Did they say it doesn't work somewhere? Would love to see them admit that, but I only read the landing page. Is that statement somewhere else? I'm lazy this morning and didn't open other links. LOL! This seems to be recommending a multiplexed method but doesn't give a reason as to why they're pulling the emergency authorization for the one they've been using. You're probably right that is doesn't work...and never has, but I'd love to see that stated somewhere. Could REALLY use showing that kind of thing to friends and family right now.
They seem to clearly imply that influenza (normal old flu) cases represented a significant portion of the 'covid-19 positive' results from that assay.
Quote from OP's link: "CDC encourages laboratories to consider adoption of a multiplexed method that can facilitate detection and differentiation of SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses." (key word= differentiation)
Yeah, I get it, but it's not enough for me to red pill MY family with. "Seeming to clearly imply" is just not good enough. They'll say it's a stretch to assume the original test didn't work even though I sent them info in the beginning that it couldn't differentiate between ANY coronavirus. I was just hoping someone did a little digging on any of the page links and found something more concrete. I'll probably take the time a little later and will drop anything I find that I think might be helpful. Appreciate your comment, though. Have a great weekend!
They're saying the new test going forward should preferably be able to tell you if you have covid, flu or neither. As in test for both within the same test. Current tests can only tell you if you specifically have the flu or if you specifically have covid, etc.
Did they say it doesn't work somewhere? Would love to see them admit that, but I only read the landing page. Is that statement somewhere else? I'm lazy this morning and didn't open other links. LOL! This seems to be recommending a multiplexed method but doesn't give a reason as to why they're pulling the emergency authorization for the one they've been using. You're probably right that is doesn't work...and never has, but I'd love to see that stated somewhere. Could REALLY use showing that kind of thing to friends and family right now.
They seem to clearly imply that influenza (normal old flu) cases represented a significant portion of the 'covid-19 positive' results from that assay.
Quote from OP's link: "CDC encourages laboratories to consider adoption of a multiplexed method that can facilitate detection and differentiation of SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses." (key word= differentiation)
Yeah, I get it, but it's not enough for me to red pill MY family with. "Seeming to clearly imply" is just not good enough. They'll say it's a stretch to assume the original test didn't work even though I sent them info in the beginning that it couldn't differentiate between ANY coronavirus. I was just hoping someone did a little digging on any of the page links and found something more concrete. I'll probably take the time a little later and will drop anything I find that I think might be helpful. Appreciate your comment, though. Have a great weekend!
They're saying the new test going forward should preferably be able to tell you if you have covid, flu or neither. As in test for both within the same test. Current tests can only tell you if you specifically have the flu or if you specifically have covid, etc.
LOL like you expect them to give actual information and data? Nope, it's not in there anywhere.
That's what I figured.