I posted a while back about being confused as to a positive result of 2.82 on a HSV2 igg test. Never having experienced symptoms of anything like herpes combined with the skepticism of my doctor caused me to read up on this forum and found that University of Washington (somebody post the link please) study giving the percentage chance of a false positive for the different number ranges in increments of 0.5. My range 2.5-3.0 gave me a 40% chance of not having it!
Of course Quest Diagnostics tells you that you are 'positive' above 1.1. I admit it would be quite expensive for the company to tell everyone that their test has misdiagnosed millions of people, and that a lot of them didn't have as good a doctor as mine, nor access to forums like this one to convince themselves of the necessity of another DIFFERENT TYPE OF TEST. Not only do they not tell you about these chances, they also offer a DISCOUNTED SECOND TEST of the SAME TYPE in case you want to re-test. How f-ing altruistic of them huh? They get you one and a half times.
Anyway, got the Western Blot, negative...Hooray!
Point: If you are under 5.00 on an Igg test GO GET RETESTED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And don't give any more damn money to Quest, they are scumbags, and stay away from those IGG (ELISA?) tests. If they weren't misdiagnosing 100,000s of people per year then the commercials wouldn't be able to say things like "1/5 American adults have herpes" or "80% [idk actually number they use] of people with herpes don't know it and don't show symptoms"...uh yeah... because a large percentage of that 80% DON'T HAVE HERPES.
Anyway I'm about to do the math in the next couple of days to figure out how many people per year are misdiagnosed, using the UW study findings, people diagnosed per year by igg tests (public I'm guessing), and what the spread along the igg number line looks like. Beyond that it just seems like simple algebra. I just hate to see potentially millions of people going through life thinking they have something they don't, all because it would cost a few pharmaceutical companies too much money to come out and tell the public that their test sucks.
Thanks for existing