Elon musk claims COVID tests are bogus, rising conspiracy theories

[milotic2]

Something extremely bogus is going on. Was tested for covid four times today. Two tests came back negative, two came back positive. Same machine, same test, same nurse. Rapid antigen test from BD.
- Elon Musk (@elonmusk) November 13, 2020
The scientist/businessman/real life super villain, claims to have undergone 4 times the COVID test, after

Comments

[eronanke]

He's right; the rapid tests are bullshit.
But that's all; no conspiracy here.

[slinkydinks]

It's irresponsible of him to not add a BIG, explicit caveat to his tweet that this is the rapid test and not the qPCR or the lab serology tests. Like, I know he mentions it in the tweet, but he needs to draw more attention to that fact because his dumbass acolytes will generalize that to all tests. I'm beyond Bitch-Eating-Crackers with this dude.

[eronanke]

It's true, but he's a bad tweeter/person. He's an irl troll.

[slinkydinks]

Unsurprisingly, a bunch of conspiracy theorists latched on, and now he's talking out his ass about PCR, which he quite evidently does not understand. -_- .... I wouldn't say he's an irl troll because trolls know what they're saying is wrong and are just trying to rile people up. He's an irl dumbass.

[cupkate]

Seriously. Give me a sample and I'll run your qRT-PCR, a dual-screen ELISA and a freaking neutralization test. Reliable tests take time, Elon, you stupid bitch.

[xbenji65]

But if he tested positive at all on rapid test does that mean he definitely has it? Or is that result possibly bs?

[cupkate]

Rapid antigen tests (note: NOT antibody tests, antigen means it tests for viral proteins) have low sensitivity and high specificity. That means that they're prone to false negatives, but not prone to false positives. If you had 2/4 positve rapid antigen tests, you probably are positive.

[h_wyatt]

So does that mean rapid tests could actually be underestimating the amount of infected people? Or am I reading that wrong?

[cupkate]

Rapid antigen tests absolutely underestimate total current infections. So do regular swab/RTPCR tests for slightly different reasons.

Rapid antibody tests, in turn, are likely to overestimate the percentage of the population with antibodies.

Our best bet to estimate true prevalence in the population is with non-rapid antibody tests (ELISA and neutralizations). This is useful on the population level, but isn't too helpful for infection control when we want people to get results in 4-24 hours.

[dnttllhrry]

Right. The manufacturers have already admitted there is a chance of false positives with their tests. That's why it's wise to just stay your ass inside the house.

[cupkate]

It's a rapid antigen test, not a rapid antibody test, so it's more prone to false negatives.

Rapid antibody tests are more prone to false positives and everybody knows it and it's super irresponsible for them to be in such widespread use imo because people take it as a ticket to act recklessly.

False negatives are also bad... ugh I'm just so sick of these crappy rapid xyz tests in general.

[teacupkittens]

No, they are not, but people need a better understanding that PCR is a diagnostic tool for the presence of the virus whereas rapid tests are best used to screen if someone is infectious. This article provides a good run down of the debate over rapid testing: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02661-2