"1. Just because some tests have a higher number of false positives does not mean all tests have a higher number of false positives"
No - this is a math problem. As you do tests on low prevalence populations (inherently what you're doing when you say 'excess tests'), positive predictive value drops. Sure, it will drop more for worse tests, but this is a trait of all tests.
"2. For those tests that do have a higher number of false positives, the well educated (and paid) professionals are aware and should have measures in place"
One of the problems is distinguishing between "This thing is here" and "This is a clinical problem". For example, if I give you the (highly sensitive) PCR test for C. difficile, you may very well have C. difficile in your guts. But that doesn't mean that's what's making you sick.
Similarly, there are a number of cancer screening tests that will detect cancers that will kill you decades after something else does - including, potentially, the surgery to deal with said finding.
No - this is a math problem. As you do tests on low prevalence populations (inherently what you're doing when you say 'excess tests'), positive predictive value drops. Sure, it will drop more for worse tests, but this is a trait of all tests.
"2. For those tests that do have a higher number of false positives, the well educated (and paid) professionals are aware and should have measures in place"
One of the problems is distinguishing between "This thing is here" and "This is a clinical problem". For example, if I give you the (highly sensitive) PCR test for C. difficile, you may very well have C. difficile in your guts. But that doesn't mean that's what's making you sick.
Similarly, there are a number of cancer screening tests that will detect cancers that will kill you decades after something else does - including, potentially, the surgery to deal with said finding.