this post was submitted on 14 Sep 2024
30 points (91.7% liked)

No Stupid Questions

35706 readers
3914 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

I've seen many tests (we're talking the average retail 4-drop kits) come up with varying degrees of positivity as a person goes through a bout with COVID.

Once they test positive, it's usually coming up with that T indicator long before the C shows to.

However, I've noticed that even that length of time for the T to show can vary. Sometimes it starts faded and fills in but sometimes the line can go full color as soon as the liquid hits it. Other times it may take a while and come up after the C (once closer to getting over it).

My thought here is the virus particles per million in a person's mucus are fluctuating during the course of their sickness and the more virus particles, the faster that bar is going to pop on the COVID test.

So then, is it stupid to think the faster the T shows up, the more infectious a person is with their coughing/sneezing?

top 12 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] psilotop@lemmy.world 16 points 1 month ago

Very firmly no. Even PCRs are not useful. People can pull out an example of "my friend infected me when her test said X" but that's just coincidence. This has been studied extensively during COVID and there is no reliable correlation between test value and infectivity.

[–] Boozilla@lemmy.world 13 points 1 month ago

Too many variables. There's two types of test, antigen and PCR. The chemical reactions in both can be impacted by ambient temperature and humidity, light exposure, air pressure (altitude), air quality (contaminants) and so on. At-home testing is far from lab conditions. False positives and false negatives are possible. I wouldn't put any stock in the timing.

[–] DrabPoultry@midwest.social 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

A home test won't. A PCR gives you some idea if you can get them to tell you the CT (cycle threshold) value of your test. The CT value corresponds to how many times the temperature cycled before the amplification signal of the sample became detectable. Lower CT values correspond to higher viral loads.

[–] elvith@feddit.org 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Even then, the CT roughly indicates the amount of virus that was in the sample - which correlates with how infectious you are. But it also depends on the quality of the sample and how it was taken. If you're highly infectious but the slab was not correctly inserted, you might have less virus on your sample as one would expect and appear less infectious.

[–] DrabPoultry@midwest.social 2 points 1 month ago

Definitely. Plus, you can absolutely get different CT values from two different testing platforms. Some PCR tests are more hands-on than others and the result can vary based on the quality of processing and on the settings that are used in the analysis software.

[–] bobagem@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Everyone is saying no, and I'm no expert, and I believe that for purposes beyond amusement value, the answer basically is no, but...

  1. The times that I've had covid, the strength of the T signal has started weak, gotten strong, and then trailed slowly off over the course of days.

  2. Same for family members.

  3. Same for acquaintances who I've seen post day-by-day test photos on social media.

  4. I've read that if you are vaccinated and boosted, your antigen response kicks in faster and so more closely parallels your communicability curve. That is to say that unvaccinated people will be communicable before home antigen tests start noticing that you're responding. But people who have had covid or vaccinations will test positive sooner. And specifically I've read that during the incubation stage when you are infected but not very communicable yet the tests may miss you, but on the other hand that's okayish because you're not very communicable yet.

  5. Everything that everyone has said about all the variability can be at least partially controlled, if you are using the same test batch, in the same location, at the same time of day, following the same idiosyncratic procedure for each.

[–] zenharbinger@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago
[–] Banichan@dormi.zone 4 points 1 month ago
[–] RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

AFAIK, no. The tests you can get won't show exactly how much viral load you have, only that you have enough to trigger the test to return a positive result.

[–] Oth@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

The effect you are describing is "viral load"; the degree to which a virus is present in the body. This is an indicator of how infectious you are. It is especially important for people with HIV to see if they are "safe" or need their medication adjusted.

However, an at-home test will not be a good indicator of this. These have too many variables such as the site that was swabbed, time delays from the various biological functions, how well you used the kit and even variability in the kit itself.

To properly test for viral load, a blood test should be used. I worked with a company that tested for viral load via expelled breath, and while this was a good indicator of infectiousness y/n, and was faster than a PCR, it was not more accurate.

[–] Tylerdurdon@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Interesting, thank you!