Posted on 01/21/2021 1:32:02 PM PST by Vendome
Purpose of this notice: clarify information previously provided by WHO. This notice supersedes WHO Information Notice for In Vitro Diagnostic Medical Device (IVD) Users 2020/05 version 1, issued 14 December 2020.
Description of the problem: WHO requests users to follow the instructions for use (IFU) when interpreting results for specimens tested using PCR methodology.
WHO reminds IVD users that disease prevalence alters the predictive value of test results; as disease prevalence decreases, the risk of false positive increases (2). This means that the probability that a person who has a positive result (SARS-CoV-2 detected) is truly infected with SARS-CoV-2 decreases as prevalence decreases, irrespective of the claimed specificity.
Most PCR assays are indicated as an aid for diagnosis, therefore, health care providers must consider any result in combination with timing of sampling, specimen type, assay specifics, clinical observations, patient history, confirmed status of any contacts, and epidemiological information.
(Excerpt) Read more at who.int ...
What does this mean?
Who is that a picture of in the meme?
“WHO reminds IVD users that disease prevalence alters the predictive value of test results; as disease prevalence decreases, the risk of false positive increases (2). This means that the probability that a person who has a positive result (SARS-CoV-2 detected) is truly infected with SARS-CoV-2 decreases as prevalence decreases, irrespective of the claimed specificity.”
An explanation for the explosion of positive cases driving public policy.
Coupled with valid reporting and verified fake death determinations, I call TOTAL BS on the 400k death number. I predicted early on that we could see 250-350k in total, but in reality I don’t believe for a second that we’re even close to those numbers (half, perhaps...i.e. “a bad flu season”).
It means that Biden will soon be touting that he actually DECREASED Trump’s high COVID death rate.
Wait for it.
They changed the reporting requirements of “Died from____ (covid) away fro how they used to do it. Worth a read::
https://mobile.twitter.com/nickpineault1/status/1316744440917250049
It means Bayes Theorem is still valid.
If a test is 90% accurate, it does not mean that IF you get a positive result, then there is a 90% chance you have the disease.
It means that IF you have the disease, there’s a 90% chance the result will be positive.
The chance you have the disease given a positive test is actually population dependent. Search on Bayes Theorem and have fun.
Thank you
https://mobile.twitter.com/nickpineault1/status/1316744440917250049/photo/1
i would say based on my understanding of pcr and virology, which comes from my lab contacts and my own background in instrument engineering, that of the number of positive results, the positive is more likely to be due to an artifact of the test (false pos) than due to the actual presense of covid19 (true pos).
it’s a very fine and confusing point the who is making, and if i’m right, it’s almost disinformation, as everyone should have a confirmation (by a different test and a different lab) before they believe any result. especially if it’s not from a ref lab with good controls, and safeguards in place. that would easily eliminate that small case.
I never saw that, only the other reports.
Thanks!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.