PCR test is also plagued with false positives. Even the inventor of the test said it’s especially susceptible to false positives (false negatives do happen but the nature of this method skews far to the false positive). Every test has the potential to give a false positive and it’s heavily influenced by the tech that runs it. If you run enough cycles there is a point where it will throw a positive.
This is dangerous in so many ways. Let's assume the virus actually is deadly for the sake of argument. False positives will allocate much needed resources to people who don't need it, including contract tracing on someone who never had it. False positives could swing the mortality in either direction. If they test everyone in the hospital, someone dying of plain old renal failure or cancer with a false positive would increase the mortality rate. On the other end, routine testing of healthy people would decrease the "mortality rate" since they obviously can't die from a false positive.
Basically, garbage data leads to garbage conclusions.
Garbage in, garbage out. Apparently, the Abbott test is the best method but it’s expensive. Trump did mention wanting to get the Abbott test far and wide. Best part about it, no back if the nose swab. Also, you can get results in 15 minutes.
PCR test is also plagued with false positives. Even the inventor of the test said it’s especially susceptible to false positives (false negatives do happen but the nature of this method skews far to the false positive). Every test has the potential to give a false positive and it’s heavily influenced by the tech that runs it. If you run enough cycles there is a point where it will throw a positive.
Yes! IABS - It's all bullshit.
65 x running the PCR and everyone's positive. So they stop at 38. Close enough for nuclear bombs, horseshoes - and government work.
Accuracy isn't even attempted. It's all about installing OWG.
This is dangerous in so many ways. Let's assume the virus actually is deadly for the sake of argument. False positives will allocate much needed resources to people who don't need it, including contract tracing on someone who never had it. False positives could swing the mortality in either direction. If they test everyone in the hospital, someone dying of plain old renal failure or cancer with a false positive would increase the mortality rate. On the other end, routine testing of healthy people would decrease the "mortality rate" since they obviously can't die from a false positive.
Basically, garbage data leads to garbage conclusions.
Garbage in, garbage out. Apparently, the Abbott test is the best method but it’s expensive. Trump did mention wanting to get the Abbott test far and wide. Best part about it, no back if the nose swab. Also, you can get results in 15 minutes.