BlueAnorak
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 31 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 27,838
Crying wolf like SAGE seem to do is very, very bad in the long term for science based reasoning.Very early days, but it does look like it. Fingers crossed.
Crying wolf like SAGE seem to do is very, very bad in the long term for science based reasoning.Very early days, but it does look like it. Fingers crossed.
40% - 60%.No they’re not
40% - 60%.
a mate of mine has had 5 false positives this year.
Could be a 2nd row in a ldies rugby team I suppose?Fit and healthy?
She’d most likely still be with us if she was double jabbed.Fit and healthy?
Fake news, they’re more than 80% accurate.
On the flip side, friend of mine had symptoms, 3 positive LFTs so did a PCR. Came back negative. More positive LFTs, 2nd PCR was positive.
read the fine print.
“The figure for the Innova test used in the UK was 58%. The tests worked best in the first week after symptom onset.”
“people without symptoms the tests correctly identified an average of 58% of those who were infected. However, the number of samples from asymptomatic people was around 10 times lower than from symptomatic people in the studies analysed, limiting the conclusions that could be drawn, said the authors.”
Conclusion. Not all LFT’s are equal. The UK ones are at most 58%
Covid-19: Lateral flow tests are better at identifying people with symptoms, finds Cochrane review
Rapid antigen (lateral flow) tests are better at identifying covid-19 infection in people with symptoms than in those with none, although the diagnostic accuracy of different brands of tests varies widely, a Cochrane review has found.1 The review’s lead author criticised the UK government for...www.bmj.com