 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"The tests are unreliable
"
If that is the case, why the requirement for a test prior to, for eg, flying, or visting a hospital ? Upon this evidence anyone could be in perfect health yet still present a positive test result ?? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
The negative swabs were not inserted deeply enough into the relevant orifice and/or not swabbed for sufficiently long to gather an adequate sample. If other tests on the same day, on the same person are positive, the negatives are false negative. This is very common with self swabbing and why its better for trained professionals to carry out the swabbing.
Also its a massive waste of resources to do this, if indeed you did. You may also be talking codswallop. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Why do 8 tests on the same person ?"
So all test factors are identical, the only variable being whatever lab work is carried out.. hence the testing of the tests themselves. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Why do 8 tests on the same person ?
So all test factors are identical, the only variable being whatever lab work is carried out.. hence the testing of the tests themselves."
Wrong, the swabber is also variable. Even if the same person does it to themselves multiple times, they do not do it at equal depth, pressure etc.
Also if done consecutively without opportunity for the areas to rehydrate, the swab may have remained dry on subsequent swabs and therefore picked up less/no material. Dry swabbing picks up less than wet. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Strange on the very day an article comes out about possible false positives the OP happens to have managed to order 8 tests.
Going off a certain green arrow I might be a tad suspicious. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *eeleyWoman
over a year ago
Dudley |
"Why do 8 tests on the same person ?
So all test factors are identical, the only variable being whatever lab work is carried out.. hence the testing of the tests themselves."
Why did you do this? Are you trained in this sort of thing? If so, you should know that your results and test conditions are flawed. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *eeleyWoman
over a year ago
Dudley |
"Strange on the very day an article comes out about possible false positives the OP happens to have managed to order 8 tests.
Going off a certain green arrow I might be a tad suspicious."
Ah, the green arrow, speaks volumes. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Strange on the very day an article comes out about possible false positives the OP happens to have managed to order 8 tests.
Going off a certain green arrow I might be a tad suspicious."
To be fair, I ordered 100 tests and 98 were negative and 2 were positive, you only have my word for it though  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I had 8 tests ordered. All 8 tests were used on the same subject at the same time. 6 came back negative, 2 came back positive.
Thoughts..."
8 tests
To go back to my youth. Chinny reckon |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"The negative swabs were not inserted deeply enough into the relevant orifice and/or not swabbed for sufficiently long to gather an adequate sample. If other tests on the same day, on the same person are positive, the negatives are false negative. This is very common with self swabbing and why its better for trained professionals to carry out the swabbing.
Also its a massive waste of resources to do this, if indeed you did. You may also be talking codswallop. "
All tests were carried out by a friend, herself the proud revipient of a BsC 1st, so theres our medical professional, with 4 years on the job experience to boot.
Is this not valuable information ? With such a global emergency i know id certainly want to have full trust in the ability of a test to be acurate ?
And youre right, i very much could be, so if anyone seeks any kind of comfort from that uncertainty then so be it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The negative swabs were not inserted deeply enough into the relevant orifice and/or not swabbed for sufficiently long to gather an adequate sample. If other tests on the same day, on the same person are positive, the negatives are false negative. This is very common with self swabbing and why its better for trained professionals to carry out the swabbing.
Also its a massive waste of resources to do this, if indeed you did. You may also be talking codswallop.
All tests were carried out by a friend, herself the proud revipient of a BsC 1st, so theres our medical professional, with 4 years on the job experience to boot.
Is this not valuable information ? With such a global emergency i know id certainly want to have full trust in the ability of a test to be acurate ?
And youre right, i very much could be, so if anyone seeks any kind of comfort from that uncertainty then so be it."
One question? Why? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Strange on the very day an article comes out about possible false positives the OP happens to have managed to order 8 tests.
Going off a certain green arrow I might be a tad suspicious."
8 different people ordered a test each, they were then kindly donated to the test... this was almost 3 weeks ago |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Strange on the very day an article comes out about possible false positives the OP happens to have managed to order 8 tests.
Going off a certain green arrow I might be a tad suspicious.
8 different people ordered a test each, they were then kindly donated to the test... this was almost 3 weeks ago"
Why? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The negative swabs were not inserted deeply enough into the relevant orifice and/or not swabbed for sufficiently long to gather an adequate sample. If other tests on the same day, on the same person are positive, the negatives are false negative. This is very common with self swabbing and why its better for trained professionals to carry out the swabbing.
Also its a massive waste of resources to do this, if indeed you did. You may also be talking codswallop.
All tests were carried out by a friend, herself the proud revipient of a BsC 1st, so theres our medical professional, with 4 years on the job experience to boot.
Is this not valuable information ? With such a global emergency i know id certainly want to have full trust in the ability of a test to be acurate ?
And youre right, i very much could be, so if anyone seeks any kind of comfort from that uncertainty then so be it."
Then your alleged expert friend, with her BSc and experience needs to go back to school. You can't reswab the same (now dry) area and expect to pick up a sample.
Is it a BSc in something health related, or perhaps she has BSc in Mechanical Engineering? A BSc does not mean you are qualified to administer swab tests. A BSc covers pretty much any type of Science degree.
Yours truly,
A Microbiologist (who is now in higher education and deals with students entering just about every type of Science related degree there is). |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The negative swabs were not inserted deeply enough into the relevant orifice and/or not swabbed for sufficiently long to gather an adequate sample. If other tests on the same day, on the same person are positive, the negatives are false negative. This is very common with self swabbing and why its better for trained professionals to carry out the swabbing.
Also its a massive waste of resources to do this, if indeed you did. You may also be talking codswallop.
All tests were carried out by a friend, herself the proud revipient of a BsC 1st, so theres our medical professional, with 4 years on the job experience to boot.
Is this not valuable information ? With such a global emergency i know id certainly want to have full trust in the ability of a test to be acurate ?
And youre right, i very much could be, so if anyone seeks any kind of comfort from that uncertainty then so be it.
Then your alleged expert friend, with her BSc and experience needs to go back to school. You can't reswab the same (now dry) area and expect to pick up a sample.
Is it a BSc in something health related, or perhaps she has BSc in Mechanical Engineering? A BSc does not mean you are qualified to administer swab tests. A BSc covers pretty much any type of Science degree.
Yours truly,
A Microbiologist (who is now in higher education and deals with students entering just about every type of Science related degree there is). "
And that , thankfully , is the end of the OPs false claims  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Strange on the very day an article comes out about possible false positives the OP happens to have managed to order 8 tests.
Going off a certain green arrow I might be a tad suspicious.
8 different people ordered a test each, they were then kindly donated to the test... this was almost 3 weeks ago
Why? "
Thinly veiled attempt to discredit the testing and provide a stage for a performance..? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The only question i am left with is... how has a melon provided 2 positive tests ?"
Jeez, we covered this in about Week 3 of "Pandemic Conspiracy Debunking for Idiots". Do pay attention at the back of the class.
The countries in which (alleged) positive tests were attributed to fruit and other animals had purchased incredibly dodgy, unproven, cheap tests from, you guessed it? China. The UK is using an exceptionally well validated, internationally accepted test that would not produce such positive tests on melons, goats or anything else similar.
Of course, I'm sure both you and your BSc buddy are experts in reverse transcriptase PCR and will shortly be able to give us a detailed overview of the methods it employs?
Don't forget that "Simple Science for Simple Simons" is a distance learning course and that participants are expected to demonstrate engagement with ALL aspects of the course. So pay attention in class. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Strange on the very day an article comes out about possible false positives the OP happens to have managed to order 8 tests.
Going off a certain green arrow I might be a tad suspicious.
8 different people ordered a test each, they were then kindly donated to the test... this was almost 3 weeks ago
Why?
Thinly veiled attempt to discredit the testing and provide a stage for a performance..?"
Probably, I doubt these ‘scientific tests’ will make the front page headlines |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Strange that a professional is needed, right up to the point said professional doesnt support a particular perspective"
Give up fella, this is getting embarrassing for you |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The only question i am left with is... how has a melon provided 2 positive tests ?"
At the beginning of your silly story you said that all 8 tests were used on one person.
Now you're changing the story to be one person and a melon.
You going to give it up now or are you about to add a rabbit and a cabbage? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"The only question i am left with is... how has a melon provided 2 positive tests ?
At the beginning of your silly story you said that all 8 tests were used on one person.
Now you're changing the story to be one person and a melon.
You going to give it up now or are you about to add a rabbit and a cabbage?"
One subject |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *eeleyWoman
over a year ago
Dudley |
"The only question i am left with is... how has a melon provided 2 positive tests ?
At the beginning of your silly story you said that all 8 tests were used on one person.
Now you're changing the story to be one person and a melon.
You going to give it up now or are you about to add a rabbit and a cabbage?
One subject"
So what was your friends degree in? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The only question i am left with is... how has a melon provided 2 positive tests ?
At the beginning of your silly story you said that all 8 tests were used on one person.
Now you're changing the story to be one person and a melon.
You going to give it up now or are you about to add a rabbit and a cabbage?
One subject"
Why did they conduct these ‘tests’?? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The tests used were ordered via NHS official means in recent weeks.
What ever keeps you happy chaps
ZH"
Your homework assignment entitled "Reverse transcriptase PCR: a short summary for the layperson" is overdue. For each minute the work remains outstanding, 10 house points shall be removed and a fairy will die. Please submit at your earliest convenience, as your assessor has her red pen awaiting. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Strange on the very day an article comes out about possible false positives the OP happens to have managed to order 8 tests.
Going off a certain green arrow I might be a tad suspicious.
8 different people ordered a test each, they were then kindly donated to the test... this was almost 3 weeks ago"
I’d drop it if I was you mate. This is bullshit. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"As the tests are declared to be 70% accurate I would say those results could easily be in the ballpark. Unless the person tested was actually positive."
All tests?? Are you sure about that |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *atEvolutionCouple
over a year ago
atlantisEVOLUTION Swingers Club. Stoke. |
Order 8 more and another 8 more and do a double blind study and then tell us the results - better still save your money (at £64 a test) and tell your mates to dress-up then all meet for a socially distanced beer, you'll have much more of a laugh.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"As the tests are declared to be 70% accurate I would say those results could easily be in the ballpark. Unless the person tested was actually positive.
All tests?? Are you sure about that "
That's what the bumf I got from the testing station said. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
The current swab tests are 70% accurate if sampled correctly. They give false negatives rather than positives. Statistically if the OP really had 8 tests, which hasn't of course, if he was covid positive he would get back 5 or 6 positive results and 2 or 3 negative. If he was covid negative he would get back 8 negative tests. The chance of a false positive is negligible. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The current swab tests are 70% accurate if sampled correctly. They give false negatives rather than positives. Statistically if the OP really had 8 tests, which hasn't of course, if he was covid positive he would get back 5 or 6 positive results and 2 or 3 negative. If he was covid negative he would get back 8 negative tests. The chance of a false positive is negligible."
To be clear, it is the process of swabbing that is 70% sensitive, due to the challenges of collecting a sample by shoving a foreign body into the nasal cavity/pharynx. Most swabbing in the UK is being done by the patient themselves and most will not probe deep enough.
The actual laboratory test, the RT-PCR test is incredibly accurate and sensitive, damn close to 100%. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"As the tests are declared to be 70% accurate I would say those results could easily be in the ballpark. Unless the person tested was actually positive.
All tests?? Are you sure about that
That's what the bumf I got from the testing station said."
That is for antibody tests , not normal COVID tests |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"As the tests are declared to be 70% accurate I would say those results could easily be in the ballpark. Unless the person tested was actually positive.
All tests?? Are you sure about that
That's what the bumf I got from the testing station said.
That is for antibody tests , not normal COVID tests "
Bugger I'm getting a antibody test next week 70% is not good  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"As the tests are declared to be 70% accurate I would say those results could easily be in the ballpark. Unless the person tested was actually positive.
All tests?? Are you sure about that
That's what the bumf I got from the testing station said.
That is for antibody tests , not normal COVID tests
Bugger I'm getting a antibody test next week 70% is not good "
https://www.cochrane.org/news/new-cochrane-review-assesses-how-accurate-antibody-tests-are-detecting-covid-19 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"As the tests are declared to be 70% accurate I would say those results could easily be in the ballpark. Unless the person tested was actually positive.
All tests?? Are you sure about that
That's what the bumf I got from the testing station said.
That is for antibody tests , not normal COVID tests
Bugger I'm getting a antibody test next week 70% is not good
https://www.cochrane.org/news/new-cochrane-review-assesses-how-accurate-antibody-tests-are-detecting-covid-19"
Thanks for the info. So if samples are taken correctly then the antibody and swab test are very very accurate. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I had 8 tests ordered. All 8 tests were used on the same subject at the same time. 6 came back negative, 2 came back positive.
Thoughts..."
The tests are 75% accurate? Which is what we knew already.? That and your subject would have a sore throat from having 8 swabs jammed down it,! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I had 8 tests ordered. All 8 tests were used on the same subject at the same time. 6 came back negative, 2 came back positive.
Thoughts..."
Or... The way you took the tests was different.? If you're going to do tests they need identical procedures, environment etc |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"As the tests are declared to be 70% accurate I would say those results could easily be in the ballpark. Unless the person tested was actually positive.
All tests?? Are you sure about that
That's what the bumf I got from the testing station said.
That is for antibody tests , not normal COVID tests
Bugger I'm getting a antibody test next week 70% is not good
https://www.cochrane.org/news/new-cochrane-review-assesses-how-accurate-antibody-tests-are-detecting-covid-19
Thanks for the info. So if samples are taken correctly then the antibody and swab test are very very accurate. "
Yes. The caveat with antibody tests is that people who had a mild cases of Covid-19 are, in many cases, not producing a significant antibody response. This may result in a negative antibody test, despite a confirmed positive swab test at an earlier point. Studies have shown that even people with a severe infection start to show significantly decreased antibody levels after 3 months. This relatively weak immune response despite severe infection is the biggest stumbling block for a vaccine. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The only question i am left with is... how has a melon provided 2 positive tests ?
Jeez, we covered this in about Week 3 of "Pandemic Conspiracy Debunking for Idiots". Do pay attention at the back of the class.
The countries in which (alleged) positive tests were attributed to fruit and other animals had purchased incredibly dodgy, unproven, cheap tests from, you guessed it? China. The UK is using an exceptionally well validated, internationally accepted test that would not produce such positive tests on melons, goats or anything else similar.
Of course, I'm sure both you and your BSc buddy are experts in reverse transcriptase PCR and will shortly be able to give us a detailed overview of the methods it employs?
Don't forget that "Simple Science for Simple Simons" is a distance learning course and that participants are expected to demonstrate engagement with ALL aspects of the course. So pay attention in class. "
You know there are no science that demonstrates viruses are infectious.
No proper control groups in the papers that claim they are. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
You know there are no science that demonstrates viruses are infectious.
No proper control groups in the papers that claim they are. "
Unfortunately, Covid isn't deterred by semantics or self acclaimed expertise. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
