Conor McKenna now negative to COVID-19, John Worsfold to address the media today

78% are asymptomatic (British Medical Journal). It is Very Rare for an asymptomatic person to spread covid-19 (WHO). Therefore, only 22% of people that actually contract covid-19 can spread it.

And they criticized Ross Lyon for being negative. Now being positive is bad. Work out what you want!

Norman Swan is outstanding. Very clear and highly accurate. That's why Radio National engage him as the moderating voice for this pandemic. Your pseudonym doesn't suffice as a counter voice.

"What he’s saying, very poorly might I add, is: there ‘was’ a high incidence of false negatives in cases that subsequently contracted the virus." That should have read: 'that subsequently tested positive, not necessarily contracted COVID after the initial negative test result.'

It’s a coronavirus choose your own adventure

Interesting. Somewhat. I like the bit: So, did he have the virus or not? There are two potential answers here.

When I analyse a study, in this case, an article, I try to understand the entire article, not just the conclusion the author is trying to portray. Dr Swan, it's fair to say, I'm not a big fan of. He explains things very poorly and is overall negative. Take this article for instance: "The ABC's Dr Norman Swan said there had been incredibly "high" false negative rates worldwide." Followed by: "overall, on average, the majority of people who get the test, it is accurate, but there is a significant minority where it is negative". What he's saying, very poorly might I add, is: there 'was' a high incidence of false negatives in cases that subsequently contracted the virus. These cases, however, constitute a minority of the overall cases tested worldwide. As such, the vast majority of tests conducted won't be a false negative or positive but accurate. Therefore, you cannot conclude that false negatives are more prevalent than false positives based on this poorly written article. The sensitivity of the test is generally geared to be more sensitive to a false positive since you are then able to test its accuracy with a second test. This won't happen with a false negative. I hope that helps.

The problem I think is they’re not super worried about false negatives they’re extremely worried about false positives. Though false negatives are almost worse

Actually Aaron Francis had a positive reading for coronavirus and he’s still playing.

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/amp.abc.net.au/article/12308076 There you go, I know it’s not a study, but it gives the quick and dirty on how PCR testing works and why we are having such a high rate of false negatives and false positives.

24/7 news cycle and 'sources close to' leaking info from every organisation before the full story is known, is now the norm. Even politicians and 'advisers' inside cabinet can't be trusted to provide professional confidentiality. Use might, could, possibly and clean up afterwards with 'new information to hand'. Doesn't matter if they're wrong then, as long as they're first. Even better, 'use as reported in.....insert another trashmedia outlet here' and you're absolved from trashing someones reputation. It's pathetic!

Good summation. https://theconversation.com/the-positives-and-negatives-of-mass-testing-for-coronavirus-137792

I wasn't aware of that. Do you have a link showing this? My understanding is more false positives will result than false negatives with the current testing procedures. However, false negatives will likely not have a follow-up test to confirm. False positives, will. That's the issue. Secondly, the likelihood (based on the current estimates of COVID cases in the country) suggests that it's unlikely there are players running around infected. That's called hysteria. Could there be players with COVID? Yes, but it's unlikely based on the community transmission rates across the country, including Victoria.

Thanks .

I agree mate just no one else has given a positive reading, biggest mistake was starting the season or just the year in Victoria a view that was derided by Victorians. How many positive tests will it take to shut down like the NBA and EPL etc because they risked alot more money by shutting down.

Actually false negatives are more likely with this brand of PCR testing so it’s likely there’s already players playing and infecting others

Not quiet, 30% of common colds are coronaviruses, but they can also be rhinoviruses, and influenza viruses. This specific brand of coronavirus is substantially more lethal, and very very morbid, meaning that it has a lasting impact on your lungs, and the development of various sequelae

We had a rough idea of the genome in January, but you’re right we haven’t fully gotten the unique differentiating factors down pat yet.

Doesn't matter what Essendon want, 2 players X 14 days just suck it up it's been 7 months and no one has any idea on how this virus behaves so the risk is way to high and no opponents doctor would give playing against the two players the all clear as the can't offer any safety guarantee.

Given that papayas, trees and goats have all returned positive test results using the current COVID-19 test-kit, the accuracy of its results can be called into question at the very least.