Did they ever figure out the Ohio governor's false positives?

[vonfirmath]

A bunch of football teams have ended up with the same -- all tied to one specific lab it appears.

https://apnews.com/5d15429433051c78f2ca42fc08fbf835

[PeterPan]

Wow. Need a gobsmacked emoji or something. That's astonishing.

Well there you go. So tell the truth, do you think it's incompetence, rushing the technology, or a conspiracy to tank football and patriotism and hope? Hahaha. I hope it's something really innocuous, and I'm guessing it will get looked into now. 

Did you see a cruise ship got turned around and their itinerary trashed over the same thing, false positives? So this is going to become an interesting issue.

[Tenaj]

The explanation about the governor was that the first test was a quick test that the Whitehouse as using to screen people but it has a high rate of false positives.

The later negatives were the PCR?  (I think that's right?) That most people get.

Regarding the football teams, it seems like that one lab had some sort of contamination maybe?  

[kbutton]

I know different types of tests have different accuracy rates, but I really wish they'd figure out, explain, and give context to tests that drive up the false positive rate. I am sure those tests have their use (faster turn around, etc.), but they are really driving conspiratorial thinking in my neck of the woods. 

[PeterPan]

These are pretty big consequences from the false positives. Seems at least at this point businesses need to have some skepticism and RE DO quick test positives (when asymptomatic) before making radical decisions.

[vonfirmath]

7 minutes ago, PeterPan said:

These are pretty big consequences from the false positives. Seems at least at this point businesses need to have some skepticism and RE DO quick test positives (when asymptomatic) before making radical decisions.

Honestly at this point I wouldn't knowingly get a rapid test.

In our business, negatives are not enough to clear you and now positives will make you quarantine and could also be false.

 

Edited August 24, 2020 by vonfirmath

[SKL]

Yeah, if the tests are so poor, then it seems to me that getting it would be a bigger risk than not getting it.  Seems they should scrap this one and start over.

[Scarlett]

OH man.  I was going to have a rapid test done before I go see my friend.  Now I am afraid to!  

[ktgrok]

Given then have what, like a 30% false negative rate, then now also a percent that is false positive....seems accuracy is about as good as flipping a coin. Yeah, I wouldn't trust the rapid tests. Or at least, I'd repeat it, no matter what the results were. 

[kbutton]

9 hours ago, PeterPan said:

These are pretty big consequences from the false positives. Seems at least at this point businesses need to have some skepticism and RE DO quick test positives (when asymptomatic) before making radical decisions.

I think many places do a better test if they get a positive on the quick test, depending on the circumstances.

5 hours ago, Ktgrok said:

Given then have what, like a 30% false negative rate, then now also a percent that is false positive....seems accuracy is about as good as flipping a coin. Yeah, I wouldn't trust the rapid tests. Or at least, I'd repeat it, no matter what the results were. 

I think when they are used in a high turnover situation where subsequent testing is likely to happen again in a short timeframe, they are probably a good tool. My husband works in healthcare, sees COVID patients most days (with PPE), and he's not been tested at all. Ideally, we'd be testing healthcare workers pretty frequently with something like a rapid test with positives followed by a more reliable test. Locally, I know nursing home workers and residents are being tested on a regular basis, but I think that's only been recently achieved.