Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The conversation is not about nursing homes or hospitals, it is about those who are dying having to do so with no family present, whatever institution is housing them.
There should be work arounds for that. That is my point.
This is the first virus where people are testing with no symptoms. This is likely what would happen if everyone was tested for the flu during flu season too. Lots of positives.
This is the first virus where people are testing with no symptoms. This is likely what would happen if everyone was tested for the flu during flu season too. Lots of positives.
People get tested for HIV and hepatitis B (both recommended for all pregnant women), and hepatitis C when they have no symptoms, too. Screening for hepatitis C in pregnancy should be done if their community has a high enough risk of exposure to support doing it.
The conversation is not about nursing homes or hospitals, it is about those who are dying having to do so with no family present, whatever institution is housing them.
Actually, the conversation is about who, what, why, where and with "up to 90% of people who have tested positive for Covid are not even contagious
"
People get tested for HIV and hepatitis B (both recommended for all pregnant women), and hepatitis C when they have no symptoms, too. Screening for hepatitis C in pregnancy should be done if their community has a high enough risk of exposure to support doing it.
What the people have consented to with Kung Flu 1984, they could be coerced into similar hardship for anyone of those "Panic's waiting to happen" you just mentioned.
Some of the nation’s leading public health experts are raising a new concern in the endless debate over coronavirus testing in the United States: The standard tests are diagnosing huge numbers of people who may be carrying relatively insignificant amounts of the virus.
In three sets of testing data that include cycle thresholds, compiled by officials in Massachusetts, New York and Nevada, up to 90 percent of people testing positive carried barely any virus at all and may not even need to be isolated and quarantined.
We have the best tests, even a very low virus count, which our immune system is destroying, or has already destroyed and dead virus cells still floating around, and you will test positive
Hindsight is great isn’t it. It still kills and spreads like locust, but that’s okay tell the simpleminded public anything to lower the bar.
doesn't really kill the healthy people though, does it. If you are healthy your chance of dying is 0.0015%. Only the sick need to worry about this virus.
doesn't really kill the healthy people though, does it. If you are healthy your chance of dying is 0.0015%. Only the sick need to worry about this virus.
The healthy ones who catch it can give it to those who are less healthy. Why is that so blasted hard to understand?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
