- 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
re: Have any of you Baws had the Antibody Test?
Posted on 4/28/20 at 3:57 pm to texridder
Posted on 4/28/20 at 3:57 pm to texridder
Prevalence affects Positive Predictive Value and Negative Predictive value.
Prevalence and PPV-National Library of Medicine
If you still do not believe. Here is the math:
I will admit I was wrong in the post above. However I challenge you to argue with the concepts in this post.
Have a wonderful day.
Prevalence and PPV-National Library of Medicine
quote:
In biostatistics, prevalence could be considered similar to the pre-test probability. That is, before any testing, the probability of a person in the specified population having the disease is the same as the prevalence of the disease in the population. If the prevalence of a disease is 1% of the population, then we would expect approximately 1 in 100 people to have the disease before any testing.
If you still do not believe. Here is the math:
quote:
•PPV = (sensitivity x prevalence) / [ (sensitivity x prevalence ) + ((1 – specificity) x (0)) ]
quote:
•NPV = (specificity x (1 – prevalence)) / [ (specificity x (1 – prevalence)) + ((1 – sensitivity) x prevalence) ]
I will admit I was wrong in the post above. However I challenge you to argue with the concepts in this post.
Have a wonderful day.
1
Posted on 4/28/20 at 4:15 pm to texridder
quote:
It will give true negative result 98.6% of time. It will only give false negative 1.4% of time.
You're a stupid jackass.
You have no idea what you're doing. If all you have to do is spout out the 1.4% figure
You dumb mother fricker.
100% - 98.6% = 1.4%
From your earlier post, crazy maths stuff -
quote:
A test with a 90% specificity rate (higher/better than the Miami test) would produce a 67.9 false positive rate.
Only at 99% specificity does the false positive rate become near acceptable, and even then 16% of positive results would still be wrong.
If you want to know how these numbers work, you should ask someone in the medical field with years and years of education and even more years of experience - like IslandBuckeye. But wait - he already explained to you how the numbers work - in this very thread.
Posted on 4/28/20 at 4:25 pm to IslandBuckeye
quote:
Prevalence affects Positive Predictive Value and Negative Predictive value. If you still do not believe. Here is the math:
This is your MO:
1) post a basic accepted generality;
2) falsely accuse me of not believing it; and then
3) challenge me to prove it's not true.
Pure disingenuous horseshite.
Posted on 4/28/20 at 4:32 pm to texridder
Last post to you on this.
I am sorry that you will not understand the point originally made. It was simply that the numbers you were throwing around can change as more tests are done. I tried being reasonable with you to no avail.
With that you can rest comfortably with your head up your arse. Your screams will no longer be heard.
I am sorry that you will not understand the point originally made. It was simply that the numbers you were throwing around can change as more tests are done. I tried being reasonable with you to no avail.
With that you can rest comfortably with your head up your arse. Your screams will no longer be heard.
Posted on 4/28/20 at 5:10 pm to Wednesday
quote:
done for the year and I won’t infect anyone?
"Who were all of your contacts during the entire time that you COULD have been shedding virus? January through April 15 should be sufficient. But let's take it up to the date of your test, to be on the safe side."
Posted on 4/28/20 at 9:53 pm to LakeCharles
quote:LC, too bad you didn't read the last group of posts -- in this very thread.
If you want to know how these numbers work, you should ask someone in the medical field with years and years of education and even more years of experience - like IslandBuckeye.
quote:
IslandBuckeye
quote:
It will give true negative result 98.6% of time. It will only give false negative 1.4% of time.
quote:
texridder
quote:
You have no idea what you're doing. If all you have to do is spout out the 1.4% figure in every case, why does the prevalence number matter?
quote:
She's not concerned about a false negative, fool.
She's concerned about a false positive.
quote:
IslandBuckeye
quote:
You got me on this one. Sensitivity will give true positives and false positives. Specificity gives true negatives and false negatives. Apologies to you and Wednesday.
LC, you had the wrong horse on this one. Maybe you should have spent more time reading the posts instead of just spouting off.
Posted on 4/29/20 at 8:25 pm to texridder
quote:
texridder
Look at this little pathetic bitch post while hiding like the loser he is from the subject that exposes him for the dishonest POS he is.
Posted on 4/29/20 at 8:30 pm to Wednesday
Yep, had it Monday. Just for curiosity really.
I had a work conference in Vegas back in March. Came home with fever, fatigue, nausea. 3 people I socialized with also had the same symptoms. One guy I ran into on the trip tested positive for covid once we returned home. Results came back today... negative for the antibody. Sucks because I’ve been walking around thinking I’ve beat covid, lol
I had a work conference in Vegas back in March. Came home with fever, fatigue, nausea. 3 people I socialized with also had the same symptoms. One guy I ran into on the trip tested positive for covid once we returned home. Results came back today... negative for the antibody. Sucks because I’ve been walking around thinking I’ve beat covid, lol
Posted on 4/29/20 at 10:09 pm to texridder
quote:
Pure disingenuous horseshite
Any comment on the recent sexual allegations against Joe Biden? Be good opportunity for you yourself to not be disingenuous.
I’m sure your furious about it right?!?
Posted on 4/29/20 at 10:11 pm to texridder
quote:
Tell me exactly how I demonstrated that I don't understand the numbers?
Was going to ask you the same thing about demonstrating the ability to be unbiased on sexual assault?
Posted on 4/29/20 at 10:13 pm to OleWarSkuleAlum
You have used the internet and you probably have a cell phone. I've got some news for you...
Posted on 4/29/20 at 11:52 pm to Wednesday
quote:
Have any of you Baws had the Antibody Test?
No, but I will eventually take one. In December I had a terrible cough for 2.5 weeks and off and on fever for over a week. I tested negative for the flu twice during that time frame
Posted on 4/29/20 at 11:55 pm to Wednesday
What did you tell them to get tested?
I'd like to get it done as well.
I'd like to get it done as well.
Posted on 4/30/20 at 9:41 pm to ShortyRob
Awwwww.
Posted on 5/3/20 at 7:49 am to IslandBuckeye
quote:
I am sorry that you will not understand the point originally made. It was simply that the numbers you were throwing around can change as more tests are done. I tried being reasonable with you to no avail.
You're a jackass and a fool. And you gave Wednesday horribly wrong advice because you don't have a clue what you were taiking about.
You advised her without considering the negative impact of a test with a significant percentage of false positives could have on her life and her family..
After all that, you still want to talk as if you know your butt from second base. Pitiful.
Posted on 5/3/20 at 8:09 am to texridder
quote:
You're a jackass and a fool.
What is your background in science, biostatistics in particular? Have you ever formally studied the subject?
Posted on 5/3/20 at 8:19 am to IslandBuckeye
quote:
What is your background in science, biostatistics in particular? Have you ever formally studied the subject?
One thing is for sure, you sure as hell don't know jack-shite about it - not that it keeps you from mouthing off.
Posted on 5/3/20 at 8:41 am to texridder
It was a simple question that you refuse to answer other than an ad hominem attack. If you understood the concepts of logic and argument, you would know that ad hominems are the last resort of the losing side.
So basically, you have no training and no idea what you speak of.
You are dismissed. Thanks for playing.
Posted on 5/3/20 at 8:25 pm to IslandBuckeye
quote:
So basically, you have no training and no idea what you speak of.
You don't know shite about it or you wouldn't have looked like a jackass giving Wednesday the wrong advice. Hell, you didn't even know which aspect of the test addressed her concern.
Whatever idea I have easily detected that you were FOS.
Page 5 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News