The false positive was discovered when the agency again reviewed the results of a sample from Taylor Farms de Mexico. It doesn’t change the company’s earlier voluntary recall.
So you’re suggesting that the most rational explanation is that the FDA did the initial test, got a false positive, then presumably did it again, and got at least one ADDITIONAL false positive, for a protist for which the species in question is the only one in its genus which uses humans as hosts. The company found it so credible that they PUBLICLY copped to it, but then it turns out that it was ALL false positives? You’re suggesting that that is the most likely scenario?
So you’re suggesting that the most rational explanation is that the FDA did the initial test, got a false positive, then presumably did it again, and got at least one ADDITIONAL false positive, for a protist for which the species in question is the only one in its genus which uses humans as hosts. The company found it so credible that they PUBLICLY copped to it, but then it turns out that it was ALL false positives? You’re suggesting that that is the most likely scenario?