Ok, let's say that its only purpose was to inform you whether there is at least a trace amount of it in a person's system. Is that how it's been reported by the big 6? Absolutely not.
A positive, in their reporting, means you are absolutely a walking bio-hazard to anyone you come in contact with. Whether it took 20 cycles (you're probably actually able to spread something) or 40 cycles (you probably had a cold 10 years ago), it's still another positive for them to scream from the rooftops that we need to wear our muzzles and shelter in our homes.
That's the danger of this. With the proposed rapid tests, it is much less sensitive, and if someone ends up feeling sick several hours or days after testing negative... just go get another test and receive any number of the verified treatments that the MSM refuses to admit the existence of.
Also, the original report came from the New York Times, not exactly a bastion of conservative thought... and they still somehow managed to allow it to be published.
I mean I agree with you. But then just do a story on media blowing things out of proportion. The test doing what it was designed to do is not outrage worthy.
I think people are already over this virus and ready for restrictions to be lifted. At a certain point nobody's going to care how many positive or negative just like nobody cares if you got H1N1 or not.
Ok, let's say that its only purpose was to inform you whether there is at least a trace amount of it in a person's system. Is that how it's been reported by the big 6? Absolutely not.
A positive, in their reporting, means you are absolutely a walking bio-hazard to anyone you come in contact with. Whether it took 20 cycles (you're probably actually able to spread something) or 40 cycles (you probably had a cold 10 years ago), it's still another positive for them to scream from the rooftops that we need to wear our muzzles and shelter in our homes.
That's the danger of this. With the proposed rapid tests, it is much less sensitive, and if someone ends up feeling sick several hours or days after testing negative... just go get another test and receive any number of the verified treatments that the MSM refuses to admit the existence of.
Also, the original report came from the New York Times, not exactly a bastion of conservative thought... and they still somehow managed to allow it to be published.
I mean I agree with you. But then just do a story on media blowing things out of proportion. The test doing what it was designed to do is not outrage worthy.
I think people are already over this virus and ready for restrictions to be lifted. At a certain point nobody's going to care how many positive or negative just like nobody cares if you got H1N1 or not.