4 ms·

How much does the quality of sampling influence the result with this machine? You're saying testing at work could be done, but what if the swab is not taken pro

How much does the quality of sampling influence the result with this machine? You're saying testing at work could be done, but what if the swab is not taken properly? Wouldn't that create a false negative?

chadmeister 7y ago
This sounds like a much easier problem to solve than what we're dealing with now
- aledalgrande 7y ago
  Sure, but if a non professional takes a bad swab on average it wouldn't be safe to talk about deploying these to workplaces and send people back to work like Trump wants to do. Even less if you think about these people testing positive after an hour of commute on public transport.
  - briandear 7y ago
    So close public transport. Touch of the US doesn’t use public transportation.
    - aledalgrande 7y ago
      That is just a single example. You go out with your car, you get a coffee in a crowded Starbucks, go to work and test positive. Now what? There's a new cluster.
      - minitoar 7y ago
        Even if people are out being infectious for a full day before they test positive it’s a massive improvement.
  - chadmeister 7y ago
    So we allocate 0.0001% of that 2 trillion stimulus package that just passed to educate and train people on it. Worst WORST case is nothing comparable to the worst case we could face otherwise. This is an insignificant problem.
    - aledalgrande 7y ago
      It it still a worse case than people staying home and going to get tested properly at the doctor with this machine.
      - chadmeister 7y ago
        Look, you couldn't make a more wrong assertion. You would destroy countless more lives by keeping this quarantine going on indefinitely. Our economy would implode and we'd wind up in a situation far worse than what we saw during the great depression. We'd go into full stagflation and I guarantee the suicides alone would dwarf the possible death count from mass testing ppl with this device.
        aledalgrande 7y ago
        I am the first who wants everything to go back to normal. But have to be realistic with what is going to happen: saying that machines installed at workplaces is enough to end the pandemic is just an illusion. As the comment made by the other user here says, it will create more waves. Now, that the damage to the economy is greater than the cost of healthcare and lives of a pandemic, that's an opinion you're not backing with data. Also, I might be biased because I have people in my circle who are at risk, but I think a real solution is more structured than this. Machines + mandatory gloves and masks would be certainly better.
      - deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
ineedasername 7y ago
That would be the case with any testing protocol, and so to the extent that it's a problem, it is a problem already. It's also a solvable one: adequate training. And people right now have a very strong incentive to pay attention and learn it properly.
- aledalgrande 7y ago
  I'm am not saying this test is not valid, I'm critizing the claim that everything can resume by installing it at workplaces.

chadmeister 7y ago

This sounds like a much easier problem to solve than what we're dealing with now

aledalgrande 7y ago
Sure, but if a non professional takes a bad swab on average it wouldn't be safe to talk about deploying these to workplaces and send people back to work like Trump wants to do. Even less if you think about these people testing positive after an hour of commute on public transport.
- briandear 7y ago
  So close public transport. Touch of the US doesn’t use public transportation.
  - aledalgrande 7y ago
    That is just a single example. You go out with your car, you get a coffee in a crowded Starbucks, go to work and test positive. Now what? There's a new cluster.
    - minitoar 7y ago
      Even if people are out being infectious for a full day before they test positive it’s a massive improvement.
- chadmeister 7y ago
  So we allocate 0.0001% of that 2 trillion stimulus package that just passed to educate and train people on it. Worst WORST case is nothing comparable to the worst case we could face otherwise. This is an insignificant problem.
  - aledalgrande 7y ago
    It it still a worse case than people staying home and going to get tested properly at the doctor with this machine.
    - chadmeister 7y ago
      Look, you couldn't make a more wrong assertion. You would destroy countless more lives by keeping this quarantine going on indefinitely. Our economy would implode and we'd wind up in a situation far worse than what we saw during the great depression. We'd go into full stagflation and I guarantee the suicides alone would dwarf the possible death count from mass testing ppl with this device.
      - aledalgrande 7y ago
        I am the first who wants everything to go back to normal. But have to be realistic with what is going to happen: saying that machines installed at workplaces is enough to end the pandemic is just an illusion. As the comment made by the other user here says, it will create more waves. Now, that the damage to the economy is greater than the cost of healthcare and lives of a pandemic, that's an opinion you're not backing with data. Also, I might be biased because I have people in my circle who are at risk, but I think a real solution is more structured than this. Machines + mandatory gloves and masks would be certainly better.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]

ineedasername 7y ago

That would be the case with any testing protocol, and so to the extent that it's a problem, it is a problem already. It's also a solvable one: adequate training. And people right now have a very strong incentive to pay attention and learn it properly.

aledalgrande 7y ago
I'm am not saying this test is not valid, I'm critizing the claim that everything can resume by installing it at workplaces.