Funny how basic statements about positive predictive value (PPV) by @WHO are suddenly “proof” of the #Casedemic. Funny how Andy also completely misunderstood the part about prevalence affecting PPV such that lower prevalence means higher false positives. https://twitter.com/AndySwan/status/1351975650521993221 …
-
-
I'm beyond sick of people going 'the guy who invented it said such and such' when they've never been within 6ft of a lab bench or ever attempted to find out what a fucking PCR is. So. Bored.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Indeed. Once the bodies stop piling up I'd love to see the day when false positives are all we have to worry about.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
As someone who teaches an application of Bayesian statistics, Andy Swan's misreading is maddening. Swan says high amplification rates (assume he means high Ct) affects PPV, where the document he cites says disease prevalence impacts PPV.
-
Hell, what the WHO seems to be talking about is such a basic concept that It's in the Cartoon Guide to Statistics. (It's a great teaching book, btw).
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.