If you read the Corman Drosten retraction demand addendum, you will see we voice concerns over both FN and FPs.
A common newb retort is that the test can’t have both.
On an individual test this is true but on a population level this is false.
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34741305/
A common newb retort is that the test can’t have both.
On an individual test this is true but on a population level this is false.
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34741305/
So why do we only hear debate about the FP rate?
I believe this is because the implications of FPs are less severe than the implications of FNs.
FPs you can confirm with another test or just suck it up and quarantine for the ‘greater good’.
I believe this is because the implications of FPs are less severe than the implications of FNs.
FPs you can confirm with another test or just suck it up and quarantine for the ‘greater good’.
FNs, on the other hand, expose the entire track trace system as the scam that it is.
Particularly when they are this high.
Once negative, very few people want to stand in a line with other potentially sick people and pay $50-300 a second shot at quarantine.
Particularly when they are this high.
Once negative, very few people want to stand in a line with other potentially sick people and pay $50-300 a second shot at quarantine.
So debates rage on with FPs and casedemics while our kids are exposed to a bio surveillance state that is merely a mirage on the walls of the cave.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
