#antigen testing again falsely discredited - this time by @GabrielScally on @cooper_m @TonightVMTV saying that it has “no particularly useful function” and is “positively dangerous”. Here he repeats the erroneous assertions of @deeksj in his now discredited @bmj paper 
@johndeeks was firmly rebutted here liverpool.ac.uk/media/livacuk/… by @michaelmina_lab @bealelab @profbuchan @louiseckenny @martinmckee @SMHopkins @jacquiavelli @ProfCalumSemple among several others
Dr. Scally asserts that #antigen testing could give “false reassurance” & it “may not pick up more than 50% of + cases”. This is a direct contradiction of the #redlight policy operating in Liverpool where >14k hitherto unidentified cases were discovered in >500k #antigen tests
Liverpool #antigen study showed 84-91% accuracy for cases of #covid19 so Dr Scally is misinformed on the 50% stat. @cooper_m I was on @lstwrd with you earlier and said many things completely contradicting Dr Scally. I sent you this as prep nature.com/articles/d4158…
Which of us is right?We can’t both be on correct side of this question re #antigen sensitivity.Dr Scally is confusing “+ pcr” with “infectious patients”.@cooper_m you must settle this - can’t have diametrically opposite views, on radio at 6 and on tv at 11 @CarrollJennifer
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
