

The PCR test doesn’t specifically test for Covid 19, it highlights traces of Coronavirus [cDNA]

is analogous to saying

"The test doesn't specifically test for George, it highlights traces of Hirst [cDNA]"

 

That leaves ambiguity as to whether the test is detecting George or David. Its completely true that both are part of the Hirst family, but what it means is that you will get a lot of false-positives from people that have shook hands with David and never even seen George in the flesh.

 

A more accurate statement is 

The test doesn't specifically test for George, it highlights traces George Hirst [cDNA]

 

The PCR test does not test for the broad family of Coronaviruses, it tests specifically for Covid-19

 

Ambiguity and false positives....quite so.

[StudentOwl]

Just now, Halifax Owls said:

 

 

Ambiguity and false positives....quite so.

... ah, and this is why you didn't like being called out, because it undermines the point you were trying to make, which is that the tests aren't reliable. 

 

It is untrue to say that the current Covid-19 test simply tests for traces of Coronaviruses. It does not. The primers used are specific to Covid-19, making it impossible to get a false-positive from the presence of SARS, MERS or the common cold. To claim this is possible is FALSE.

 

It is, however, extremely true to say that it tests for traces of Covid-19 specifically, which is why you can get false-positives from denatured/destroyed fragments of Covid-19 still present within the body.

[Halifax Owls]

18 minutes ago, StudentOwl said:

... ah, and this is why you didn't like being called out, because it undermines the point you were trying to make, which is that the tests aren't reliable. 

 

It is untrue to say that the current Covid-19 test simply tests for traces of Coronaviruses. It does not. The primers used are specific to Covid-19, making it impossible to get a false-positive from the presence of SARS, MERS or the common cold. To claim this is possible is FALSE.

 

It is, however, extremely true to say that it tests for traces of Covid-19 specifically, which is why you can get false-positives from denatured/destroyed fragments of Covid-19 still present within the body.

 

The test is unreliable for this current situation. I disagree with you. Mortality rate less than 1%. I’ll go to the game you watch it on I follow.

 

Ill bet ya when they reckon this all up in 6 months that more people died of the ‘cure’ rather than Covid-19. I’ll also bet ya that come this autumn, vulnerable people’s immune systems will have been surpressed to an extent they could get very poorly from a normal flu season.

[Charlie Chuck]

Seems sensible by the EFL. 

If people are happy to sit in parks and outside coffee shops etc. there can't be a massive risk of 1,000 people being spaced out in a 40,000 capacity stadium.

 

[sonofbert2]

A few will die on Owlstalk and a good few more will have loved ones who do/have then we’ll see how everyone feels....

 

Others will have it/have had it and some will survive with horrific long term consequences.

 

It’s all a big hoax though because it is in everyones interest to crash economies across the world for a hoax.

[tashton]

Club confirmed to me that anyone who has a multi year season ticket has priority over season ticket holders.  I'm wondering how many there are and if that leaves one year season ticket holders with not much chance.  I'm guessing there are alot of multi year season ticket holders 

[DJMortimer]

1 minute ago, sonofbert2 said:

A few will die on Owlstalk and a good few more will have loved ones who do/have then we’ll see how everyone feels....

 

Others will have it/have had it and some will survive with horrific long term consequences.

 

It’s all a big hoax though because it is in everyones interest to crash economies across the world for a hoax.

 

You've highlighted two things we keep seeing. Due to some of the vagaries of the figures, particularly where they relate to youth and general health, a lot are taking that very modern stance of "well, I'm probably alright, so sod everyone else".

 

But it's that last sentence that really begs a key question. For those who don't believe the official story of a pandemic, I'm yet to see a cogent explanation of what the motive might be. 

[StudentOwl]

18 minutes ago, Halifax Owls said:

 

The test is unreliable for this current situation. I disagree with you. 

But it isn't about agreement or disagreement, it's about fact.

The scientific fact is that the primers used in the PCR test are specific to Covid-19. That means they match parts of the Covid-19 genome that are unique to Covid-19 and are not present on the genomes of other Coronaviruses. That also means it is impossible to complete a PCR reaction on any other Coronavirus cDNA strand, because the primers won't bind to it. I'm sorry if you don't believe that's the case, but it isn't a matter of belief, that's just biological fact. 

 

Look, here's a link to buy Covid-19 specific primers

https://www.biosearchtech.com/products/pcr-kits-and-reagents/pathogen-detection/2019-ncov-cdc-probe-and-primer-kit-for-sars-cov-2

 

Every lab doing testing on Covid-19 samples will have done internal QC checks to determine if these Covid-19 specific primers worked. If they were detecting false-positives from other Coronaviruses, it would have come up in this QC process... and they wouldn't continue to use the Covid-specific primers, they'd switch to cheaper generic Coronavirus primers and make more money with lower overheads. But labs haven't done that, because internal testing has shown it works and isn't prone to the same false-positives one would get if one used general Coronavirus primers. 

 

I'm open to being incorrect in the above, but you will need to explain why and how Covid-19 specific primers are binding to other Coronavirus cDNA fragments... because the above is all a very sound biological technique that has been applied in research ranging from bird-trait inheritance to cancer research for at least a decade before Covid-19 even existed. If you can't explain why and how Covid-19 specific primers are binding to Coronavirus cDNA fragments to yield false-positive results then maybe you should question why your source didn't bother to explain this... because whoever can explain this will probably win a Nobel Prize in Chemistry for helping us realise one of our most established microbiology techniques is actually crap.

Edited September 15, 2020 by StudentOwl