Skip to main content
5 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Dec 13, 2021 at 22:09 comment added reirab Edit to add: the 25% number was erroneous. Not sure where they got that. Maybe just a typo. The source they cite does specifically say 20%, though with a confidence interval of 12% to 30%. Also, that source was published in mid August 2020, so is probably based on data from very early in the pandemic when a different variant was prevalent and different tests were being used. In other words, likely not representative of what's being used today.
Dec 13, 2021 at 21:59 comment added reirab "It is likely your negative result has a minimum 25% chance of being a false result based on this research." This conclusion is completely wrong. The 25% (actually 20%?) chance is that your result will be negative if you were actually infected. You cannot make any determination on the chance of actually being infected in the first place based on this information. Also, the chart and the text in the cited source disagree. The text says what you say, but the chart clearly shows 25% at 1 day after becoming symptomic and a minimum of 20% at 2 days after.
Dec 12, 2021 at 3:21 comment added user8677 This would not be "Willfully giving false or misleading information to the government" - this would be "giving the government what they asked for", specifically, a negative test. The government is more than able to write "you must provide all tests taken in the last 24 hours" if they wanted to. Unless you can show something saying withholding positive test results is prohibited, all of this is outside the question.
S Dec 12, 2021 at 2:46 review First answers
Dec 12, 2021 at 6:25
S Dec 12, 2021 at 2:46 history answered Symphony CC BY-SA 4.0