it's clear now they thought that shitty Abbott machine was a talisman.
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
yeah the abbott test is like 85% accurate or something
-
I've seen estimates from as low as 60 to 70% accurate, up to the 98% the manufacturer claims. But 98% isn't good enough for this application. 98% doesn't let you hold indoor events with 100s of people. 98% means that if 10 carriers show up, 20% chance you won't detect one.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Using unapproved drugs is problematic, but there's no great mystery how he got ahold of them.
End of conversation
-
-
-
The accuracy of the rapid test is debated - might be very low - but at best may be 98%. 2% false-negative rate. If 10 carriers show up to your event, there's a 20% chance the test won't spot one of them. An indoor event with 100s of people can not be made safe using rapid tests.
-
They opted for higher type II error. The mind reels.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I doubt everyone was tested just like at the
#PresidentialDebates2020Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
No wonder the death toll is 200K and climbing...
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.