false.. I barebacked ONE Whore at a $15 motel. : Originally Posted by Chung TranYeh, you suck on dick, and you are forever branded a cocksucker.
Perfect Example: A positive test for COVID19 is NOT a "case" of COVID19. Originally Posted by LexusLoverLL makes sense, seems reasonable and argues well. FWIW; I appreciate such discourse. However; it would seem the very definition of "Case" would be a positive test for the virus. What other standard would you use? Display of symptoms? Which symptoms/how many/how severe? Hospitalization?
LL makes sense, seems reasonable and argues well. FWIW; I appreciate such discourse. However; it would seem the very definition of "Case" would be a positive test for the virus. What other standard would you use? Display of symptoms? Which symptoms/how many/how severe? Hospitalization?It's again all in how you "choose" to play with the numbers and definitions.
What the number of "cases" means, how that data is used and evaluated, is for discussion. But for every other disease, like the flu, only a positive test for the virus would count as a "case". Originally Posted by PillowPilot
LL makes sense, seems reasonable and argues well. FWIW; I appreciate such discourse. However; it would seem the very definition of "Case" would be a positive test for the virus. Originally Posted by PillowPilotActually, a positive test result with no symptoms of any illness associated with the virus should not be counted as a "case." Just like a death of someone who tested positive should not be counted as a "death by Covid19" unless the cause of death can be connected to Covid19. The Government is currently revisiting the stats.
The consideration above is about "terminology" as much as anything. Originally Posted by oeb11As is your post. "Active Infection"? A positive test DOES NOT mean the person has an "active infection." It only means they have a presence of the Covid19 virus in their system.
I'm not sure who wrote the history you read or who authenticated it.
https://www.mountvernon.org/george-w...he-revolution/
Fast forward to the Civil War.
and
First, and recent events demonstrate the point, the civil side of our government makes policy and strategic decisions based on information gathered "in the field" historically and they make that independent of the influence of the military, who historically played the role of contributing tactically information in so far as implementing military action and the alternatives and strengths needed.
The military has in the past been known for washing the intel and manipulating the conclusions in order to influence outcomes in the decision making arena. Are you intending to take a soldier out of uniform to infiltrate a foreign government or even enter their country Originally Posted by LexusLover
But since you're familiar with the intelligence community history you are then aware of the relationship between U.S. intelligence and organized crime with Sicilian connections. Fast forward to Cuba, Bay of Pigs, and missile crisis. Then Nixon & Watergate.
Actually, a positive test result with no symptoms of any illness associated with the virus should not be counted as a "case." Originally Posted by LexusLoverTo continue our discussion:
To continue our discussion:Yes, as I noted in my post a "case" is a verifiable positive test plus or minus margins of error for false positives/false negatives.
Actually, that is by definition, and by practice widely used in the medical profession, scientific world, and even this administration, EXACTLY the criteria for determining what is or isn't a "case". You may have a different opinion, but I'm sticking with that definition.
One does NOT need to exhibit symptoms to have the virus. IE one does not need to exhibit symptoms to be counted as a "case" of the virus. Originally Posted by PillowPilot
The good news CT is that we already know that bone spur in chief and his ignorant racist redneck orange sucker supporters will be stupid enough to attend. What's that saying bout you can't fix stupid. Just hope they all have someone to hold their beer... Originally Posted by TsmokiesAs opposed to the rioters and looters out there congregating openly without thinking it through nor signing a waiver, who will be outright expecting government support should they contract Wuhan Virus while out flaunting the law.
However, that level of "case" is nearly worthless in the discussion until you start adding in all the caveats that entails. What's the distribution of symptomatic vs. asymptomatic cases. How long is the contagion period of each type of case? How many asymptomatic cases are going untested? Originally Posted by eccielover___The "level of cases" is a number that is a lot more than worthless! It may not be the final fact in the equation, but it is a good start. IE: one recent uptick in the number of cases that was worrying was the percentage of positive to negative tests. For whatever reason, that % was growing higher. So, even if you allow for the increase in numbers being partly due to the increase in testing, what is driving the % increase? You have to start somewhere with what facts you can educe. Yes, you take into account the other aspects that you mentioned. Probably a lot more as well. Unfortunately, we can't carve what we know about the virus in stone, just yet.
To continue our discussion:Actually, "this administration" is not counting a "positive test" result as a "case" ..... and the stats being reporting by doctors and medical facilities are being revisited.
Actually, that is by definition, and by practice widely used in the medical profession, scientific world, and even this administration, EXACTLY the criteria for determining what is or isn't a "case". You may have a different opinion, but I'm sticking with that definition.
One does NOT need to exhibit symptoms to have the virus. IE one does not need to exhibit symptoms to be counted as a "case" of the virus. Originally Posted by PillowPilot