Originally Posted by
ExtraSlow
I'm sure we discussed these tests before. False negatives were a clearly identified risk a long time ago.
Also, federal procurement is basically guaranteed to be fuck.
Yah but when it was discussed back then, you were just a crazy conspiracy theorist. Haha
Originally Posted by
sabad66
Fraudulent doesn’t seem like the right word here. “Not as sensitive to non-contagious people resulting in a high number of false negatives” is more accurate.
I think a lot of people figured this out through anecdotal/personal experience. I’ve personally never been able to get a positive result even though I’m certain I’ve been positive in the past (entire family sick in the house, wife and kids all positive).
Yah they sucked. I got a false negatives all thru my Covid experience, which was only two days mind you. After that, I got a positive result when I felt great. My experience with them was all over the map. Couldn’t you drop whiskey on them and get a positive result too?
Looking around
Wondering what became
Of what I once knew