Nate Silver

@NateSilver538 ↗

Deleted No

Hibernated Yes

Last Checked Oct. 7, 2020

Created

Fri Apr 24 16:30:09 +0000 2020

Likes

Retweets

Source

Twitter Web App

View Raw Data

JSON Data

View on Twitter

Likely Available

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

Preceded By

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

Followed By

Nate Silver @NateSilver538

However, this should be a less of a problem in places that have had a medium-to-bad epidemic; say, Belgium or London—or certainly NYC. Studies in those places should be more reliable, therefore. Further, there is *also* the issue of false negatives. — PolitiTweet.org

Posted April 24, 2020 Hibernated