Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DriveInDriѵeOut" data-source="post: 4872164" data-attributes="member: 44954">That&#039;s funny, seems to me before covid, doctors and scientists were fully aware that PCR tests were inaccurate and had a tendency towards false positives....Read this 2007 article from the New York Times, and explain to me what you think changed.[URL unfurl=&quot;true&quot;]https://archive.is/MdDCX[/URL]Now, as they look back on the episode, epidemiologists and infectious disease specialists say the problem was that they placed too much faith in a quick and highly sensitive molecular test that led them astray.It’s a problem; we know it’s a problem,” Dr. Perl said. “My guess is that what happened at Dartmouth is going to become more common.”Many of the new molecular tests are quick but technically demanding, and each laboratory may do them in its own way.&nbsp; But their very sensitivity makes false positives likely, and when hundreds or thousands of people are tested, as occurred at Dartmouth, false positives can make it seem like there is an epidemic.“You’re in a little bit of no man’s land,” with the new molecular tests, said Dr. Mark Perkins, an infectious disease specialist and chief scientific officer at the Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics, a nonprofit foundation supported by the <a href="https://archive.is/o/MdDCX/topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/g/gates_bill_and_melinda_foundation/index.html?inline=nyt-org" target="_blank">Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation</a>. “All bets are off on exact performance.”Of course, that leads to the question of why rely on them at all. “At face value, obviously they shouldn’t be doing it,” Dr. Perl said. </blockquote>

[QUOTE="DriveInDriѵeOut, post: 4872164, member: 44954"] That's funny, seems to me before covid, doctors and scientists were fully aware that PCR tests were inaccurate and had a tendency towards false positives.... Read this 2007 article from the New York Times, and explain to me what you think changed. [URL unfurl="true"]https://archive.is/MdDCX[/URL] [I]Now, as they look back on the episode, epidemiologists and infectious disease specialists say the problem was that they placed too much faith in a quick and highly sensitive molecular test that led them astray. It’s a problem; we know it’s a problem,” Dr. Perl said. “My guess is that what happened at Dartmouth is going to become more common.” Many of the new molecular tests are quick but technically demanding, and each laboratory may do them in its own way. But their very sensitivity makes false positives likely, and when hundreds or thousands of people are tested, as occurred at Dartmouth, false positives can make it seem like there is an epidemic. “You’re in a little bit of no man’s land,” with the new molecular tests, said Dr. Mark Perkins, an infectious disease specialist and chief scientific officer at the Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics, a nonprofit foundation supported by the [URL='https://archive.is/o/MdDCX/topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/g/gates_bill_and_melinda_foundation/index.html?inline=nyt-org']Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation[/URL]. “All bets are off on exact performance.” Of course, that leads to the question of why rely on them at all. “At face value, obviously they shouldn’t be doing it,” Dr. Perl said. [/I] [/QUOTE]

Verification