[Coldjensens]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

You entirely failed to present your experience as “an interesting oddity.” This thread, like pretty much all forum threads on the topic, is a hot bed of controversial argument and debate. There was / is no reason to take your comment as anything other ... especially considering you have contributed controversial agenda in the past.

Furthermore, how is your experience “an oddity” at all? Given the overall statistics, there’s nothing one bit unusual about any setting of hundreds of people being virus free.

It is an oddity because the tests are over 90% accurate. Yet, our company has not had 4 people out of 4 people who tested positive be false positives. That is incredible odds.

[leroythelion]

Originally Posted by Coldjensens

It is an oddity because the tests are over 90% accurate. Yet, our company has not had 4 people out of 4 people who tested positive be false positives. That is incredible odds.

Were they all tested at the same time with the same lot number for the kit? If so then the odds may be skewed to a bad kit (statistical bias). If they were all tested at different parts of the area with different types of kits and testing labs, then those odds are quite incredible.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by Coldjensens

It is an oddity because the tests are over 90% accurate. Yet, our company has not had 4 people out of 4 people who tested positive be false positives. That is incredible odds.

Nuts. Statistical averages of infection rates per population don’t indicate or require that infections are evenly disbursed throughout the population. Even within cities and counties that have significant infection present there will be pockets of more and less heavily infected groups ... including places where there are no infections.

[Coldjensens]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

Nuts. Statistical averages of infection rates per population don’t indicate or require that infections are evenly disbursed throughout the population. Even within cities and counties that have significant infection present there will be pockets of more and less heavily infected groups ... including places where there are no infections.

We are talking about false positive test results, not infections.



The tests were not the same. All of the individuals got tested in their home area either because they had a symptom, or because they were exposed to someone who tested positive. Most of them were weeks or months apart in time and they live as much as 100 miles apart. They all got the nasal swab test and then were required to have four negative tests at least 48 hours apart after testing positive before they could return to work.


It is apparently just a really unusual coincidence to have so many false positives in one place and no actual positives. I am also surprised we have had no cases. We went back to work in mid-may and have roughly 300 people working in fairly close quarters. We do have very strict precautions in place.


I think we are just experiencing unusual luck (so far). We are also have the best sales year in 104 years despite the pandemic.