# perceivingacting

• ### Dr Birx - HALF of Covid positive tests...are FALSE POSITIVES (and CDC now admits it)

1,977 views 1 month ago
Dr Birx - HALF (or more!) of #Covid tests that test positive are likely to be #FalsePositives.

US ADVISOR Dr Deborah Birx warned you can not assume the Covid test positive result is correct - it is likely to be wrong most of the time - a "false positive".

She says:
"If you have 1% of the population infected and you have a test that is only 99% specific, then if you find a positive, then 50% of time it will be a real positive and 50% of time it won't be! [ie, it will be a false positive]".

See full 1.5 hr video for context. Segment starts at 52m37s:

Update: CDC FINALLY admits it too (regarding antibody tests but same problem for PCR).
#CDC competent??
https://www.dailymail.co.uk......

CDC know this well but did not admit it for months:
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pro......

All these false positives are not obvious but here's why:

Specificity: probability that a test will be negative when the disease is absent.
Sensitivity: probability that a test result will be positive when the disease is present.

The key factor is PREVALENCE, eg, "If you have 1% of the population infected ".

Birx: “None of our tests are 100 percent sensitive and specific."
Video: https://lnkd.in/gHhCPwd

And Birx says so here:

A test with specificity of 99% is unrealistic, as in Birx example. But let's assume her numbers are realistic...

Check Dr Birx's numbers for yourself here with a test calculator that does the complicated probabilities math for you (Bayesian stats).

https://www.thoughtco.com/b......

Here's a calculator and follow steps below.
https://www.medcalc.org/cal......

Enter data:
Disease present (Sensitivity 99%): 1, 99 (although a more typical value as used in another version, the NPR calculator below, would be 90%, or 10, 90);
Disease absent (Specificity 99%): 1, 99 (Dr Birx's unrealistic/optimistic value for an almost perfect test);
Prevalence: 1% (Dr Birx'x example for the population prevalence).

Results (Birx example):
True positives: 50% (ie, 50% of those with a result of "positive" will be truly positive for virus markers - they "have" the virus)
False positives: 100 - 50% = 50% (ie, 50% will be FALSE positives - their positive result is false! They likely do NOT truly have the virus).

Tests are more likely to have only 80 - 85% specificity.
https://lnkd.in/ga9XzrM
https://www.sciencemediacen......

Reduce to a more realistic test specificity of 85% (15, 85), and sensitivity 90%, prevalence 1%...

Then you get:
True positives: 5.71 = 6%
False positives: 100 - 6 = 94%
Over 90% are wrong results!

Because the test was developed using a test-tube with 100% virus prevalence as the standard, then as prevalence INCREASES (more true cases in population), the test becomes MORE reliable (but not by much):
If California has, say, 5% prevalence, then above calc (85% specificity) becomes:
True positives: 24%
False positives: 100 - 24 = 76%
76% of positive tests would be FALSE and wrong - about three quarters are wrong.
--
Another calculator here (from NPR) - cross-check:
"If you used a test with 90% specificity in a population in which only 1% of the people have it...more than 90% of the positive results would be false positives."
Article + calc: https://lnkd.in/gVyKtUb
It says "antibody test" but it applies to any test including PCR swab.

--
A very easy read and example explanation:
Today’s riddle: A 99% accurate medical test is wrong half the time. Why?
https://www.concordmonitor.......
--
More good videos explaining false positives, and antibody testing:

--
The Covid test is reliable for true negatives (eg, 99.5%) so if you don't have the (signature of) the virus, the test will reliably tell you that. But it extremely unreliable for positive tests if prevalence is low (eg, 1-5% of popn actually have it). The poor reliability and imperfect sensitivity and specificity of the PCR test (or any test) is a serious issue that undermines their entire narrative of "test test test!" and uses misleading results to justify questionable policy. This is astounding and is not understood or even discussed enough.

#Birx #Covid #FalsePositives #Coronavirus #Pandemic Show less
• ## Paul Treffner ~ videos Play all

• ### Visualisation and attention - PJ Treffner - Duration: 3 minutes, 58 seconds.

• 522 views
• 5 years ago
• ### Treffner Lab - Medical Visualisation - MRI - Haptics - Duration: 4 minutes, 22 seconds.

• 97 views
• 1 year ago
• ### Mobile phones and attentive driving - PJ Treffner - Duration: 17 minutes.

• 1,017 views
• 5 years ago
• ### The need for defensive driver training - PJ Treffner - Duration: 5 minutes, 39 seconds.

• 211 views
• 5 years ago
• ### Coordination and affordances - PJ Treffner - Duration: 35 minutes.

• 1,226 views
• 6 years ago
• ### Gestures and speech perception - try experiment - PJ Treffner - Duration: 4 minutes, 52 seconds.

• 751 views
• 3 years ago
• ### Attention, driving, and distraction - PJ Treffner - Duration: 9 minutes, 39 seconds.

• 476 views
• 6 years ago
• ### Talking and driving (NZ radio interview) - PJ Treffner - Duration: 42 minutes.

• 409 views
• 6 years ago
• ### Perception, Affordances, Safety, and Design - Lecture by PJ Treffner - Duration: 1 hour, 46 minutes.

• 1,567 views
• 6 years ago
• ### Direct perception, affordances, and ecological realism - Lecture by PJ Treffner - Duration: 1 hour, 33 minutes.

• 2,855 views
• 6 years ago
• ### PJ Treffner - Occlusion demos: Accretion and deletion - Duration: 71 seconds.

• 2,665 views
• 6 years ago
• ### Attention lab - PJ Treffner - Duration: 2 minutes, 25 seconds.

• 345 views
• 5 years ago
This item has been hidden
• ## Attentive!Driving Play all

• ### Change blindness - classic demo - plane - Duration: 27 seconds.

• 13,840 views
• 3 years ago
• ### Old vs. New Car Crash - Toyota 1998 vs. 2015 - Duration: 5 minutes, 7 seconds.

• 4,485 views
• 2 years ago
• ### Mobile phones and attentive driving - PJ Treffner - Duration: 17 minutes.

• 1,017 views
• 5 years ago
• ### The need for defensive driver training - PJ Treffner - Duration: 5 minutes, 39 seconds.

• 211 views
• 5 years ago
• ### Distractions Always Lie - Bond distracted by a SPECTRE - Duration: 2 minutes, 18 seconds.

• 1,225 views
• 4 years ago
• ### Distracted driving - James Bond and gadgetry - Duration: 85 seconds.

• 175 views
• 1 year ago
• ### Distracted driving = NOT James Bond! - Duration: 92 seconds.

• 74 views
• 1 year ago
• ### Change blindness - classic demo - tourists - Duration: 26 seconds.

• 1,914 views
• 3 years ago
• ### selective attention test - Duration: 82 seconds.

• 23,657,222 views
• 10 years ago
• CC
• ### Texting while driving: Inattentional blindness - Duration: 4 minutes, 16 seconds.

• 5,847 views
• 7 years ago
• ### Talking and driving (NZ radio interview) - PJ Treffner - Duration: 42 minutes.

• 409 views
• 6 years ago
• ### Attention, driving, and distraction - PJ Treffner - Duration: 9 minutes, 39 seconds.

• 476 views
• 6 years ago
This item has been hidden
• ## Ecological Approach to Perception and Action

This item has been hidden
• ## Popular uploads Play all

• ### Human echolocation - Daniel Kish, "Batman" - Duration: 3 minutes, 41 seconds.

• 151,401 views
• 6 years ago
• ### Gibson - Visual cliff experiments (affordances) - 1960s - Duration: 2 minutes, 12 seconds.

• 89,349 views
• 7 years ago
• ### David Lee - Optic flow and moving room - 1974 - Duration: 2 minutes, 9 seconds.

• 21,373 views
• 7 years ago
• ### John Kennedy with blind painter Esref Armagan - Duration: 9 minutes, 8 seconds.

• 21,055 views
• 5 years ago
• ### Humor: Red Green on technology, computers, and virtual reality - Duration: 83 seconds.

• 15,354 views
• 5 years ago
• ### Change blindness - classic demo - plane - Duration: 27 seconds.

• 13,840 views
• 3 years ago
• ### Harry Heft - The ecological approach to perception & action - Duration: 1 hour, 46 minutes.

• 10,597 views
• 6 years ago
• ### Why Are Flowers Beautiful - Gibson makes sense of David Deutsch's confusion - Duration: 1 hour, 6 minutes.

• 9,717 views
• 6 years ago
• ### Erismann and Kohler inversion "upside-down" goggles - Film 2 - Duration: 10 minutes, 41 seconds.

• 9,396 views
• 7 years ago
• ### Force 10 on the Beaufort Scale - Balance research ship - Duration: 2 minutes, 3 seconds.

• 8,508 views
• 4 years ago
• ### James Gibson - Ohio - 1974 - Part 1 - Duration: 48 minutes.

• 6,729 views
• 7 years ago
• ### John Searle on Gibson and Direct Perception - Duration: 1 hour, 13 minutes.

• 6,569 views
• 7 years ago
This item has been hidden
• ## Created playlists

• ### Covid - False positives tests - Playlist

• Updated 4 days ago

• ### Kennedy - Playlist

This item has been hidden

• ### Dr Birx - HALF of Covid positive tests...are FALSE POSITIVES (and CDC now admits it) - Duration: 78 seconds.

• 1,977 views
• 1 month ago
• ### Sailing - Duration: 86 seconds.

• 70 views
• 2 months ago
• ### Glasses for simulating inattentional blindness - Duration: 85 seconds.

• 40 views
• 5 months ago
• ### Occlusion, time to contact, tau-dot - information for collisions - Venice cruise ship crash - Duration: 3 minutes, 24 seconds.

• 233 views
• 1 year ago
• ### Treffner Lab - Medical Visualisation - MRI - Haptics - Duration: 4 minutes, 22 seconds.

• 97 views
• 1 year ago
• ### On Her Majesty's Secret Service - Chopin's Funeral March vs. Barry's theme - Duration: 4 minutes, 46 seconds.

• 164 views
• 1 year ago
• ### Distracted driving - James Bond and gadgetry - Duration: 85 seconds.

• 175 views
• 1 year ago
• ### Distracted driving = NOT James Bond! - Duration: 92 seconds.

• 74 views
• 1 year ago
• ### Old vs. New Car Crash - Toyota 1998 vs. 2015 - Duration: 5 minutes, 7 seconds.

• 4,485 views
• 2 years ago
• ### Change blindness - classic demo - plane - Duration: 27 seconds.

• 13,840 views
• 3 years ago
• ### Change blindness - classic demo - tourists - Duration: 26 seconds.

• 1,914 views
• 3 years ago
• ### Change blindness in driving demo - Duration: 27 seconds.

• 929 views
• 3 years ago
This item has been hidden
to add this to Watch Later