User talk:115.87.11.155

Is there any good information on the sensitivity and specificity of those tests? Especially in light of what mass, asymptomatic testing may achieve (or not)? Here is one such discussion: https://towardsdatascience.com/statistics-and-unreliable-tests-coronavirus-is-difficult-to-contain-e113b5c0967c

Here is one paper, showing that both are quite low (but I don't understand what type of test that was). I think it may be interesting to start a section on it in this article and have a discussion about it - the common lore is that you test positive, therefore you are infected, and vice-versa... https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32133832

Here is another paper on the issue: https://osf.io/9pz4d/

Also, I've noticed that some private laboratories advertising their expensive testing omit the specificity/sensitivity (and thus the rate of false negatives and positives), and they may know better than that.