Why is a False positive more significant in HIV testing of patients than in screening donated blood for transfusions?
A) It isn't-both are equally dangerous/significant. False positives in people can lead to psychological trauma, but False positives in blood could lead to the useful blood being discarded.
B) A False positive in a person is easily re-testable. This makes it more significant, because we would simply quickly retest the person to verify their actual HIV status.
C) A False positive in blood is easily re-testable. This makes it less significant, because we would simply quickly retest the blood to verify its actual HIV status.
D) This statement is backwards. False positives in blood testing are more significant. If the False positive rate is high, we're more likely to discard useful blood that may lead to acute blood shortages for patients needing transfusions.
E) This question is misleading because like all immunological testing, the HIV test is infallible and there is absolutely no possibility of False positive results.

Question

Why is a False positive more significant in HIV testing of patients than in screening donated blood for transfusions?
A) It isn't-both are equally dangerous/significant. False positives in people can lead to psychological trauma, but False positives in blood could lead to the useful blood being discarded.
B) A False positive in a person is easily re-testable. This makes it more significant, because we would simply quickly retest the person to verify their actual HIV status.
C) A False positive in blood is easily re-testable. This makes it less significant, because we would simply quickly retest the blood to verify its actual HIV status.
D) This statement is backwards. False positives in blood testing are more significant. If the False positive rate is high, we're more likely to discard useful blood that may lead to acute blood shortages for patients needing transfusions.
E) This question is misleading because like all immunological testing, the HIV test is infallible and there is absolutely no possibility of False positive results.

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

The Answer of Why is a False positive more significant in HIV testing of patients than in screening donated blood for transfusions?
A) It isn't-both are equally dangerous/significant. False positives in people can lead to psychological trauma, but False positives in blood could lead to the useful blood being discarded.
B) A False positive in a person is easily re-testable. This makes it more significant, because we would simply quickly retest the person to verify their actual HIV status.
C) A False positive in blood is easily re-testable. This makes it less significant, because we would simply quickly retest the blood to verify its actual HIV status.
D) This statement is backwards. False positives in blood testing are more significant. If the False positive rate is high, we're more likely to discard useful blood that may lead to acute blood shortages for patients needing transfusions.
E) This question is misleading because like all immunological testing, the HIV test is infallible and there is absolutely no possibility of False positive results.

Why Is a False Positive More Significant in HIV Testing