Community Chat

[CrazyDaisy]

OK, exactly what does everyone want tested.

You can be tested for the virus. Be negative, stop at the grocery store on the way home and pick it up.

You can be tested for the antibodies.  Have them indicating you had been sick once.  No idea how long the antibodies will last or if you can get sick again.

Just seems like all this general testing people are screaming for will only give people a false sense of security.  Targeted testing to control outbreaks to me seems logical and practical.

[Laura14]

It's too late.  I needed a test weeks ago when I am pretty sure I had it.  Unless I get re-infected, past time now. 

And you are absolutely right about testing negative.  If you thought the spring breakers were arrogant, I think a lot of people will be "holding their beers."

[Imaoldhippie]

IMHO the testing is worthless unless you are ill.

Get tested today no virus,  get sick in 2 days or 2 weeks bam you have covid19.  What good did it do?

And if you test positive then what?  No preventive medicine and no cure.

[Patriot3]

---

@Imaoldhippie wrote:

IMHO the testing is worthless unless you are ill.

Get tested today no virus,  get sick in 2 days or 2 weeks bam you have covid19.  What good did it do?

And if you test positive then what?  No preventive medicine and no cure.

---

@ImaoldhippieExactly what I have been thinking. 

[Bhvbum]

Testing will identify those who have had the virus.  Most experts say those people are now immune.  They can return to work.

Also if someone tests positive, they need to be quarantined.

Why is this taking so much time to get testing?  We have the lowest rate of testing of almost all the major countries. Why?

We don't require 50 states to each develope and acquire their own tests for other diseases for a reason, it slows the whole process down and many states just don't have the resources.

So why are we forcing each state to do it now instead of the Federal Govt doing it??  Business leaders said yesterday they will not be opening up their workforces until we have the testing.

[CrazyDaisy]

---

@Bhvbum wrote:

Testing will identify those who have had the virus.  Most experts say those people are now immune.  They can return to work.

Also if someone tests positive, they need to be quarantined.

Why is this taking so much time to get testing?  We have the lowest rate of testing of almost all the major countries. Why?

We don't require 50 states to each develope and acquire their own tests for other diseases for a reason, it slows the whole process down and many states just don't have the resources.

So why are we forcing each state to do it now instead of the Federal Govt doing it??  Business leaders said yesterday they will not be opening up their workforces until we have the testing.

---

Which is why targeted testing to control outbreaks is important, everything else is meaningless at this point, except possible research which should not prohibit businesses from opening.

[Shanus]

The only true test is not re-opening until about a month without any new cases. Sorry, just my opinion. If there's a 14 day incubation period, then testing is useless. I think I'll be masked, hand washing and sanitizing everything for quite awhile.

[CrazyDaisy]

---

@Shanus wrote:

The only true test is not re-opening until about a month without any new cases. Sorry, just my opinion. If there's a 14 day incubation period, then testing is useless. I think I'll be masked, hand washing and sanitizing everything for quite awhile.

---

While intitled to your opinion, you would have to shut down the entire world.  At that point why bother re opening.

[gardenman]

Most of the testing that's done now is antigen testing looking for the virus. That's largely done by PCR testing which looks for the DNA/RNA of the virus. It only tells you if you have a detectable level of the virus in the sample that was collected. You could have an undetectable level of the virus but be infected. The swab may have been collected improperly or handled improperly and missed an active infection giving you a false negative. The swab could get cross-contaminated at some point due to the volume of testing being done now and give you a false positive. 

Testing is a tool, but it's not nearly as foolproof as many like to assume. It's far from a panacea. Oddly enough, temperature monitoring seems to have been most effective in China in containing the spread, if you believe the Chinese numbers. They reportedly had drones scanning people's temperatures as they walked on streets and even through their apartment windows and then dragging away and isolating anyone with even a slight fever.

That could prove most effective in containing the spread here if it's truly as simple as that. Monitor the temp of everyone entering or leaving a business, school, stadium, etc, and exclude those running a temp. Send them back home until their condition resolves. If a temperature occurs before the person is infectious, it would make containing this virus very easy. Taking temps can be done in a blink with modern tools these days and is a very fast, accurate and reliable test. No fever, come on in. Running a temp, go back home. Simple, fast, easy, and cost-effective.

[stevieb]

@CrazyDaisy  I agree with you. The testing is flawed and besides, it's nothing more than a place in time. All this hue and cry about testing would be better placed on treatment and prevention.