You are reading a single comment by @jellybaby and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
-
This is a fun article on Bayes and how it impacts the LFT, which again, I am guessing the majority of LFT users wouldn't take in to account when assessing their result:
That was written in April when the infection prevalence was 1 in 340. Happy days! We are way higher than that at the moment so an LFT positive is unlikely to be false.
jellybaby-
Lots of talk about false positives with LFDs but remember that during the first week of secondary schools using LFDs (in supervised testing) there were only 1,805 positives out of 3,867,007 tests. That's a positive rate of around 0.05% and the false positive rate cannot be greater than the positive rate, so chances of a false positive test with a LFD is very small.
Greenbank
That is the main criticism I have read, they were never meant for the use the way our Government has chosen deploy them and it potentially risks people becoming over confident and dispensing with the other precautions
This is a fun article on Bayes and how it impacts the LFT, which again, I am guessing the majority of LFT users wouldn't take in to account when assessing their result:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/apr/18/obscure-maths-bayes-theorem-reliability-covid-lateral-flow-tests-probability