My understanding is that the test has a relatively high rate of false negatives. Does anyone have statistics for that?
Take a breath, he does not have ebola.
One test for Ebola, the indirect fluorescence assay, is known to have a rather low specificity, and therefore a rather high false negative rate. PCR testing has also been known to miss cases of affliction. (source)
In other words, it is possible for an Ebola test to be negative when the person actually does have Ebola.
That is true especially in the first two days of fever. Ebola produces symptoms well before the virus concentration is high enough to show on Elisa or PCR tests (amazing - those are usually sensitive tests). Most negatives are correct, but there are a substantial number of false negatives in the first few days with symptoms. I hope he does not have Ebola, but I would not jump to that conclusion until his fever goes away or he has a second negative test three days after the first.
No, I haven’t heard that.
From most everything I read this guy had a bad burrito.
I don’t blame him for getting nervous. He had been in the house. I would be a little hinky too.