Jump to content
To change color scheme, click on themes at bottom of page ×
RightNation.US
Sign in to follow this  
kestrel

Ontario, Canada Govt Medical Official Warns Against Mass Coronavirus Testing-- 'Will Not Actually Achieve Anything', False Positives 'Almost Half' in Low COVID Areas

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

kestrel

"False Positives half the time"..Yikes!...If true what does that say about our vaunted "Testing Strategies" (I mean besides the reports of people receiving a phone call and telling them that their test was "Positive" for Wuhan Cooties and who say "Test?..I never took a test? or the report of some Govt Doc's in Africa sending in samples of swabs dipped in Mango Juice and Test's given to Donkeys that came back Positive..Financial Incentive?

Kestrel...

 

thegatewaypundit.com

Ontario, Canada Govt Medical Official Warns Against Mass Coronavirus Testing-- 'Will Not Actually Achieve Anything', False Positives 'Almost Half' in Low COVID Areas (Video)

By Kristinn Taylor
Published July 31, 2020

As Ontario, Canada prepares to open schools for children in September, Ontario’s Associate Chief Medical Officer of Health Dr. Barbara Yaffe warned against mass testing for the COVID-19 China coronavirus, saying it takes resources from other needed areas and does not “actually achieve anything.” Dr. Yaffe also said that in areas with low incidences of COVID infection, the rate for false positive test results is “almost half.”

Yaffe said testing should be reserved for suspected cases, people with symptoms and their contacts.

“You know, I think a lot of people think that testing is going to really solve the whole problem, and it isn’t. It’s one component of a response. If you test somebody today, uh, you only know if they’re infected today. And in fact if you’re testing in a population that doesn’t have very much COVID, you’ll get false positives almost half the time. That is the person actually doesn’t have COVID, they have something else, they may have nothing. Uh, so it will just complicate the picture.”

“On the other hand, if we have evidence of a case, even a suspect case in a school, all the contacts of that case be it a child or teacher would be tested. Regardless of whether they’re symptomatic or not. That is something we’ve learned with COVID, it’s very important to do that. That is when we might be identifying people who are asymptomatic and infected that need to um, stay home and uh, wait ’til they’re cleared by Public Health. Doing testing on all the teachers would be a huge amount of resources taken away from the need for quick, um, access to testing when somebody may be symptomatic.”

LINK:https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/07/ontario-canada-govt-medical-official-warns-mass-coronavirus-testing-will-not-actually-achieve-anything-false-positives-almost-half-low-covid-areas-video/

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dean Adam Smithee

The problem is with the (so-called) "rapid" antibody tests, specifically the one made by the Cellex company. One analysis showed that, compared to the much more accurate (but more expensive)  mRNA test, The Cellex "Rapid" antibody test had false positives (and/or false negatives) about 47% of the time.

Heck, with numbers like that, might as well flip a fricken' coin. Heads, you're okay. Tails, bill the gov't for another ventilator.

The American Association of Family Physicians (AAFP) warned about this in early July. AAFP.org (Jul 1):  Beware of False-Positive Results with SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Tests

"... By varying the cutoff that defines a positive test result for immunoglobulin G (IgG) or IgM, test developers can choose to favor a high sensitivity, a high specificity, or take a balanced approach. Cellex, the first antibody test approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for the virus, has a reported sensitivity of 94% and specificity of 96%.1 However, as we begin widespread testing in a population in which the prevalence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection is unknown, there is a risk of false-positive results. When initially diagnosing acute infection, it is important to avoid false-negatives because this can falsely reassure patients and hinder appropriate contact tracing and isolation. However, when assessing whether patients had a previous infection and may be immune, it is important to avoid false-positives so that patients do not think they are immune when they are not.

Table 1 summarizes the false-positive rates at various population prevalence for the Cellex test and for a hypothetical test that is 90% sensitive and 99% specific.1 At relatively low population prevalences, which likely reflect current conditions in the United States and elsewhere, we would argue that false-positive rates are unacceptably high with the Cellex test...."

I suspect this may have been the impetus behind a number of states (including GA) taking a second look at their numbers that had included antibody tests.

And what they mean by "sensitivity" and "specificity" is how well a test can detect covid but ONLY covid. Make it too "sensitive" and it will detect a guy who had a common cold 2 years ago. Make it too "specific" and it will detect one specific covid but miss the 300-some mutations of it.

There IS a balance to be had. Apparent Cellex failed at it. I'm reminded of a Herman cartoon from back in the day where a salesman was trying to sell shoddy blurry eye charts to an eye doctor: "You'll make a million dollars with these". LOL.

 

 

  • Haha (+1) 1
  • Agree (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ThePatriot

There is no "balance" to be had here because balance is IMPOSSIBLE to achieve in this situation. 

There is nothing all the corona cowards can do to make the tens of millions of American families and businesses they destroyed whole again, and nothing the corona cowards can do to repay the TRILLIONS in debt that have been added to our burden for generations!

The ONLY thing to do that makes any sense at all is to STOP ALL THIS COVID INSANITY NOW!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Timothy

The important qualifier is "in Low COVID Areas".

If 1% of people are actually positive, and the test has a 1% false positive rate, about 2% of the tests will come back positive and half of those will be false positives.

If 10% of people are actually positive, and the and the test has a 1% false positive rate, about 11% of the tests will come back positive and only about 9% of those will be false positives.

If .1% of people are actually positive, and the test has a 1% false positive rate, about 1.1% of the tests will come back positive and about 90% of those will be false positives.

If .1% of people are actually positive, and the test has a .1% false positive rate, about .2% of the tests will come back positive and half of those will be false positives.

Edited by Timothy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kestrel
2 hours ago, Timothy said:

The important qualifier is "in Low COVID Areas".

If 1% of people are actually positive, and the test has a 1% false positive rate, about 2% of the tests will come back positive and half of those will be false positives.

If 10% of people are actually positive, and the and the test has a 1% false positive rate, about 11% of the tests will come back positive and only about 9% of those will be false positives.

If .1% of people are actually positive, and the test has a 1% false positive rate, about 1.1% of the tests will come back positive and about 90% of those will be false positives.

If .1% of people are actually positive, and the test has a .1% false positive rate, about .2% of the tests will come back positive and half of those will be false positives.

...And a wink is as good as a nod to a blind horse....and?

Kestrel...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...