3 ms·

Here's a transcript from yesterday's press conference. Of the 42 hits of a search for "test", not one of them is Trump referring to the availability of tests. I

Here's a transcript from yesterday's press conference. Of the 42 hits of a search for "test", not one of them is Trump referring to the availability of tests. It's either other people mentioning tests, reporters asking about tests, Trump using "test" as an imbecile's synonym for "clinical trial", or referring to various peoples' test result. No "tests are being made available", or "we're working with industry to increase production of testing kits" or anything similar. https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-coronavirus-task-force-briefing-transcript-march-19-trump-takes-shots-at-the-media https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-coronaviru...

cm2187 7y ago
Goes in hand with anti-virals. You don't give anti-virals to the whole population, only to people who have been tested positive.
- ebrenes 7y ago
  It's not unheard of and some work has been done to study if this would be beneficial (with promising results)[1]: But I offer as evidence two papers[2] in 2005, one in Nature and one in Science. They both did mathematical modeling with influenza, to see whether saturation with just Tamiflu of an area around a case of influenza could stop the outbreak. And in both cases, it worked. [1] https://www.wired.com/story/coronavirus-interview-larry-brilliant-smallpox-epidemiologist/#intcid=recommendations_wired-homepage-right-rail-popular_47820e76-7cfc-40d5-9501-a2d28533353c_popular4-1 https://www.wired.com/story/coronavirus-interview-larry-bril... [2] Journal references: Nature (DOI: 10.1038/nature04017) and Science (DOI:10.1126/science1115717)
  - cm2187 7y ago
    Perhaps. But in this case we are just trying to get around the saturation of medical facilities.
    - ebrenes 7y ago
      Which is really all that most countries are doing. In doing so also they're buying time by decreasing the number of people that get infected per unit of time, thus increasing the likelihood that more people will be infected later when possibly better treatment options exist and/or a vaccine.

cm2187 7y ago

Goes in hand with anti-virals. You don't give anti-virals to the whole population, only to people who have been tested positive.

ebrenes 7y ago
It's not unheard of and some work has been done to study if this would be beneficial (with promising results)[1]: But I offer as evidence two papers[2] in 2005, one in Nature and one in Science. They both did mathematical modeling with influenza, to see whether saturation with just Tamiflu of an area around a case of influenza could stop the outbreak. And in both cases, it worked. [1] https://www.wired.com/story/coronavirus-interview-larry-brilliant-smallpox-epidemiologist/#intcid=recommendations_wired-homepage-right-rail-popular_47820e76-7cfc-40d5-9501-a2d28533353c_popular4-1 https://www.wired.com/story/coronavirus-interview-larry-bril... [2] Journal references: Nature (DOI: 10.1038/nature04017) and Science (DOI:10.1126/science1115717)
- cm2187 7y ago
  Perhaps. But in this case we are just trying to get around the saturation of medical facilities.
  - ebrenes 7y ago
    Which is really all that most countries are doing. In doing so also they're buying time by decreasing the number of people that get infected per unit of time, thus increasing the likelihood that more people will be infected later when possibly better treatment options exist and/or a vaccine.