RT @foogatwo: More data around false positives. This time in the Lancet. For the record, I use 99.2 specificity in my work, which is the lo…
RT @EthicalSkeptic: Excellent. I am using 1.55% right now. I am glad they recognized what I call 'program false-positives' and not testing…
RT @kerpen: LANCET: "The current rate of operational false-positive swab tests in the UK is unknown; preliminary estimates show it could be…
RT @17_so2020: Un article du Lancet : les tests sont positifs à toutes les infections respiratoires et pas seulement au Coronavirus. #Dicta…
RT @moon_bio: #Atchoummatuer La contamination lors de l’échantillonnage, la contamination par des amplicons ou des réactifs, la contaminati…
RT @TerryMJones4: False-positive COVID-19 results: hidden problems and costs - The Lancet Respiratory Medicine https://t.co/VROHeLTNe1
RT @moon_bio: #Atchoummatuer La contamination lors de l’échantillonnage, la contamination par des amplicons ou des réactifs, la contaminati…
RT @foogatwo: More data around false positives. This time in the Lancet. For the record, I use 99.2 specificity in my work, which is the lo…
RT @foogatwo: More data around false positives. This time in the Lancet. For the record, I use 99.2 specificity in my work, which is the lo…
RT @moon_bio: #Atchoummatuer La contamination lors de l’échantillonnage, la contamination par des amplicons ou des réactifs, la contaminati…
RT @EthicalSkeptic: Excellent. I am using 1.55% right now. I am glad they recognized what I call 'program false-positives' and not testing…
LANCET: "The current rate of operational false-positive swab tests in the UK is unknown; preliminary estimates show it could be somewhere between 0.8% and 4.0%." https://t.co/7nlI2nMG07
RT @foogatwo: More data around false positives. This time in the Lancet. For the record, I use 99.2 specificity in my work, which is the lo…
RT @kerpen: LANCET: "The current rate of operational false-positive swab tests in the UK is unknown; preliminary estimates show it could be…
Read the thread below. It helps explain false positives and the true number. If "Positives" are going run our lives, it is past time to discuss the tests! #Casedemic
RT @foogatwo: More data around false positives. This time in the Lancet. For the record, I use 99.2 specificity in my work, which is the lo…
RT @moon_bio: #Atchoummatuer La contamination lors de l’échantillonnage, la contamination par des amplicons ou des réactifs, la contaminati…
@Peston False positive rates in the UK are now believed to be between 0.8-4.0% of the total number tested, NOT as a percentage of positive tests, making our over reaction to these case numbers look utterly ridiculous. https://t.co/0GtenaIR2k
RT @EthicalSkeptic: Excellent. I am using 1.55% right now. I am glad they recognized what I call 'program false-positives' and not testing…
RT @moon_bio: #Atchoummatuer La contamination lors de l’échantillonnage, la contamination par des amplicons ou des réactifs, la contaminati…
RT @EthicalSkeptic: Excellent. I am using 1.55% right now. I am glad they recognized what I call 'program false-positives' and not testing…
RT @kerpen: LANCET: "The current rate of operational false-positive swab tests in the UK is unknown; preliminary estimates show it could be…
RT @foogatwo: More data around false positives. This time in the Lancet. For the record, I use 99.2 specificity in my work, which is the lo…
"The .. rate of operational false-positive .. tests in the UK ... could be .. between 0.8% and 4.0%." [2] from UK Govt dated JUNE, Not News. @MattHancock told @JuliaHB1 it's less than 1%. Well, if you're lucky, Matt. https://t.co/S4gV3VsqvH
@BorisJohnson casedemic when no symptoms is causing more harm than good, and the responsibility is yours to ensure only the sick, and those needing to shield do so. @PHCukorg Statistical data will be reviewed! https://t.co/FceVP1Wjg2
RT @moon_bio: #Atchoummatuer La contamination lors de l’échantillonnage, la contamination par des amplicons ou des réactifs, la contaminati…
RT @moon_bio: #Atchoummatuer La contamination lors de l’échantillonnage, la contamination par des amplicons ou des réactifs, la contaminati…
RT @EthicalSkeptic: Excellent. I am using 1.55% right now. I am glad they recognized what I call 'program false-positives' and not testing…
RT @moon_bio: #Atchoummatuer La contamination lors de l’échantillonnage, la contamination par des amplicons ou des réactifs, la contaminati…
RT @EthicalSkeptic: Excellent. I am using 1.55% right now. I am glad they recognized what I call 'program false-positives' and not testing…
RT @17_so2020: Un article du Lancet : les tests sont positifs à toutes les infections respiratoires et pas seulement au Coronavirus. #Dicta…
@Niall_Boylan Both UK and Ireland are running PCR tests up to 45 cycles, so we should expect similar levels of false positives here. False positives may be far higher than 1%. https://t.co/IO5OOOkCWZ
RT @kerpen: LANCET: "The current rate of operational false-positive swab tests in the UK is unknown; preliminary estimates show it could be…
RT @foogatwo: More data around false positives. This time in the Lancet. For the record, I use 99.2 specificity in my work, which is the lo…
RT @17_so2020: Un article du Lancet : les tests sont positifs à toutes les infections respiratoires et pas seulement au Coronavirus. #Dicta…
RT @kerpen: LANCET: "The current rate of operational false-positive swab tests in the UK is unknown; preliminary estimates show it could be…
RT @17_so2020: Un article du Lancet : les tests sont positifs à toutes les infections respiratoires et pas seulement au Coronavirus. #Dicta…
RT @moon_bio: #Atchoummatuer La contamination lors de l’échantillonnage, la contamination par des amplicons ou des réactifs, la contaminati…
RT @17_so2020: Un article du Lancet : les tests sont positifs à toutes les infections respiratoires et pas seulement au Coronavirus. #Dicta…
RT @moon_bio: #Atchoummatuer La contamination lors de l’échantillonnage, la contamination par des amplicons ou des réactifs, la contaminati…
That's very bad.
RT @moon_bio: Même le Lancet commence à avoir des doutes sur les tests...On fait plus complotiste, non ? https://t.co/04LP37xPtZ
RT @kerpen: LANCET: "The current rate of operational false-positive swab tests in the UK is unknown; preliminary estimates show it could be…
RT @moon_bio: #Atchoummatuer La contamination lors de l’échantillonnage, la contamination par des amplicons ou des réactifs, la contaminati…
RT @kerpen: LANCET: "The current rate of operational false-positive swab tests in the UK is unknown; preliminary estimates show it could be…
RT @moon_bio: #Atchoummatuer La contamination lors de l’échantillonnage, la contamination par des amplicons ou des réactifs, la contaminati…
RT @moon_bio: #Atchoummatuer La contamination lors de l’échantillonnage, la contamination par des amplicons ou des réactifs, la contaminati…
Un article du Lancet : les tests sont positifs à toutes les infections respiratoires et pas seulement au Coronavirus. #DictatureSanitaire #TousContreMacronJour3
RT @foogatwo: More data around false positives. This time in the Lancet. For the record, I use 99.2 specificity in my work, which is the lo…
RT @EthicalSkeptic: Excellent. I am using 1.55% right now. I am glad they recognized what I call 'program false-positives' and not testing…
@andrebercoff Pour en rajouter Résultats COVID-19 faux positifs: problèmes cachés et coûts - The Lancet Respiratory Medicine https://t.co/4JhA1K6gpZ https://t.co/6ZyKSQbeN0
RT @EduardToledano: False-positive COVID-19 results: hidden problems and costs. The Lancet Respiratory Medicine. BMJ . https://t.co/jsbvBx…
RT @LutherB99406283: @JamesDelingpole Just as this was published in the Lancet too.... https://t.co/CZONT6SypL
RT @LutherB99406283: @JamesDelingpole Just as this was published in the Lancet too.... https://t.co/CZONT6SypL
@OSTERElizabeth1 @olivierveran @LCI Je me pose souvent la question : les écouvillons sont ils testés aléatoirement ? POUR ÇA C'est pas moi qui le dit👇 Résultats COVID-19 faux positifs: problèmes cachés et coûts - The Lancet Respiratory Medicine https://
RT @EthicalSkeptic: Excellent. I am using 1.55% right now. I am glad they recognized what I call 'program false-positives' and not testing…
RT @moon_bio: #Atchoummatuer La contamination lors de l’échantillonnage, la contamination par des amplicons ou des réactifs, la contaminati…
RT @moon_bio: #Atchoummatuer La contamination lors de l’échantillonnage, la contamination par des amplicons ou des réactifs, la contaminati…
RT @moon_bio: #Atchoummatuer La contamination lors de l’échantillonnage, la contamination par des amplicons ou des réactifs, la contaminati…
RT @LutherB99406283: New paper from the Lancet on false-positive swab tests in UK. "estimates show it could be somewhere between 0.8% and…
RT @moon_bio: #Atchoummatuer La contamination lors de l’échantillonnage, la contamination par des amplicons ou des réactifs, la contaminati…
RT @kerpen: LANCET: "The current rate of operational false-positive swab tests in the UK is unknown; preliminary estimates show it could be…
RT @kerpen: LANCET: "The current rate of operational false-positive swab tests in the UK is unknown; preliminary estimates show it could be…
RT @foogatwo: More data around false positives. This time in the Lancet. For the record, I use 99.2 specificity in my work, which is the lo…
RT @EthicalSkeptic: Excellent. I am using 1.55% right now. I am glad they recognized what I call 'program false-positives' and not testing…
RT @moon_bio: #Atchoummatuer La contamination lors de l’échantillonnage, la contamination par des amplicons ou des réactifs, la contaminati…
RT @kerpen: LANCET: "The current rate of operational false-positive swab tests in the UK is unknown; preliminary estimates show it could be…
False-positive COVID-19 results: hidden problems and costs. The Lancet Respiratory Medicine. BMJ . https://t.co/jsbvBx1umO
RT @EthicalSkeptic: Excellent. I am using 1.55% right now. I am glad they recognized what I call 'program false-positives' and not testing…
RT @moon_bio: #Atchoummatuer La contamination lors de l’échantillonnage, la contamination par des amplicons ou des réactifs, la contaminati…
RT @moon_bio: Même le Lancet commence à avoir des doutes sur les tests...On fait plus complotiste, non ? https://t.co/04LP37xPtZ
RT @LutherB99406283: New paper from the Lancet on false-positive swab tests in UK. "estimates show it could be somewhere between 0.8% and…