In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

At home COVID testing for unvaccinated citizens

MobuckMobuck Member Posts: 13,790 ✭✭✭✭
edited October 2021 in Politics

Just how much faith would one have about that? I would have ZERO confidence in the results and 100% suspicion that the swabs would be 'pre-loaded' with the virus so as to infect those hold outs who have refused the jab.

Locally, there was a mistake made during some of the initial testing and an entire UNOPENED case of swabs was returned for testing and the results were nearly 75% positive. Unopened, still sealed carton contained positive samples. Something stinks.

So it happened earlier and now there's a possible replay in the works. Results? A well publicized uptick in COVID cases in the unjabbed populace and leverage to mandate further vaccinations.


  • Options
    select-fireselect-fire Member Posts: 69,453 ✭✭✭✭

    Well you know... anyone tested anywhere will come back positive.. insert the green font. does not mean one has to get vaccinated, however it may mean you cannot travel by certain means.

  • Options
    Ditch-RunnerDitch-Runner Member Posts: 24,572 ✭✭✭✭

    One of my sons tested positive at the hospital check station but to confirm it

    he went to three more test one a local health clnic another at a urgent care?

    and a home test kit all came back negative. Go figure

  • Options
    MobuckMobuck Member Posts: 13,790 ✭✭✭✭

    If 'they' can figure out how to test for the virus, 'they' can also figure out how to 'pre-load' the swabs WITH the virus.

    If someone even suggests I shove some unknown whatever up my nose, I'll tell them in no uncertain terms where THEY CAN SHOVE IT. Same goes for the vaccination.

  • Options
    MrMag00MrMag00 Member Posts: 532 ✭✭✭

    I'm all for vaccinations. I am not for the covid jab. I wish people would call it what it is; Jab, Shot, experimental biological agent, etc.

     vs giving vaccinations a bad name.

  • Options
    SCOUT5SCOUT5 Member Posts: 16,182 ✭✭✭✭

    I've swabbed a lot of people for a lot of things. I used the same type of swab/swabs for several different tests. The difference is in the reagent or other evaluation methods. The swab is basically generic though there are different kinds used depending on area of the body and type or organism/organisms you are looking. Some you send to the lab dry and others in a solution. The home test contain the reagent in one form or another.

    When nasal cavities are swabbed for a virus check it is important to make good contact with the nasal pan. It is uncomfortable to have the nasal pan swabbed. A lot of people do not do it right and fail to pick up the virus even if it is present.

    Could the swabs be pre-infected,? Yes they could. However if the swab is dry the virus isn't going to last long in the package among other issues. Could these issues be overcome? Like most things there is probably a way but it's hard for me to think it's being done. False positives happen even in time proven tests of this kind. With the rapid development of the reagent associate with this test I'm not surprised to have a high level of false positives. A positive result of these kind of test are far from conclusive and does not 100% prove presence of the virus. Other related viruses could be present or a flawed test could happen with no virus present. These type of tests are used as part of an evaluation and are not conclusive in and of themselves.

Sign In or Register to comment.