Coronavirus in DFW - News & Discussion (Dallas, Earth: stores, to move)

[Ralph_Kirk]

Originally Posted by My Kind Of Town

You are missing a big part of the testing benefit. The more confirmed cases, the more we can target which areas are affected most and invoke greater public restrictions - stay at home orders, etc.

Again: They're not even testing people at all who don't show symptoms. So asymptomatic carriers won't be tested anyway.


Most people who have mild symptoms won't be tested, either. They'd have to be both symptomatic and be known to have an additional vulnerability factor.


So testing is really only capturing those who get very sick...and those are going to wind up in the hospital anyway where then they can be tested to be sure of what has made them very sick.

Also, once you are a confirmed case and recover you are no longer a risk to society (at least in regards to spreading this virus). No longer a potential carrier. Identifying these people is huge.

That's absolutely not what I've heard or read. What I've read is that persons who have recovered from the disease are still carriers for up to two weeks afterward and can actually be re-infected.

[Ralph_Kirk]

Originally Posted by platon20

This is correct.

Furthermore, if people know they have the coronavirus, they are much, much more likley to follow quarantine procedures than if they think they "just have a cold" or it's "just allergies"

Nobody gets tested unless they have symptoms and have an underlying condition or some additional situation.


By the time they get the results of the test one to two weeks later--they're either much sicker or it most likely was just a cold or just allergies.


I'm not saying nobody should be tested. Clearly, testing should be part of the hospital admission procedure, for instance.


But I'm not seeing drive-through testing as a particularly advantageous use of testing resources. It's failure at determining how prevalent the disease is in the general population, and there are places in the country where they don't have enough testing kits even for those who have been hospitalized.



The money being spent on drive-through testing would be better used for ventilators, beds, et cetera.

[serger]

Originally Posted by Ralph_Kirk

Nobody gets tested unless they have symptoms and have an underlying condition or some additional situation.


By the time they get the results of the test one to two weeks later--they're either much sicker or it most likely was just a cold or just allergies.


I'm not saying nobody should be tested. Clearly, testing should be part of the hospital admission procedure, for instance.


But I'm not seeing drive-through testing as a particularly advantageous use of testing resources. It's failure at determining how prevalent the disease is in the general population, and there are places in the country where they don't have enough testing kits even for those who have been hospitalized.



The money being spent on drive-through testing would be better used for ventilators, beds, et cetera.

https://fortune.com/2020/03/19/coron...rea-test-data/

[Ralph_Kirk]

Originally Posted by serger

https://fortune.com/2020/03/19/coron...rea-test-data/

I don't think you read what I wrote,



or else you didn't actually read the article you linked.





“South Korea has been testing basically everyone since the outbreak had become apparent,” Backhaus said. “Consequently, South Korea has detected more asymptomatic but positive cases of coronavirus than Italy, in particular, among young people.”


The US is not testing everyone--including asymptomatic persons and young persons. So the resources aren't being used effectively with drive-by testing when areas don't have enough test kits even for those who are hospitalized. There is no mass testing going on in the US, and half-ass testing doesn't answer the mail.


They're not gaining reliable results about the spread in the general population.

[My Kind Of Town]

Originally Posted by serger

Yes, mass testing made a huge difference in Korea for instance. They pretty much have this thing under control. Now, on the other hand, the US was dead last in testing as of several days ago.

There are numerous benefit to wide scale testing. We really dropped the ball in that regard. Now I’m wondering if there is a way to retroactively test people to see if they already had the virus and beat it. I’m not aware of such a test being developed or even possible but that sure would be useful.

[My Kind Of Town]

Originally Posted by Ralph_Kirk

Again: They're not even testing people at all who don't show symptoms. So asymptomatic carriers won't be tested anyway.


Most people who have mild symptoms won't be tested, either. They'd have to be both symptomatic and be known to have an additional vulnerability factor.


So testing is really only capturing those who get very sick...and those are going to wind up in the hospital anyway where then they can be tested to be sure of what has made them very sick.





That's absolutely not what I've heard or read. What I've read is that persons who have recovered from the disease are still carriers for up to two weeks afterward and can actually be re-infected.

No, they’re not even testing everyone that is showing symptoms let alone asymptomatic carriers. That’s a real travesty imo.

Also, your last paragraph has been a topic of much discussion and is very unlikely. No one can say with 100% either way but the experts are saying it is extremely unlikely you can be reinfected.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cne...onavirus-chat/

"I would project that once you're infected and you recover that if you get exposed to this exact virus you will not get reinfected," Fauci said.”

[chipper21]

Japan is NOT doing much testing. Their case numbers are low but so are the number of deaths. I'm unaware of any lockdowns in that country. Curious...

[My Kind Of Town]

Here’s another article worth reading explaining why testing is so crucial:

https://www.wired.com/story/coronavi...rWXH5fkaA2xJNo

[Ralph_Kirk]

Originally Posted by My Kind Of Town

No, they’re not even testing everyone that is showing symptoms let alone asymptomatic carriers. That’s a real travesty imo.

Also, your last paragraph has been a topic of much discussion and is very unlikely. No one can say with 100% either way but the experts are saying it is extremely unlikely you can be reinfected.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cne...onavirus-chat/

"I would project that once you're infected and you recover that if you get exposed to this exact virus you will not get reinfected," Fauci said.”

March 19 was a long time ago for this disease.


Recent information I've read is that the Chinese have been discovering re-infections and post-recovery infectiousness (and they've had it long enough to have gathered such data).

[CDContribuitor]

This is a bit off-topic, but it is relevant for all of us. As per the official here in Israel, the single most important action more than anything else, that we could take is to isolate our elderly people - our parents and grandparents who are older than 65.


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Zf6x5bBd3IE