I think you are both right. It's confusing because the original claim uses different terminology than usual. It said > 100% of the positives with 0% negatives

I think you are both right. It's confusing because the original claim uses different terminology than usual. It said > 100% of the positives with 0% negatives [are treated as positives] * The "100% positives" are actual positives that show up as positive, so it's saying that there are no positives that show up as negatives i.e. "no false negatives" (even though it uses the word "positive") * The "0% negatives" are actual negatives that show up as positives, so it's saying that there are "no false positives" (even though it uses the word "negative"). So UncleMeat's comment 'Then that doesn't mean "0% of the negatives"' and your comment 'it means you have false positives' are actually in agreement.