4 ms·
> test extensively You can't manage what you can't measure. To this date, I have seen no reliable data on how fast the disease spreads, or how dangerous it ac
by pacala 7y ago
> test extensively
You can't manage what you can't measure.
To this date, I have seen no reliable data on how fast the disease spreads, or how dangerous it actually is. Testing only 'people with shortness of breath and high fever for more than 4 days' is so biased it's not even funny. There could be 10x or even 100x more people with milder symptoms that are never considered for testing. Reporting '10% of people tested die' is also very misleading, since we only tested people with severe symptoms in the first place.
We can poll 5 times a week for the chances of Biden or Sanders or Warren to become Trump's challenger in fall. Perhaps we could also perform randomized tests every week and get a better sense of the shape of the danger we're facing. Yes, testing for coronavirus is more expensive than calling a phone number, but shutting down the country indefinitely is orders of magnitude more expensive.
- garmaine 7y agoThere is extremely good data from South Korea where extensive testing is performed.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]