The false positive rate isn't a constant. It varies substantially depending on the population that you test.

I explained it in detail here if you're interested: https://thedonald.win/p/GcH3ljtQ/x/c/15IXg4DEfs

The basic summary though is this: if you used the same test in a population of people who are highly likely to be positive (showing symptoms, etc) then the false positive rate can be as low as 1%. However if you use the EXACT SAME TEST on a population with only 5% actually infected, you'll get a false positive rate of 50% or higher.

So basically, indiscriminate testing of random people will drive up false positives substantially compared to only testing to CONFIRM someone has the virus who is showing symptoms.

The false positive rate isn't a constant. It varies substantially depending on the population that you test.

I explained it in detail here if you're interested: https://thedonald.win/p/GcH3ljtQ/x/c/15IXg4DEfs

The basic summary though is this: if you used the same test in a population of people who are highly likely to be positive (showing symptoms, etc) then thefalce positive rate can be as low as 1%. However if you use the EXACT SAME TEST on a population with only 5% actually infected, you'll get a false positive rate of 50% or higher.

So basically, indiscriminate testing of random people will drive up false positives substantially compared to only testing to CONFIRM someone has the virus who is showing symptoms.