Thread by @Cara_TXZEAL

On the "bugaboo" circulating on RT-PCR tests giving false positives, they ALSO give false negatives.

(Known 30-50% accuracy)

Quality Control is essential

Lab testing is times 2 plus a control

1 positive & 1 negative = inconclusive
Retested @ CDC

cdc.gov/coronavirus/20…

Repeats:

Quality Control is essential thus specific instructions were created for specimen collection and lab testing procedures.

Confirmation is also done patient history, presentation of symptoms, exposure, blood work and CT scans as has been widely discussed.

1 small group in an NIH China study doesn't qualify as "Oh, PCR tests give way too many false positives!"

Studies also support the false negatives, thus tests are subject to human error both directions.

It is what it is and the testing we have with which to work.

Let common sense prevail.

Patients tested 2 or 3 days apart may have different results depending on viral load, errors, & some reasons under study.

It's also a novel coronavirus not a beta.

Isolated exposed people are also tested more than once as are hospitalized.

In symptomatic patients, flu &respiratory disease tests (RSV, Pertussis, etc.) are performed to rule those in/out.

Let common sense prevail.😉

@RMachArts @PlimouthOutWest @sc_lorraine @NHMommy1 @turnbolt11 @BabeReflex_8 @moneypenny_2020 @RadChick4Cast @jskielb3 @TexasKelGirl

@blcartwright thread

@nnorkus this is short thread I did earlier today on false positives and false negatives. Includes CDC QC page on the RT-PCR.

NIH has a small sample China study claiming a projected high count of false positives. If I recall correctly, the study was 24 people.