So your problem with the field of psychiatry is that psychiatrists can be lied to and they don't put more effort into second-guessing their patients' experiences?
...
...
I think you might just be blaming other people for your unethical behaviour as a teenager.
> If there is no way to detect false positives, then everyone is a false positive.
That does not logically follow.
Proof by contradiction:
I have invented a dumb test for COVID-19: I look at a linkedin profile of someone, then I lick a block of salt. If my tongue tastes salty, then I conclude they have COVID-19. Trivially, my test has no way to check for false positives. So, if ran this test on someone, your statement implies that they would be a false positive and therefore they would definitely be free of COVID-19.
Unless you think my salty tongue has magical COVID-curing powers, then even a broken clock is still right twice a day.
I've never seen anyone use false negatives to argue that we should accept false positives as reasonable. I guess there's a first time for everything.
But to answer your question, yes, it would be statistically prudent to assume that everyone who passed your test is free of covid because the proportion of the general population who have it is less than 1% currently and your test produces a 100% positive rate.
And how about people without real psychological problems who ruin their lives?
Psychiatry has a rolling history where everything that was done 30 years ago is so barbarous that the treatments are criminalize, and it has been that way for a century. At what point are we going to realize that there is no baby in the bathwater?
...
...
I think you might just be blaming other people for your unethical behaviour as a teenager.
https://slatestarcodex.com/2018/10/24/nominating-oneself-for...