Nate Silver

@NateSilver538 ↗

Deleted No

Hibernated Yes

Last Checked Oct. 7, 2020

Created

Fri Apr 24 16:30:08 +0000 2020

Likes

Retweets

Source

Twitter Web App

View Raw Data

JSON Data

View on Twitter

Likely Available

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

Technically, the issue is not the false positive rate per se but that *we don't know what the true false positive rate* is. If we knew false positives were *exactly* 1%, we could correct for it. But it could be 0.5% or 2.5% or who knows—maybe not what the manufacturer claims. — PolitiTweet.org

Posted April 24, 2020 Hibernated

Preceded By

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

Intuitively, the false positive problem should be easy to see. If a test produces, say, 1-2% false positives among healthy people, then results saying that 2-3% of people tested positive in a given region just won't really tell you very much. — PolitiTweet.org

Posted April 24, 2020 Hibernated

Followed By

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

Unless these tests are *very* accurate—and they probably won't be, since it's still the early stages of this crisis—this renders antibody studies not terribly useful in places where the underlying incidence of a disease in a population is low (say, under 5%). — PolitiTweet.org

Posted April 24, 2020 Hibernated