3 ms·
No, they're testing people who are a) having issues as likely infections or b) those who have been exposed. The odds of any random person getting it are still
by caseysoftware 7y ago
No, they're testing people who are a) having issues as likely infections or b) those who have been exposed.
The odds of any random person getting it are still low, especially if you're not in one of the epicenters. Testing random people would be wasting time, effort, and tests. All of which are limited.
- tyingq 7y agoI'm interested in the theory that a fair amount of untested people have or had it, and are mostly asymptomatic. Iceland did some work there: https://www.buzzfeed.com/albertonardelli/coronavirus-testing-iceland https://www.buzzfeed.com/albertonardelli/coronavirus-testing... (Not my favorite source, but plenty of direct quotes)
- caseysoftware 7y agoThat's a safe assumption since ~80% are asymptomatic and therefore probably think they don't have it or it's just a cold, allergies, etc. That's where the "stay home!" mantra kicks in. If you have it and stay home for two weeks, maybe you infect your family but none of you infect anyone else. Therefore, it burns out without anyone else to spread to. Not a perfect world but it's the one we ahve.
- digsy 7y agoIts not even that in places. Some hospitals in Dallas will only test you if you are critical i.e. cannot breathe on your own.