A Doctor's Questions... What should I say??

[train]

Correct. On their own MOST medical tests are worthless because the base rate of the condition they test for is simply too low. But when combined with information that increases the base rate--such as observable symptoms, or information that the person is in a certain risk group, then the base rate is not low and the test provides useful information.

http://statweb.calpoly.edu/chance/oldstat321/lectures/day8sols.html

Thanks for the information Gala - I appreciate it .

I guess I'm just slow but to me you either have a std or you don't . If I feel 'exposed' enough to ask for testing I would be hoping for the test to stand on it's own merits . I'm disappointed to hear that the accuracy of certain tests or the determination of what tests are performed requires this quasi statistical profiling .

Swabs do not sound hugely invasive so if they are the more accurate then I guess that is what I would insist on . I have been tested in conjunction with indepth insurance medicals ( and been found clear of HIV ) and now must evaluate whether this is sufficient .

Life is never simple is it ? Interestingly no one has ever mentioned this to me previously . I'm wondering if this is yet another example of the medical profession's low regard for the patient's need to know or comprehension abilities ? This all seems so imperfect as an individuals desire/right to privacy would obviously bring the answers to any profiling into question .

And on a final note ......I alweays hated the stats courses I had to take in university .....lol.

 

[gala]

Oh you surely either have it or you don't, no doubt about that. It's KNOWING whether you do that is tough.

Think about it this way: ALL the information about your condition, including your test results, are really just a part of the same statistical profile.

What proves that someone has HIV? If you find out they have had unprotected anal sex by itself that proves nothing. Or if you see an AIDS-like rash on someone's skin that also proves nothing. Or if someone got a "yes" on an HIV test while it does make it 12 times more likely that they have HIV it still proves nothing.

But if you add those three factors together: someone who has unprotected anal sex, with AIDS-like rashes, and a positive HIV test, it's getting pretty damn likely that it's HIV.

In the end it's really ALL statistical profiling: lifestyle questions, observing physical symptoms, medical testing, they're all just part of the statistics gathering process. At some point it becomes "probable" that they have AIDS, and at that point the doctor will make an educated guess and make an official "diagnosis". But it's all just odds, even then.

 

[Thunderballs]

Just say, "Is that number including or excluding your wife?".