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 disposed.
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 and we don't realize it, we're more likely to dispose useful blood. This could lead to acute shortages of blood for patients that need transfusions.
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q42: Active immunity develops only after a natural
Q44: Recombinant vaccines and inactivated vaccines typically require
Q45: Alum is an adjuvant.
Q51: DNA vaccines are dangerous due to the
Q52: The risk of serious illness from measles
Q53: Would antibodies produced by a patient in
Q53: The serology test that may show the
Q54: Blood for transfusion is frequently tested for
Q55: What would be a primary advantage of
Q60: Agglutination reactions utilize particles rather than molecules.
Unlock this Answer For Free Now!
View this answer and more for free by performing one of the following actions
Scan the QR code to install the App and get 2 free unlocks
Unlock quizzes for free by uploading documents