- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Experts believe 1 in 3 positive infected patients getting negative test result
Posted on 4/2/20 at 9:50 am
Posted on 4/2/20 at 9:50 am
LINK
quote:
Health experts say they now believe nearly one in three patients who are infected are nevertheless getting a negative test result. They caution that only limited data is available, and their estimates are based on their own experience in the absence of hard science.
quote:
That picture is troubling, many doctors say, as it casts doubt on the reliability of a wave of new tests developed by manufacturers, lab companies and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Most of these are operating with minimal regulatory oversight and little time to do robust studies amid a desperate call for wider testing.
16
Posted on 4/2/20 at 9:52 am to RedRifle
quote:
They caution that only limited data is available, and their estimates are based on their own experience in the absence of hard science.
So then why are you spreading this around, you fear-mongering POS?
Posted on 4/2/20 at 9:53 am to RedRifle
So we should be freaking out even more?
Posted on 4/2/20 at 9:54 am to Uptowner
quote:
So then why are you spreading this around, you fear-mongering POS?
is it fear mongering though?
between all the people that have it and are not getting tested, and those are are getting false negatives, it just means that way more people actually have it and are not getting sick enough for hospitalization, which would just drive all of the bad numbers even lower
Posted on 4/2/20 at 9:55 am to Uptowner
Well since it’s in the Wall Street journal it’s news dipshit.
Posted on 4/2/20 at 9:55 am to RedRifle
quote:
They caution that only limited data is available, and their estimates are based on their own experience in the absence of hard science.
Posted on 4/2/20 at 9:56 am to Salmon
quote:By the end of this the death rate is gonna be 0.015% and we will wonder why everyone freaked the frick out as badly as they did.
it just means that way more people actually have it and are not getting sick enough for hospitalization, which would just drive all of the bad numbers even lower
Posted on 4/2/20 at 9:57 am to RedRifle
quote:
Health experts say they now believe nearly one in three patients who are infected are nevertheless getting a negative test result. They caution that only limited data is available, and their estimates are based on their own experience in the absence of hard science.
Yet they feel confident to say that we'll have a minimum of 100,000-200,000 deaths. These assholes want to have their cake and eat it too.
Posted on 4/2/20 at 9:57 am to RedRifle
"Experts" who depend on funding believe overstating the risk will increase their future budgets.
//What you really mean
//What you really mean
Posted on 4/2/20 at 9:57 am to RedRifle
quote:
They caution that only limited data is available, and their estimates are based on their own experience in the absence of hard science.
Oh, well then, hold the fricking presses.
Posted on 4/2/20 at 9:58 am to ell_13
Unpopular, but I agree. It is time to re-open the economy, what that means in regards to social distancing and how we do that, I don't know. But it is time.
Posted on 4/2/20 at 9:59 am to SoFla Tideroller
quote:
"Experts" who depend on funding believe overstating the risk will increase their future budgets.
//What you really mean
Yep. Key statement here:
quote:
That picture is troubling, many doctors say, as it casts doubt on the reliability of a wave of new tests developed by manufacturers, lab companies and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Most of these are operating with minimal regulatory oversight and little time to do robust studies amid a desperate call for wider testing.
Posted on 4/2/20 at 9:59 am to RedRifle
Weren't some insane number, like 70% of tests provided by WHO to Spain and maybe a few other countries faulty?
I'm convinced 200 million people have or had this thing in the world so far.
I'm convinced 200 million people have or had this thing in the world so far.
Posted on 4/2/20 at 9:59 am to RedRifle
quote:
based on their own experience in the absence of hard science.
Posted on 4/2/20 at 10:01 am to RedRifle
ehh seems like a fear mongering tactic based on little science and some conjecture. so a 2020 leading headline....
Posted on 4/2/20 at 10:01 am to RedRifle
Flooded the market with tests. Some without even published sensitivity numbers. The sensitivity will be different with each. The major labs are using Thermo Fisher Scientific technology and I just saw they were quadrupling production to 5Mwk but many others are making due with what they have.
Posted on 4/2/20 at 10:01 am to RedRifle
Doc: I’ve seen a lot of people with the virus. I know his test is negative, but he looks like he has the virus to me.
Posted on 4/2/20 at 10:03 am to RedRifle
Not faulting the OP for the thread, but the WSJ shouldn't be running with word of mouth of health care workers.
Journalism is dead
Journalism is dead
Posted on 4/2/20 at 10:03 am to Scruffy
or we should be excited because we actually have more cases thus driving down the death rate.
Posted on 4/2/20 at 10:05 am to ell_13
quote:
By the end of this the death rate is gonna be 0.015% and we will wonder why everyone freaked the frick out as badly as they did.
Currently Orleans Parish sitting at 115 deaths out of a population of 400,000 people. That's already double your estimate - and assumes 100% of the people in the parish have it (0.029%).
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News