Pregnancy tests are 99% accurate in the lab, 75% accurate in the wild due to misreads- mistakes which are highly dependant on education and socioeconomic status. No, it is not stupid or wasteful to use a hardware interface to help women with this. archive.is/20081206110632/ar…
I saw a tweet recently that I wanted to confirm. Sadly I can't find it right now, but it was about digital pregnancy tests. So, I went out and grabbed a 2-pack for 7 dollars: let's tear it down!
Show this thread
98
731
257
2,905
Some really enormously shitty takes in that thread.
10
11
1
417
Terrified teenage girls fumbling in public bathrooms with pregnancy tests because they are scared their parents will find out they are sexually active and murder them don't read instructions carefully. White college-educated women: "Hur hur hur words are for stupid people".
21
62
8
949
Would addition of many parts create new points of failure? And I feel like an idiot, but couldn't they just make lines into a word on paper like "YES"?
1
1
3
29
The lines are actually antibodies attached to small gold particles. They fix to hormones in the piss, and are carried until an area where another line of antibody capture the hormones, and the gold-antibody conjugate.
3
12
8
240
IF you make that second line of antibodies in the shape of a YES, you'd run into issue that (imagining it flows from bottom to top) the first line of the E would capture all the antibodies, leaving non. The E would look like a _.
2
4
0
119
Putting less antibodies on the E sound doable in practice, but you'd risk loosing sensitivity. Also the extra space of having to write something would risk causing issues with the positive control (that second line that you see on the test).

9:03 AM · Sep 4, 2020

2
3
0
101
What if you use negative colouring? As colour the background instead of the word
1
0
0
1
Not 100% sure I get it. Wouldn't that make it a lot, lot harder because you need to color more surface area?
1
0
0
0