Jump to content

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

Something doesn’t add up. They’ve had 7 million cases and 200000 deaths. 6% of 7 million is 420000.

They must have had more than 7million cases .....they’ve had 7 million positive  tests 

 

why are you multiplying by 6% ?  Not everyone who has died is over 70 ??

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, simFox said:

False positives are caused by the cycles used in PCR testing, each cycle magnifies the virus so it can be detected, the earlier it is detected in the cycle the more infectious you are.

 

UK is using 40+ cycles. USA also I believe.

Germany is using apx 33 cycles. 

 

Anything over 30 is likely just magnifying dead fragments of virus and not someone who is infectious. So Germany only go to apx 33.

 

To put this into perspective, if the USA used 33 cycles, something like 70% of the detected cases wouldn't be cases.

 

The UK cycles used for PCR is coming under review.

 

I hope that clears your question up.

 

Have a Google to get the exact cycle numbers, bit you will find that we are being over sensitive in our testing.

 

It's like being drunk, pulling a stunner and waking up next to a minger. The UK testing is currently drunk so the stunner detector is working overtime.

Surely if the false positive is because of dead virus showing up, it reveals that the person has had the virus before. So it’s still a genuine positive case for stats , even though they may not currently be infectious.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

Something doesn’t add up. They’ve had 7 million cases and 200000 deaths. 6% of 7 million is 420000.

You have simply added the percentages up to get 6%. Maths doesn’t work like that. 
 

I you would need to do a sum based on the death rate an case number for each age group and add up. When that’s done you achieve the reported deaths number. 

Edited by Benguin
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Surely if the false positive is because of dead virus showing up, it reveals that the person has had the virus before. So it’s still a genuine positive case for stats , even though they may not currently be infectious.  

are you saying we should lockdown a country because it's full of people who have had a virus and are not infectious and therefore no longer a danger to anyone ?

The clue is in the terminology "false positive" 

Edited by joachim1965
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, joachim1965 said:

are you saying we should lockdown a country because it's full of people who have had a virus and are not infectious and therefore no longer a danger to anyone ?

The clue is in the terminology "false positive" 

I’m just pointing out that a false positive is still a positive re stats on positive cases. Strange that someone who has had the virus before now feels the need to get tested and didn’t when they actually had it ! 
 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Surely if the false positive is because of dead virus showing up, it reveals that the person has had the virus before. So it’s still a genuine positive case for stats , even though they may not currently be infectious.  

Correct so there's no risk. But these peoples lives are now being put on hold which is immoral.

The false increase in figures adds to the scaremongering so more people agree and comply with the stricter measures, when there is no need.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Otis said:

Correct so there's no risk. But these peoples lives are now being put on hold which is immoral.

The false increase in figures adds to the scaremongering so more people agree and comply with the stricter measures, when there is no need.

so what percentage of positive tests are false positives ??

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

I’m just pointing out that a false positive is still a positive re stats on positive cases. Strange that someone who has had the virus before now feels the need to get tested and didn’t when they actually had it ! 
 

 

Pehaps they didn't know they had it at the time, but have recently devoped a cough so thought they'd better get tested.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

so what percentage of positive tests are false positives ??

 

 

An article from less than a week ago.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/why-isn-t-matt-hancock-taking-false-positive-tests-seriously-

The manufacturers of the UK’s RT-PCR tests report that the specificity of those tests is around 99 per cent, meaning that up to one per cent of cases are false positives. Public Health England research suggests however this may be more like 95 per cent in reality.

When asked about this by Julia Hartley-Brewer, Hancock replied: 'Under one per cent means that for all the positive cases the likelihood of one being a false positive is very small.'

But Hancock is wrong to dismiss this problem so lightly. Perhaps he simply misspoke or, perhaps more worryingly, does not actually understand simple statistics and probability.

Last week's official data revealed that the UK has been processing around 220,000 tests a day, a significant increase on a month ago where the average was 170,000. Given one per cent of tests may return a false result, this means that 2,200 of reported Covid-19 ‘cases’ could in fact be false. This means 2,200 people – and their families – forced into isolation; their relatives unnecessarily worried; their workplaces forced to deep clean, or even shut.

The rolling average of reported daily cases is currently around 3,300, which would indicate that as many as up to two thirds of the reported case total could, in fact, actually be a testing error. This might lead to the perverse situation that if you test positive for Covid-19 you are actually more likely not to have the virus than have it, hardly the 'very small' likelihood the Health Secretary suggested.

So is the government listening to these growing calls to take the issue of false positives seriously? The Royal Statistical Society has warned the Government that:

'Tests cause harm when they miss or wrongly diagnose cases. Our current tests have one and two per cent false positive rates – which, when millions are being tested every day, risks causing personal and economic harm to tens of thousands of people. This problem is exacerbated if the new tests, as is likely, are less accurate than the ones used currently.'

One way to guard against unnecessary panic and potential overreaction would be to test those with positive results again as it is very unlikely that someone would receive two false positive results (one in ten thousand chance). However when the Health Secretary was asked about this he was unable to say how many people receive two tests, only commenting that 'we do do that sometimes'.

Given the scale of the problem, this is hardly reassuring and suggests a lack of awareness of this significant issue. With the ongoing shortage of testing capacity, it is also hard to see how the government will be able to adopt a two-test solution any time soon. In the mean time, more and more people will potentially get false results and the worry and panic that comes with this.

As testing volumes continue to increase, the role of false positives will naturally play an increasingly important role unless a test with significantly higher accuracy is developed. Even with the current challenges some people face in getting a single test, the government needs to urgently prioritise re-testing ‘positive’ Covid cases to weed out phantom cases. A failure to do so could inflict unnecessary damage, alarm and concern on a weary public and struggling businesses.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No test is 100% perfect. A test with a specificity of over 95% is a solid test.

 

I have very little good to say about the government but that is a really shitty stick to beat them with. The politicisation of healthcare that has come with COVID is really harmful. People looking to inappropriately allocate blame to what is an incredible natural event, a virus overwhelming an overpopulated species.

Edited by Bryn
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Otis said:

An article from less than a week ago.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/why-isn-t-matt-hancock-taking-false-positive-tests-seriously-

The manufacturers of the UK’s RT-PCR tests report that the specificity of those tests is around 99 per cent, meaning that up to one per cent of cases are false positives. Public Health England research suggests however this may be more like 95 per cent in reality.

When asked about this by Julia Hartley-Brewer, Hancock replied: 'Under one per cent means that for all the positive cases the likelihood of one being a false positive is very small.'

But Hancock is wrong to dismiss this problem so lightly. Perhaps he simply misspoke or, perhaps more worryingly, does not actually understand simple statistics and probability.

Last week's official data revealed that the UK has been processing around 220,000 tests a day, a significant increase on a month ago where the average was 170,000. Given one per cent of tests may return a false result, this means that 2,200 of reported Covid-19 ‘cases’ could in fact be false. This means 2,200 people – and their families – forced into isolation; their relatives unnecessarily worried; their workplaces forced to deep clean, or even shut.

The rolling average of reported daily cases is currently around 3,300, which would indicate that as many as up to two thirds of the reported case total could, in fact, actually be a testing error. This might lead to the perverse situation that if you test positive for Covid-19 you are actually more likely not to have the virus than have it, hardly the 'very small' likelihood the Health Secretary suggested.

So is the government listening to these growing calls to take the issue of false positives seriously? The Royal Statistical Society has warned the Government that:

'Tests cause harm when they miss or wrongly diagnose cases. Our current tests have one and two per cent false positive rates – which, when millions are being tested every day, risks causing personal and economic harm to tens of thousands of people. This problem is exacerbated if the new tests, as is likely, are less accurate than the ones used currently.'

One way to guard against unnecessary panic and potential overreaction would be to test those with positive results again as it is very unlikely that someone would receive two false positive results (one in ten thousand chance). However when the Health Secretary was asked about this he was unable to say how many people receive two tests, only commenting that 'we do do that sometimes'.

Given the scale of the problem, this is hardly reassuring and suggests a lack of awareness of this significant issue. With the ongoing shortage of testing capacity, it is also hard to see how the government will be able to adopt a two-test solution any time soon. In the mean time, more and more people will potentially get false results and the worry and panic that comes with this.

As testing volumes continue to increase, the role of false positives will naturally play an increasingly important role unless a test with significantly higher accuracy is developed. Even with the current challenges some people face in getting a single test, the government needs to urgently prioritise re-testing ‘positive’ Covid cases to weed out phantom cases. A failure to do so could inflict unnecessary damage, alarm and concern on a weary public and struggling businesses.

Surely only a positive can be a false positive .... I don’t have time to read the article in depth but that immediately made me think it’s unreliable at best ... (and we aren’t testing 220k per day!) 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, st albans fox said:

Surely only a positive can be a false positive .... I don’t have time to read the article in depth but that immediately made me think it’s unreliable at best ... (and we aren’t testing 220k per day!) 

Agreed, I think the journalist has their maths wrong reagrding the false positives.

 

But just checked on the Gov website and the 220k tests per day is correct.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, yorkie1999 said:

By making it illegal to enter a shop without a mask 

probably half the shops i go in the shopkeepers aren't even wearing one. i went into my local pharmacy today, which had posters plastered all over it about wearing a mask and only allowing 2 people in. i walk in and the 3 workers had masks on but had them pulled down lol 

Edited by don_danbury
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

 

Not surprising at all. Stuff like this just makes me thing they're absolutely winging it now and just trying anything in the hope of seeing something good come out of it which they can take credit for. Doing something which makes them look like they've got their eye on the ball. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, StanSP said:

Not surprising at all. Stuff like this just makes me thing they're absolutely winging it now and just trying anything in the hope of seeing something good come out of it which they can take credit for. Doing something which makes them look like they've got their eye on the ball. 

Of course they're winging it.

 

I'm worried I'm turning into some sort of anti vaxer/Karen/anti-mask fruit loop.  Nothing the govt does makes sense.  

 

Cinemas open - theatres closed

Offices in the NHS, staff have to wear masks - all other offices masks not needed

eat out to help out - curfews for restaurants

takeaway food have to close at 10 unless they deliver or have drive through

Indoor team sports banned but not organised fitness classes

 

I think they are just having a laugh now.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, StanSP said:

I know you hate the youth/youngsters judging by some of your other posts but it's definitely not just them. I've seen quite a few middle-aged people and just adults in general get arsey with staff cos they think they are above the law. Not just the 'teens' that cause the issues.

And as an extra point in support of staff not being able to challenge - if the non-masker says they have a medical reason to not wear a mask, then the shop assistant has no legal right to ask what that medical condition is.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, st albans fox said:

They must have had more than 7million cases .....they’ve had 7 million positive  tests 

 

why are you multiplying by 6% ?  Not everyone who has died is over 70 ??

.

Edited by yorkie1999
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Col city fan said:

Who’s going to press charges? I’ve already told you it seems that shops have a ‘no approach’ policy 

It’s not that difficult is it. 90% of people pay by card, security cameras, post a fine out. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Benguin said:

You have simply added the percentages up to get 6%. Maths doesn’t work like that. 
 

I you would need to do a sum based on the death rate an case number for each age group and add up. When that’s done you achieve the reported deaths 

Edited by yorkie1999
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...