CDC MMWR: Unvaccinated w/ prior covid 5X likelier to test positive than fully vaxed

[Kickstand]

they run the unvaccinated PCR tests at 40 cycles or more

the vaccinated 28 cycles or less

https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/pcr-tests-on-vaccinated-and-unvaccinated-people-are-evaluated-using-the-same-criteria-the-cdc-didnt-change-criteria-for-detecting-infection-in-vaccinated-people-as-alleged-in-off-guardian-a/

[sd_shooter]

https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/pcr-tests-on-vaccinated-and-unvaccinated-people-are-evaluated-using-the-same-criteria-the-cdc-didnt-change-criteria-for-detecting-infection-in-vaccinated-people-as-alleged-in-off-guardian-a/

Thanks for that, it's helpful to debunk some FUD.

But that 'article' is nonetheless full of misinformation of another kind, it keeps saying that the vaccines are "highly effective." How can that be if an entire hockey team gets the covid after being vaccinated?
In particular it repeats the overly optimistic initial estimates:

n November 2020, Pfizer and BioNTech reported that the vaccine has 95% efficacy at preventing symptomatic COVID-19, while Moderna reported 94% efficacy. Johnson and Johnson reported that their vaccine has 85% efficacy at preventing severe illness.

[SPUTTER]

The level of misinformation in just this one thread is astounding. One claim after another is just “no.” Regarding this particularly ignorant comment above: I work with our in-house lab- there is no link in the lab between samples and pt’s vaccination status. None. The lab equipment knows nothing but what test is being run; all samples are run the exact same.

Just saying wrong information over and over isn’t “well documented.” Good lord.

https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/pcr-tests-on-vaccinated-and-unvaccinated-people-are-evaluated-using-the-same-criteria-the-cdc-didnt-change-criteria-for-detecting-infection-in-vaccinated-people-as-alleged-in-off-guardian-a/

The CDC revised there testing protocols which included reduced testing cycles for the fully vaccinated, back in May. I believe Alex Berenson was the first to write about it. I'm not sure if they have since revised it but apparently they removed the pdf of the revision.
Nevertheless, I said even if you disregard the testing shenanigans, the claim that naturally infected unvaccinated are 5x more likely to test positive than fully vaccinated is flat out ridiculous based on the numbers in the paper.
Next time CDC makes a claim, look past the graphic and spend more than 15 minutes reviewing the data.

[five.five-six]

Laboratory-Confirmed

I had delta, it lasted about 6 hrs

My boss is vaxed, I caught delta from him and as soon as they found out he was VAXXED they refused to test him. Just put him on oxygen.

In other news, purebloods are 100% less likely to die from mRNA poisoning in the future.

[five.five-six]

Fully read the paper and refer to specific parts of the paper you found wanting. I'm not responding to tangential/bizarre assertions and/or questions already answered in the paper. It's only 6 pages long, took me 15 minutes.

I find it very odd that some here accuse the MMWR, the #1 journal (by H-rating) in epidemiology of "propaganda", while the children's defense fund is A-OK. You want to read what actual doctors read, read the MMWR, JAMA, NEJM, etc.

You don’t respond to tangential/bizarre assertions, you just make tangential/bizarre assertions.

Got it.

[bigbossman]