Yeah I RTed the other thread initially but I looked at the research about how much using a digital sensor increases accuracy of readings compared to eyeballing in the wild and it's significant Just blithely calling the digital tests "waste" is a bad takehttps://twitter.com/RealSexyCyborg/status/1301786032136835072 …
-
-
I mean I wish I had. Even without issues trying you might do two a month (because you jump the gun and test early, then second thoughts) for like 2-7 months.
-
Still that's prob a drop in the baby cost bucket, end of the day
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Two cases, people who want positive tests and people who want negative. In the negative case even if one cost 20 bucks you’ll pay it and you only want one or two. This is one of those cases where the first look makes you think it’s dumb until you think about it more.
-
The real kicker is a point someone made the Foone pointed out at the very end of the thread which is that this stuff needs to be FDA approved which is probably easier with something like this than a whole new thing. One part everyone knows already works.
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.