5 ms·

Just give us a mass produced anti-body test we can take already. This is ridiculous. If people can just take an anti-body test to show they are immune to covid

by gt565k 7y ago

Just give us a mass produced anti-body test we can take already. This is ridiculous. If people can just take an anti-body test to show they are immune to covid-19, they can safely return to work.

timr 7y ago
While we absolutely need an antibody test, any such test would currently come up negative for the vast majority of the country. It would basically be a more expensive way of doing what we're doing now.
usaar333 7y ago
It's unlikely that even 1% of the United States has been infected at this point. What does the other 99+% do? Infect themselves?
- hiram112 7y ago
  > What does the other 99+% do? Infect themselves? Yes, sooner or later. You need to get to something like 60%-75% of the population infected and with developed antibodies before you can obtain herd immunity in a given population. Unlike the majority of our politicians, Angela Merkel was praised several weeks ago when she told the German public, no BS, that 3/4 of the population would end up getting the virus, eventually. It's not certain we will even develop a vaccination anytime soon. Corona viruses have been around in live stock for a long time, and no vaccination has been created, even though it'd be very profitable. They've been promising the elusive HIV vaccine for almost 40 years, and we've still got squat. The virus is out. It cannot be locked away again, at least till the vast majority of us are immune or dead. Waiting 'till next season is neither feasible for the economy, nor society, and it's likely you'll just end up getting infected with a stronger mutated version instead of this one a la Spanish Flu Season #2. We cannot keep our population inside cowering in fear forever. If we had unlimited doctors, nurses, ventilators, etc. we wouldn't even bother having this lock down, social distancing, or waiting. We'd carry on as normal, and let the virus take its best shot. There is literally no other way to get out of this.
  - usaar333 7y ago
    The problem is the hospitalization rate is too high even for a younger population. If you could target even 2% hospitalized at 60% of population, you would still need >4+ years at current capacity to get through this. You'd also still lose 1/1000 lives (of younger people) which still is unacceptable. Why is it guaranteed you need to get herd immunity? Can you not take the Singapore/SK route indefinitely - heavy contact tracing + mask wearing + limit mass groups to keep basic reproduction number under 1 indefinitely?
    - lokedhs 7y ago
      I'm in Singapore, and I can assure you that although we're not locked down, no one wants this to last longer than it has to.
      - usaar333 7y ago
        Agreed. But to the point above, is it better to have 5000 people under age 50 die or just keep the current regime (which will probably start emerging mostly as a ban on leaving the city) up for 18 months?
    - hiram112 7y ago
      > You'd also still lose 1/1000 lives (of younger people) which still is unacceptable. I think if this goes on for months on end - kids stuck at homes, large events cancelled perpetually, the stock market headed further down, shortages in not just hand sanitizer but eventually even basics like fresh produce and grains, clothes, electronics, then that 1/1000 death rate won't be so unacceptable at all. Our society cannot just change like it would need to in order to keep the death rate as low as we'd wish.
ryanhuff 7y ago
Does that exist? Does it work for strains?

by gt565k 7y ago

Just give us a mass produced anti-body test we can take already. This is ridiculous. If people can just take an anti-body test to show they are immune to covid-19, they can safely return to work.

timr 7y ago

While we absolutely need an antibody test, any such test would currently come up negative for the vast majority of the country. It would basically be a more expensive way of doing what we're doing now.

usaar333 7y ago

It's unlikely that even 1% of the United States has been infected at this point. What does the other 99+% do? Infect themselves?

hiram112 7y ago
> What does the other 99+% do? Infect themselves? Yes, sooner or later. You need to get to something like 60%-75% of the population infected and with developed antibodies before you can obtain herd immunity in a given population. Unlike the majority of our politicians, Angela Merkel was praised several weeks ago when she told the German public, no BS, that 3/4 of the population would end up getting the virus, eventually. It's not certain we will even develop a vaccination anytime soon. Corona viruses have been around in live stock for a long time, and no vaccination has been created, even though it'd be very profitable. They've been promising the elusive HIV vaccine for almost 40 years, and we've still got squat. The virus is out. It cannot be locked away again, at least till the vast majority of us are immune or dead. Waiting 'till next season is neither feasible for the economy, nor society, and it's likely you'll just end up getting infected with a stronger mutated version instead of this one a la Spanish Flu Season #2. We cannot keep our population inside cowering in fear forever. If we had unlimited doctors, nurses, ventilators, etc. we wouldn't even bother having this lock down, social distancing, or waiting. We'd carry on as normal, and let the virus take its best shot. There is literally no other way to get out of this.
- usaar333 7y ago
  The problem is the hospitalization rate is too high even for a younger population. If you could target even 2% hospitalized at 60% of population, you would still need >4+ years at current capacity to get through this. You'd also still lose 1/1000 lives (of younger people) which still is unacceptable. Why is it guaranteed you need to get herd immunity? Can you not take the Singapore/SK route indefinitely - heavy contact tracing + mask wearing + limit mass groups to keep basic reproduction number under 1 indefinitely?
  - lokedhs 7y ago
    I'm in Singapore, and I can assure you that although we're not locked down, no one wants this to last longer than it has to.
    - usaar333 7y ago
      Agreed. But to the point above, is it better to have 5000 people under age 50 die or just keep the current regime (which will probably start emerging mostly as a ban on leaving the city) up for 18 months?
  - hiram112 7y ago
    > You'd also still lose 1/1000 lives (of younger people) which still is unacceptable. I think if this goes on for months on end - kids stuck at homes, large events cancelled perpetually, the stock market headed further down, shortages in not just hand sanitizer but eventually even basics like fresh produce and grains, clothes, electronics, then that 1/1000 death rate won't be so unacceptable at all. Our society cannot just change like it would need to in order to keep the death rate as low as we'd wish.

ryanhuff 7y ago

Does that exist? Does it work for strains?