CV Testing and the Mainstream media.

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/full-list-cumulative-total-tests-per-thousand ^

[nagant]

I just watched today’s lamestream media argue-ferst otherwise known as a coronavirus task force update.

A recurring preach of the media has been that Trump isn’t testing enough. So I found a well balanced chart which compares America’s CV testing to other countries

To be fair in comparing America’s testing response you would have to move each of the country lines to start with zero cases at the same horizontal point. If you can imagine it then you will see that, even percapita, the USA has ramped up testing far faster than any of the other countries compared.

Add that there is a higher level of confidence in our tests.

[nagant]

Past that, the U.S, has a pretty low infection rate compared to some of the biggies. Are we expected to test people who don’t show any symptoms? ….people who don’t want to be tested?

Leftists won’t be satisfied no matter how much Trump does.

[colorado tanker]

It’s just another obstacle they are throwing in the way of reopening.

[nagant]

I think most people would respond to a testing request by saying “I don’t want to be tested, I have no symptoms, and my insurance won’t pay for it.”

[a fool in paradise]

My insurance will pay for it and would even pay for hospitalization but my primary care provider will only see patients for this who already have symptoms or identifiable contact with people who have it.

So I can go to one of the free pop-up testing locations for active infection but that would not include anybody’s testing.

I may be returning to my job site sooner than later and while it is not a requirement to be able to gain entry, I would still like to know if I have it or not, and also do you know if I have not contracted it until I returned that site.

But at this point if I had the antibodies I would assume my chance of re-infection or transmission this month would be slim

[nagant]

“I would still like to know if I have it or not, and also do you know if I have not contracted it until I returned that site.”

That’s a point which Trump has addressed. If you get tested a negative result means that you don’t have an incubated case of CV. The test can’t know whether you have an incubating case or whether you will contract a case on your way home.

To be sure our government would have to test every citizen constantly, and that is totally unreasonable.

[IndispensableDestiny]

The question is what actionable information would come of expanded testing? We have irrefutable data on hospitalizations and outcomes. We test suspected cases because the results determine the need for hospitalization. We test before discharge to be certain they are clear of the virus. My thinking is that hospitalization data is a valid sample of the entire population. We only need to observe hospitalizations to see how the pandemic is playing out and make decisions on reopening the economy.

If asymptomatic persons infect others, then some percentage will have symptoms, present themselves to a hospital and be tested. The only action on positive results on asymptomatic people is to quarantine them. That result does not add to our knowledge relevant to making protective measure decisions.

[jurroppi1]

“The only action on positive results on asymptomatic people is to quarantine them. That result does not add to our knowledge relevant to making protective measure decisions.”

How so? If we can determine that there is a predictable percentage of asymptomatic people walking around we can predict the spread and infection rate with much greater certainty. We can also determine high risk individuals might need to further self isolate.

[IndispensableDestiny]

How so? If we can determine that there is a predictable percentage of asymptomatic people walking around we can predict the spread and infection rate with much greater certainty. We can also determine high risk individuals might need to further self isolate.

The asymptomatic would have to self isolate and stay away from high risk people. But we would not learn anything that we don't know by looking at hospital data. We can decide on reopening a lockdown based on the number of admissions. If those drop to nothing, that means people aren't getting sick.

[nagant]

“If we can determine that there is a predictable percentage of asymptomatic people walking around we can predict the spread and infection rate with much greater certainty. We can also determine high risk individuals might need to further self isolate.”

We can determine the prevalence of CV by testing cross sections of the population like we are already doing. The cross section tests are pointing out whether there is a need for further isolation. The reports I’ve read say that positive cases are maybe upward of 10 times as prevalent as detected cases. That’s a lot, but it means that the death rate is much lower than feared.

[jurroppi1]

That means no one is getting admitted at that point in time or for some length of time certain, not that they aren’t infected or getting sick. We would need to see no admissions for something like a month since people can be asymptomatic and infected and never get admitted, but still spread the disease.