Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Digital pregnancy tests have an internal paper test

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 161 posts

Re: Digital pregnancy tests have an internal paper test

#51

Post by new299 »

Thorrez wrote: post #9
Benjamin_Dobell wrote: post #5

I'm not too sure why this is supposed to be surprising. When chemical reactions are involved, you often need chemicals. A significant portion of digital meters used for servicing swimming pools require servicing/replacement of strips/chemicals (reagents) within the device. Yes, there are also digital meters that work without chemicals per se, and have special electrodes that measure electric current. However, this ap…

It's surprising because the electronics are essentially useless. Most people would expect the electronic version would have some type of advantage, because those electronics cost extra money to produce.

It’s not clear to me that the LEDs are not selected based on their emission frequency/photodiodes don’t have a filter.

That could allow a more sensitive measurement than possible with the human eye.

Re: Digital pregnancy tests have an internal paper test

#52

Post by hombre_fatal »

mrtksn wrote: post #12
Thorrez wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's surprising because the electronics are essentially useless. Most people would expect the electronic version would have some type of advantage, because those electronics cost extra money to produce.

The advantage is the UX. On a regular stripe test you are responsible to conduct the experiment and interpret the outcome which can be intimidating. "Is there a line? I think I see a line? But it's fainter from the last time? What does it mean?" This is replaced by an algorithm that's written by people who know what are they doing to save you from analysing a chemical reaction and have a straight answer. edit: Just G…

Your link actually shows you why there is no UX advantage.

OP is only two cycles into their pregnancy. A paper test can pick up on this tiny HCG measurement and show something. A digital test cannot because it's going to pick a higher threshold if it only wants to give you a binary result. A digital test will tell you that you're pregnant when you're far enough along for a paper test to be obvious.

There are so many "can someone interpret this paper test?" questions not because paper is inferior but because they are trying to interpret results 0-2 months into their pregnancy and paper can actually give you a faint reading here.

A digital test could support that by showing "possibly pregnant" which is back to the same UX, and showing "not pregnant" during this time isn't much of a win either.

Re: Digital pregnancy tests have an internal paper test

#53

Post by wwn_se »

Benjamin_Dobell wrote: post #5

I'm not too sure why this is supposed to be surprising. When chemical reactions are involved, you often need chemicals. A significant portion of digital meters used for servicing swimming pools require servicing/replacement of strips/chemicals (reagents) within the device. Yes, there are also digital meters that work without chemicals per se, and have special electrodes that measure electric current. However, this ap…

I have seen regular pool strips that you can get an app for and let the camera in your phone do the "hard work"

Re: Digital pregnancy tests have an internal paper test

#54

Post by theon144 »

mrtksn wrote: post #12
Thorrez wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's surprising because the electronics are essentially useless. Most people would expect the electronic version would have some type of advantage, because those electronics cost extra money to produce.

The advantage is the UX. On a regular stripe test you are responsible to conduct the experiment and interpret the outcome which can be intimidating. "Is there a line? I think I see a line? But it's fainter from the last time? What does it mean?" This is replaced by an algorithm that's written by people who know what are they doing to save you from analysing a chemical reaction and have a straight answer. edit: Just G…

But this link shows exactly why plain chemical tests are superior, no?

The poster's question was about the conflict, not the interpretation of the chemical test.

>FRERs can pick up hCG as low as 7. Digitals require >40. Try with a digital in another week!

This seems to me like you're replacing an analogue, more precise reading with a binary, easier to read, imprecise reading?

Re: Digital pregnancy tests have an internal paper test

#55

Post by wwn_se »

0latency wrote: post #22

Pregnancy/Motherhood groups are swarmed with the same "can you read this, I think I see a faint line" + photo question every single day because of the cheap tests. The strip results are NOT easy to interpret, because you may still see a faint line on the paper when not pregnant, and it's kind of an important emotional question as some couples have been trying to get pregnant for years. Your OB does you a mercy if the…

Well yes but the digital test does not give your better info. They translate a non binary result to a binary one.

What I did when "we" were doing these tests (got 2 types both paper stips, one high sensitivity and one of the cheapest one) simply compare a unused strip and the one with pee.

It's not hard and the manual in the ones I got were really good. Like color pictures and lots of examples.

Re: Digital pregnancy tests have an internal paper test

#56

Post by buran77 »

mrtksn wrote: post #40
watwut wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This sounds more like imaginary pregnancy test then real one. The real ones dont do faint line-ish. Also, for christ people, 16 years old were administrating these tests for years now, without there being massive social problem of confused woman. They just somehow managed to do them, even if their school results were very bad. So trying to claim they are somehow difficult to interpret is absurd.

Forums are filled with people not sure what the test result is. Just Google for "is this pregnancy test positive" to get a sample.

It looks to me that the digital test just makes the situation worse by potentially giving a false negative due to the sensitivity threshold. In many cases being pregnant and not knowing it is worse than the converse. So the false positive may be better than a false negative.

The "analog" version is capable of displaying a value marginally above 0 and lets your eyes and brain decide or at least raise a flag. The digital test replaces your eyes with crappy photodiodes, and your (even 16 year old) brain with a crappy controller that just looks at a high threshold and decides "below=0".

I see people here saying that a digital is better because it reduces confusion. But it does so by discarding data. I'd take the debatable test every time, especially when for the money a digital one costs you can get multiple paper tests to do repeated checks.

Re: Digital pregnancy tests have an internal paper test

#57

Post by nelaboras »

oe wrote: post #41

I didn't find it mentioned here or in the Twitter thread, but the digital test also keeps track of previous results and alerts you when the scores are ramping up. Of course you could do this manually by keeping all the strips and comparing them but the device makes it a bit easier.

There might be some that can do this, but how would this version possibly be able to do that if it only has one paper inside?

Re: Digital pregnancy tests have an internal paper test

#58

Post by nelaboras »

Johnny555 wrote: post #46
superasn wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What's the shenanigans? I think pricing a 20c device for $12, to trick people that since it's digital/more expensive it is more accurate is the shenanigans.

I just checked on cvs.com, a 2 pack of CVS branded "blue line" style pregnancy tests cost $13.99, a 2 pack of "clear blue" digital tests costs $17.79. You can buy bulk strips for around 50 cents each, but many people would rather pay for the convenience of peeing on a stick than peeing in a cup and them dipping a test strip in it.

You could also pee straight on the paper.

Re: Digital pregnancy tests have an internal paper test

#59

Post by oe »

nelaboras wrote: post #57
oe wrote: post #41

I didn't find it mentioned here or in the Twitter thread, but the digital test also keeps track of previous results and alerts you when the scores are ramping up. Of course you could do this manually by keeping all the strips and comparing them but the device makes it a bit easier.

There might be some that can do this, but how would this version possibly be able to do that if it only has one paper inside?

Whoops I thought this was a digital ovulation test. They have multiple strips and you test one each day.

Re: Digital pregnancy tests have an internal paper test

#60

Post by hnlmorg »

Thorrez wrote: post #9
Benjamin_Dobell wrote: post #5

I'm not too sure why this is supposed to be surprising. When chemical reactions are involved, you often need chemicals. A significant portion of digital meters used for servicing swimming pools require servicing/replacement of strips/chemicals (reagents) within the device. Yes, there are also digital meters that work without chemicals per se, and have special electrodes that measure electric current. However, this ap…

It's surprising because the electronics are essentially useless. Most people would expect the electronic version would have some type of advantage, because those electronics cost extra money to produce.

But they also sell for extra money. It's less about building a better device and more about marketing. It's playing on the fact that people assume something electronic and more expensive will be more accurate.

People will make claims about UX et al but they're more a side effect from companies marketing a pseudo-digital device to gullible customers rather than the original goal of the device. And I don't mean "gullible" in a negative way because I've fallen for this trick many times in the past too. If you don't know the hardware (and most wont) then you can't be blamed for trusting the marketing.

Ultimately though, if a digital readout reassures potential mums-to-be more than a paper strip then at least this device does serve a useful purpose beyond tricking people for a few extra dollars.

Post reply on HN