3 ms·
I understand that false negative PCR tests are almost impossible? EDIT: for those down voting. What about this paper then? https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/321
by baxtr 7y ago
I understand that false negative PCR tests are almost impossible?
EDIT: for those down voting. What about this paper then?
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32133832/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32133832/
- snowmaker 7y agoIt's the opposite. The PCR tests are more specific (99%) than sensitive (perhaps 90%, we're not really sure).
- jennyyang 7y ago30% chance of false negative which is why they do 2 days in a row, which bring it down to 9% chance of false negatives.
- PeterisP 7y agoSooo, if you release a thousand patients as cured based on these tests, you'll have 90 false negatives...
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- ohazi 7y agoI think you have that backwards. False negative seems extremely plausible. If you're sick, but your viral load is low, it should be possible to collect a sample without a virus particle. If the sample doesn't contain a viral particle, it will necessarily come back negative. False positive seems unlikely, as you'd have to have something that survives several cloning cycles that ends up looking exactly like the markers you're matching against.
- andruby 7y agoIt’s the opposite. False positives are highly improbable. False negatives happen more regularly. If there are very little viruses, and the swab/sample didn’t contain any you would get a false negative test.