FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to Virus

Portuguese court rule PCR test unreliable

Jump to newest
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

Opinions on this

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *allySlinkyWoman
over a year ago

Leeds

The ruling was on 11 November. What has happened since then ?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ackformore100Man
over a year ago

Tin town


"The ruling was on 11 November. What has happened since then ?"

I think this was done already

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

In a specific case relating to quarantine of four asymptomatic tourists. There are arguments for and against stating the crossing threshold on the clinical report.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *naswingdressWoman
over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

My thought is that people grab things out of context, without looking to what happens around it, without considering if it's looked into elsewhere. Sometimes they misread it, sometimes they rely on their favourite site to interpret it for them. Often they haven't read the source material and lack the background to understand it.

It doesn't tell us much if anything about the truth.

(The available information in English is minimal and I'm afraid I don't run to legal Portuguese )

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *olly_chromaticTV/TS
over a year ago

Stockport

My thought is that lawyers did what lawyers often do. They twist around the meaning of complex scientific reports, exploit the extreme ends of a grey region, mislead juries and judges that do not have the specialist knowledge to correctly understand the information.

As i understand it, this single case in Portugal used the argument that if the PCR method is not 100% utterly correct in distinguishing between infected and non-infected, then the results are always meaningless and cannot ever be trusted. The judges were later censured by higher authority for having followed faulty logic.

Real world situation:

Is the PCR test 100% conclusive? Wrong question. PCR is not a test, it is a generic method of carrying out a type of process, and it is only as good as the specific usage of it. Analogy: cooking dinner uses a saucepan, so does the "saucepan dinner" always taste good? Should we ban the use of the "saucepan dinner" because it's not 100% guaranteed to create good food?

Correct question: Is the PCR method when used correctly a valuable diagnostic tool for detecting the SARS-CoV-2 virus? Answer yes. When used correctly for this purpose, does the test give a correct result in a statistically significant number of cases? Answer yes. Does the test give a perfect result every time? Answer no. Does the test result, in conjunction with evaluation of patient symptoms, give a diagnostically useful indication? Answer yes.

Does the widespread usage of the PCR method during the current crisis give information that helps slow the progress of the pandemic and save lives? Answer definitely yes!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *naswingdressWoman
over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

I also think that this would have a fuckton more traction if it had any merit.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ackformore100Man
over a year ago

Tin town


"My thought is that lawyers did what lawyers often do. They twist around the meaning of complex scientific reports, exploit the extreme ends of a grey region, mislead juries and judges that do not have the specialist knowledge to correctly understand the information.

As i understand it, this single case in Portugal used the argument that if the PCR method is not 100% utterly correct in distinguishing between infected and non-infected, then the results are always meaningless and cannot ever be trusted. The judges were later censured by higher authority for having followed faulty logic.

Real world situation:

Is the PCR test 100% conclusive? Wrong question. PCR is not a test, it is a generic method of carrying out a type of process, and it is only as good as the specific usage of it. Analogy: cooking dinner uses a saucepan, so does the "saucepan dinner" always taste good? Should we ban the use of the "saucepan dinner" because it's not 100% guaranteed to create good food?

Correct question: Is the PCR method when used correctly a valuable diagnostic tool for detecting the SARS-CoV-2 virus? Answer yes. When used correctly for this purpose, does the test give a correct result in a statistically significant number of cases? Answer yes. Does the test give a perfect result every time? Answer no. Does the test result, in conjunction with evaluation of patient symptoms, give a diagnostically useful indication? Answer yes.

Does the widespread usage of the PCR method during the current crisis give information that helps slow the progress of the pandemic and save lives? Answer definitely yes!"

Good saucepan analogy... But all my cooking tastes like shit... I need a new saucepan.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *naswingdressWoman
over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)


"My thought is that lawyers did what lawyers often do. They twist around the meaning of complex scientific reports, exploit the extreme ends of a grey region, mislead juries and judges that do not have the specialist knowledge to correctly understand the information.

As i understand it, this single case in Portugal used the argument that if the PCR method is not 100% utterly correct in distinguishing between infected and non-infected, then the results are always meaningless and cannot ever be trusted. The judges were later censured by higher authority for having followed faulty logic.

Real world situation:

Is the PCR test 100% conclusive? Wrong question. PCR is not a test, it is a generic method of carrying out a type of process, and it is only as good as the specific usage of it. Analogy: cooking dinner uses a saucepan, so does the "saucepan dinner" always taste good? Should we ban the use of the "saucepan dinner" because it's not 100% guaranteed to create good food?

Correct question: Is the PCR method when used correctly a valuable diagnostic tool for detecting the SARS-CoV-2 virus? Answer yes. When used correctly for this purpose, does the test give a correct result in a statistically significant number of cases? Answer yes. Does the test give a perfect result every time? Answer no. Does the test result, in conjunction with evaluation of patient symptoms, give a diagnostically useful indication? Answer yes.

Does the widespread usage of the PCR method during the current crisis give information that helps slow the progress of the pandemic and save lives? Answer definitely yes!

Good saucepan analogy... But all my cooking tastes like shit... I need a new saucepan. "

I had this happen on a school trip once. Someone had put methylated spirits in my cooking equipment. Puking for days

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ackformore100Man
over a year ago

Tin town


"My thought is that lawyers did what lawyers often do. They twist around the meaning of complex scientific reports, exploit the extreme ends of a grey region, mislead juries and judges that do not have the specialist knowledge to correctly understand the information.

As i understand it, this single case in Portugal used the argument that if the PCR method is not 100% utterly correct in distinguishing between infected and non-infected, then the results are always meaningless and cannot ever be trusted. The judges were later censured by higher authority for having followed faulty logic.

Real world situation:

Is the PCR test 100% conclusive? Wrong question. PCR is not a test, it is a generic method of carrying out a type of process, and it is only as good as the specific usage of it. Analogy: cooking dinner uses a saucepan, so does the "saucepan dinner" always taste good? Should we ban the use of the "saucepan dinner" because it's not 100% guaranteed to create good food?

Correct question: Is the PCR method when used correctly a valuable diagnostic tool for detecting the SARS-CoV-2 virus? Answer yes. When used correctly for this purpose, does the test give a correct result in a statistically significant number of cases? Answer yes. Does the test give a perfect result every time? Answer no. Does the test result, in conjunction with evaluation of patient symptoms, give a diagnostically useful indication? Answer yes.

Does the widespread usage of the PCR method during the current crisis give information that helps slow the progress of the pandemic and save lives? Answer definitely yes!

Good saucepan analogy... But all my cooking tastes like shit... I need a new saucepan.

I had this happen on a school trip once. Someone had put methylated spirits in my cooking equipment. Puking for days"

Ohhh maybe that's it... Must store my meths away from the olive oil

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central

I don't practice law within the Portuguese legal system, so have no basis to critique their legal rulings, which is what this is. It is not a scientific analysis of the evidence upon PCR test result accuracy, as used in Portugal.

Are the PCR tests that we use in the UK the best method for evaluation of millions of the UK population? Yes, presently this test is functionally good and accurate, unlike the Tracing part of our Test and Trace systems, that we've spent £22 billion on.

Sure, you'll get some crackpots here trying to wiggle out of taking personal responsibilities for the wellbeing of others, who will try every trick in the book to hoodwink others.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top