20 New Cases Reported; More Than 40 Cases of B.1.1.7 Variant Identified in County
Press release from the Humboldt County Joint Information Center:
A total of 3,935 Humboldt County residents have tested positive for COVID-19 after 20 news cases were reported today.
Two previously reported hospitalizations have been removed from the county’s count. While both were positive for COVID-19, the reason they were admitted to the hospital was unrelated to the virus.
Genomic sequencing of local COVID-19-positive samples has identified more than 40 total cases of the B.1.1.7 variant, now the most dominant strain of the virus in the state and nation. This variant is associated with a 50% increase in transmission and can lead to more severe illness as well as hospitalizations and deaths in unvaccinated individuals.
Public Health officials say the B.1.1.7 variant was present in a majority of sequenced samples, indicating that it is widespread locally. The community will be notified if additional variants of concern are detected in the county. Health officials pointed out that all approved vaccines are highly effective against COVID-19 variants and encouraged county residents to get vaccinated as soon as possible.
More than 2,600 second doses of COVID-19 vaccine are expected to be administered at Public Health’s mass-vaccination clinics scheduled today through Sunday. County residents in need of a first- or second-dose of vaccine who aren’t already scheduled for an appointment can sign up through a local pharmacy. Go to vaccines.gov to check availability at all participating local pharmacies.
View the Humboldt County Data Dashboard online at humboldtgov.org/dashboard, or go to humboldtgov.org/DashboardArchives to download today’s data.
For the most recent COVID-19 information, visit cdc.gov or cdph.ca.gov. Local information is available at humboldtgov.org or by contacting [email protected] or calling 707-441-5000.
Sign up for COVID-19 vaccination: MyTurn.ca.gov
Check for vaccine availability at a local pharmacy: Vaccines.gov
Local COVID-19 vaccine information: humboldtgov.org/VaccineInfo
Humboldt County COVID-19 Data Dashboard: humboldtgov.org/Dashboard
Follow us on Facebook: @HumCoCOVID19
Instagram: @HumCoCOVID19
Twitter: @HumCoCOVID19
Humboldt Health Alert: humboldtgov.org/HumboldtHealthAlert
Join the discussion! For rules visit: https://kymkemp.com/commenting-rules
Comments system how-to: https://wpdiscuz.com/community/postid/10599/
Shame on you, Dr. FAUCI.
You’ve given the virtue signaling vaccinated people a new designation:
“BITTER CLINGERS”
You’re crazy.
The only thing that commentor gets right is his name.
Crazy!
🥾
🆗️
Guest wants to tounge me.
I’ve got soul.
[edit]
You’re crazy✌️
Run for your lives! The sky is falling!
Broken clocks are not right twice a day.
They are broken every second of every day.
Time is not stagnant, a broken clock is.
Throw broken clocks away.
It’s never too late to abort a life?
You can’t get a pass for supporting abortion, and then demanding the sanctity of life when you feel like it.
Survival of the Wisest is an excellent book.
Read it.
You might actually understand the God Complex that inhabits evil intelligence.
On the Humboldt county Dashboard, Adjusted Case Rate is 13.1 and Positivity Rate is 6.4%, levels corresponding to Tier I Widespread and Tier 2 Substantial respectively but Humboldt county is in Tier 3 Moderate.
Is this a lag effect in reporting or what?
Right Orleans,
have wondered the same.
I believe it must be maintained for two weeks before a tier change is made, but don’t quote me on that one.
Thank you.
The numbers have to be maintained for two weeks in a row and there are some other mitigating factors.
Thank you.
Seems like Humboldt county stats are headed in the unfortunate direction then alas.
Apparently the cdc is investigating those 9,000 “breakthrough cases”.
And in order to test those, they have recommended lowering the Ct of the rtPCR test to 28.
Imagine that!
40 when they need more “cases” to scare people into getting jabbed but 28 when they test for people still getting the virus after receiving the shot.
Nothing to see here folks…
“Clinical specimens for sequencing should have an RT-PCR Ct value ≤28.”
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/downloads/Information-for-laboratories-COVID-vaccine-breakthrough-case-investigation.pdf
You don’t understand how those numbers work. The lower threshold is more rigorous, so you can toss your conspiracy theory.
no, you are the one who doesn’t understand.
you say.. “The lower threshold is more rigorous”..
every cycle that is run amplifies the amount of virus in the original sample therefore making it easier to get a positive test result the more times you run it.
so the higher threshold or more cycles you run it, the smaller the amount of virus it takes to read positive. so if they want a higher case count, they run it more cycles, and if they want fewer cases, they run it less cycles, just like 4trinity said.
fewer cycles= less amplification of virus in sample= harder to detect= need more virus in original sample to get a positive result= fewer cases
more cycles= more amplification of virus in original sample= easier to detect= need much smaller amount of virus to get a positive result= more cases
I think you’re right tree hugger.
“Experts: US COVID-19 positivity rate high due to ‘too sensitive’ tests.” From msn.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/experts-us-covid-19-positivity-rate-high-due-to-too-sensitive-tests/ar-BB18wE8B
Definitely correct, Treehugger. 👍
Third, the lower number is more rigorous, that’s what 4 trinity is saying. You don’t understand. Do you understand? Thanks.
I think you are all right,
Rigorous:
Extremely thorough, exhaustive,
“accurate”.
Thorough and exhaustive
would apply to the higher cycle PCR testing…
Accurate would maybe not apply, also, and is where the confusion lies, in that too exhaustive is too sensitive, and is being considered inaccurate in this discussion, as in false positive.
The lower cycle PCR testing could be considered rigorous as it is more accurate in this discussion, and also thorough and exhaustive, just not as exhaustive.
So it’s two out of three both ways.
Tie goes to the runner.
Shake hands folks, we’re all on the same team.
Higher and lower cycle testing could both be considered more accurate, therefore more thorough.
They are both exhaustive.
The higher cycle PCR test I would conclude is more exhaustive.
Actually, though, in this discussion, it’s too exhaustive, and affects accuracy.
So it’s a push, folks, do we have to argue about everything?
Next up:
Creation versus Evolution,
“Why can’t it be both?”
“Higher and lower cycle testing could both be considered more accurate, therefore more thorough.”
Well…except it’s not. The higher the Ct, the lower the accuracy.
According to studies, 28 should be somewhat accurate. Not as much as 20 though.
40 is rediculous. And since this whole scam is built around the “test”, it’s very pertinent.
Really, it shouldn’t even be used.
Do you see the smoke&mirrors?
Will Humboldt change from 35-40 to 28 for their “cases” and “covid deaths”?
Will most of the world? Then the house-of-cards would fall.
I can see that this is another point the anti vaxxers network has blown up as proving their suspicions.
However normally the PCR test is only used to determine whether there is a positive or negative infection. Not the level of infection. The cycle at which the virus is detected has something to do with the severity of the infection. So maybe this study is focusing on severe illness which shows up at 28 CT rather than milder infections showing up as > 28 cycles. So this is not a wide ranging survey but one for using on severe infections, which is the prevention the vaccines are claiming. Not that no one will ever be infected.
“These surveillance data are a snapshot and help identify patterns and look for signals among vaccine breakthrough cases.
As CDC and state health departments shift to focus only on investigating vaccine breakthrough cases that result in hospitalization or death, those data will be regularly updated and posted every Friday.” https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/health-departments/breakthrough-cases.html
Auntie, you have a point. Maybe this is a question for dr. Hoffman.
Yes Auntie Ovine,
The lower cycle PCR testing for the breakthrough cases are searching for more serious infections, the most serious.
They are looking for variants that are impervious to the various vaccines.
They are the products of this grand experiment that is using everyone as a lab animal, and will be treasured by the epidemiologists.
They will be carefully sequenced, sorted, and properly stored for future use.
Lather, rinse, repeat.
The race is on to produce as many new weapons, in as short amount of time, as is possible.
A new arms race.
Like a breeder reactor, this weapon creates endless fuel for it’s perpetuity, courtesy of the willing vaccinated populace, in combination with the ever evolving virus de jour. Not to mention increasing it’s variety, to perpetuate the need for new vaccinations, on the regular.
Appetizer anyone?
Would you like a drink with that?
The vaccination may be justified.
Maybe don’t give them so many samples to “Test”?
Wild and crazy conspiracy theory you say?
You should ask yourself why there has been little progress on a mucosal vaccine that prevents infection like a real vaccine would,
to work in conjunction with the intramuscular vaccine if necessary.
Why no word on that?
Not a peep.
Because that would prevent the precious mutations that will be
potentially produced, and be patented and profited off of, that they so desperately desire.
Out with the old, in with the new.
They got us over a barrel, caught in a crossfire, pitting us all against each other.
Soon the unvaccinated will be persecuted and blamed for the unstoppable spread of the insidious viruses, until there won’t be a control group left to compare side effects to, and whatever side effects do eventually manifest themselves, will all of a sudden, be the new normal.
How positively Orwellian.
Fact or Fiction? You must decide.
Remember, you’ll find Fauci, in the dictionary, between Fact and Fiction.
You heard it here first, on RHBB.
Sweet Dreams.
Actually intranasal vaccines are being developed. “The newer vaccines are from the US government labs and companies including Sanofi , Altimmune and Gritstone Oncology with the potential to offer better immune responses and be more effective against novel viral variants, possibly helping fight the future pandemics, the report mentioned.”
There’s a caution about this because there was an intranasal flu vaccine, which are mostly attenuated live vaccines, that turned out to be ineffective for children. The article below gives some thoughts about it but I think it maybe more complicated than that as I remember another intranasal vaccine that turned out to be capable under rare circumstances to spread the disease to unprotected people. We’ll just have to wait to see.
https://www.cnbctv18.com/healthcare/new-covid-19-vaccines-could-be-a-pill-or-a-nasal-spray-report-9187861.htm
https://www.livescience.com/55176-flu-nasal-spray-not-working.html
The rtPCR does not determine if one is infected or not.
It can, at Ct 28, detect viral particles. Not necessarily covid particles. A Ct f 40 is false-positive. Which is roughly what is being used currently to test for “cases” or “covid deaths”. (and why there are so many “cases” in Humboldt)
Which is why this “test” should never be used to diagnose.
In other words, if a person is symptomatic for a flu-like illness (which covid apparently is) there are procedures that can be followed to treat the flu-like illness.
If one is asymptomatic, what difference does it make?
Bottom line: no need to test.
“Could mass testing for Covid-19 do more harm than good?”
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/could-mass-testing-for-covid-19-do-more-harm-than-good-/amp?__twitter_impression=true
If course it does. The 35 CT was used (it depends on the manufacturer- some are more sensitive than other) because ” the US CDC has reported that they were able to culture virus from specimens with Ct values up to the low 30s.”
https://medicine.yale.edu/labmed/sections/virology…
And there were hospital patients whose covid-19 diagnosis was confirmed through x ray but whose viral count needed many cycles to turn up.
“Case example: Diagnosis of acute infection
• 43 year old, with fever, cough, SOB for 8 days. Presented to ED at
outside hospital.
• CXR showed ground glass opacities
• SARS CoV-2 RT-PCR negative [GeneXpert]
• Sent home
• Patient returned to 2 days later with worsening SOB and O2 sats
• SARS CoV-2 RT-PCR positive [CDC assay]
• Ct values: 35.2 N1 /37.7 N2
• Patients with pneumonia may have little virus in upper airway and
using a sensitive assay is essential.
• PCR of sputum or BAL preferred, but often not available.”
Then “During assay development and validation, the limit of detection (LOD) is determined using a target of
known quantity which is serially diluted, usually using 1 log (i.e., 10 fold) dilutions, and tested with the
PCR assay. The cut-off (highest Ct value) for positivity is usually placed at a Ct value similar to that
generated by the lowest copies of target that can be reliably detected in the assay (e.g. Ct ≤ 38). This Ct
cut-off value is determined by manufacturers of commercial assays, or by laboratories during the validation of laboratory developed tests (LDTs).”
https://www.publichealthontario.ca/-/media/…
This idea keeps being trotted out by anti vaxxers because they prefer to believe the whole pandemic is a scam no matter how many times it’s refuted. Of course there are false positives in any tests. But to assume a large number of them is ridiculous. It would mean that the manufactures of testing equipment, the techs that run them and the doctors that rely on them are wrong and the anti vaxxers, not understanding much but repeating what they are told, are right.
“Your Coronavirus Test Is Positive. Maybe It Shouldn’t Be.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/29/health/coronavirus-testing.html
“Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR.”
https://www.eurosurveillance.org/content/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.3.2000045
“External peer review of the RTPCR test to detect SARS-CoV-2 reveals 10 major scientific flaws at the molecular and methodological level: consequences for false positive results”
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/346483715_External_peer_review_of_the_RTPCR_test_to_detect_SARS-CoV-2_reveals_10_major_scientific_flaws_at_the_molecular_and_methodological_level_consequences_for_false_positive_results
“External peer review of the RTPCR test to detect SARS-CoV-2 reveals 10 major scientific flaws at the molecular and methodological level: consequences for false positive results.”
https://cormandrostenreview.com/report/
Those are starters, Auntie.
(you might consider not using “anti-vaxxers” anymore. The covid jab is not a vaccine and some who are “hesitant” are so because it is completely experimental and are not against other real vaccines, per se)
Oh…and it is a scam. You’ll see, though likely too late.
https://kymkemp.com/2020/09/05/we-may-be-surviving-but-were-no-longer-living-mendocino-county-behavioral-health-director-addresses-suicides-mental-illness-since-covid-19-pandemic-began/#comment-1170415
Nothing to see here.
Hey Expert ! Can you answer my question?
🕯🌳Damn it my dashboard lights went out. 🖖🖖
Did you check your fuses?
🕯🌳Hey I checked my fuses it happened when that damn Chinese space trash fell on me. 🖖🖖
You guys got the rocket trash in fortuna? Lucky…
🕯🌳Hey Elon Musk pays big money for that trash. 🖖🖖
🤙✌️
Means your taillights are out, too, Willie Bray.
They are on the same circuit as your dashboard lights, so you will know if your taillight fuse is blown and they are out.
A safety feature.
(True Story).
On the big, bad’s possible origin:
“The origin of COVID: Did people or nature open Pandora’s box at Wuhan?”
https://thebulletin.org/2021/05/the-origin-of-covid-did-people-or-nature-open-pandoras-box-at-wuhan/
“COVID19 Files – Scientific Investigation On Mysterious Origin Of Coronavirus”
https://greatgameindia.com/covid19-files-scientific-investigation-on-mysterious-origin-of-coronavirus/#Shi_Zhengli_Mystery_of_cross-species_Coronavirus_infection
Which ties into this:
“WHO inspector caught on camera revealing coronavirus manipulation in Wuhan before pandemic.”
https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/4104828
All just coincidences and whatnot. It was Bats…..🙄
https://apple.news/AkvdT6d18RZOQDrLp-3GnmQ
This was from today, also says it was created in a lab in humanized mice, due to a “gain of function experiment”
Knocked the first link out. It was lengthy but very informative, thanks.
I will definitely be clicking the other two when time permits.
Thanks
The author of the first is very well respected, fwiw.
Very informative indeed!
My $ is still on Ft Detrick though.
https://anewscafe.com/2021/05/05/redding/enraged-red-white-and-blueprint-leader-assaults-video-creator/
The same conversation, over a year old, with the same language, but the names keep changing.
“Gain of Function” terminology is a red flag of banned commentors and pseudo-logic.
https://kymkemp.com/2020/09/05/we-may-be-surviving-but-were-no-longer-living-mendocino-county-behavioral-health-director-addresses-suicides-mental-illness-since-covid-19-pandemic-began/#comment-1170739
He used to say, “medical tyranny” under multiple names.
Again, they are using played out tactics, terms and methods to play their games on RHBB readers.
Gain of Function. Gain of Function.
It’s a scientific term.
Do you even know what that means trb?