4 ms·

You can get them for free in the uk https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-antibody-tests/coronavirus-covid-19-antibody-tests https://

You can get them for free in the uk https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-antibody-tests/coronavirus-covid-19-antibody-tests https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-covid...

orwin 5y ago
Yeah, me too, not my point. Imagine half the uk population wanted to get tested before getting the vaccine, the cost for the NIH would be way higher than just vaccinating everybody. You can't tell people `if the antibody test is positive, you don't have to get vaccinated`, at least not until the vast majority is already vaccinated. And even then, it's mostly lost money. You could have told people "pay for your own test", but in this case, the fabrication and distribution of those test would slow down the vaccination. And you have to make sure that the test are not faked, so a doctor should verify that the test was yours. I know some doctors who faked smallpox vaccine, so you can imagine how much of a good idea this is. Also, even if the individual cost is not that high, telling people to `pay not to get vaccinated` (because it would've been spin like this, I've read UK newspapers) is not the best idea want the biggest issues for most western government is lack of trust. So: it is more pragmatic to jab everybody. Easier to orchestrate, you don't expose your leadership too much. Overall, best solution for the governments. Is it the best solution for the population? Debatable. I'd say its the most cost-effective, the one with the less headaches, so yes?
- peteradio 5y ago
  you put the orwin in orwellian
  - dang 5y ago
    You've been posting a ton of flamebait and unsubstantive comments. That's destructive of what this site is for and we ban accounts that do it. In fact - you've done almost nothing but post like that. I had to scroll back a long way in your comment history to see something that wasn't unsubstantive. If you keep doing it, we will ban you. If you don't want to be banned on HN, please stop all of that now and review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and start using the site as intended. Here's the basic idea: if you have a substantive point, make it thoughtfully; if not, please don't comment until you do.
    - peteradio 5y ago
      Its probably not worth your time, but I'd like to know which of my comments you consider unsubstantive. I'd say most my comments are terse and I don't care to provide references unless requested. My terseness has a point and I try to rely on big picture details that we can all agree on and are readily available to be provided if someone was curious to ask or look themselves (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/burden.html https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/burd...). When so many people are vocally willing to set a dangerous new precedent in a state of emergency I think a biting tone may become appropriate. Although I understand that this isn't necessarily a forum meant for discussing such politically charged happenings and you have precedents to worry about yourselves as moderators of this forum.
      - dang 5y ago
        What you're calling "terse" and "biting tone" is frequently flamebait. When you do this, you're breaking the site guideline which says: "Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive." as well as "Eschew flamebait", of course. Examples: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28515653 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28515653 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28514509 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28514509 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28531159 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28531159 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28530286 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28530286 Comments like that aren't worth it to have on HN because the negative effect they have on the threads, and on the culture of the site, dominates any value they're adding. It seems obvious, reading through your comment history, that you have an agenda about this topic. There's nothing wrong with having a view, of course, but an agenda is something different—that's when you're using the site to wage a battle in favor of your view. At that point curiosity has left the building, and curiosity is supposed to be the animating value here.
        peteradio 5y ago
        Definitely I've behaved selfishly and with an agenda. However it is not with a particular outcome in mind except to see a discussion happen among an excellent group of people under excellent moderation. I'm deeply concerned that I have wrong information and am begging to be skewered with the truth. I do think others wanted to see the discussion had as well, so while its selfish on my part its not without broader appeal. This forum is amazing and I thank you so much for your patient moderation.
tim333 5y ago
"Tests are only available to certain groups." I had to pay £50 for my one in the UK.

orwin 5y ago

Yeah, me too, not my point. Imagine half the uk population wanted to get tested before getting the vaccine, the cost for the NIH would be way higher than just vaccinating everybody. You can't tell people `if the antibody test is positive, you don't have to get vaccinated`, at least not until the vast majority is already vaccinated. And even then, it's mostly lost money. You could have told people "pay for your own test", but in this case, the fabrication and distribution of those test would slow down the vaccination. And you have to make sure that the test are not faked, so a doctor should verify that the test was yours. I know some doctors who faked smallpox vaccine, so you can imagine how much of a good idea this is. Also, even if the individual cost is not that high, telling people to `pay not to get vaccinated` (because it would've been spin like this, I've read UK newspapers) is not the best idea want the biggest issues for most western government is lack of trust. So: it is more pragmatic to jab everybody. Easier to orchestrate, you don't expose your leadership too much. Overall, best solution for the governments. Is it the best solution for the population? Debatable. I'd say its the most cost-effective, the one with the less headaches, so yes?

peteradio 5y ago
you put the orwin in orwellian
- dang 5y ago
  You've been posting a ton of flamebait and unsubstantive comments. That's destructive of what this site is for and we ban accounts that do it. In fact - you've done almost nothing but post like that. I had to scroll back a long way in your comment history to see something that wasn't unsubstantive. If you keep doing it, we will ban you. If you don't want to be banned on HN, please stop all of that now and review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and start using the site as intended. Here's the basic idea: if you have a substantive point, make it thoughtfully; if not, please don't comment until you do.
  - peteradio 5y ago
    Its probably not worth your time, but I'd like to know which of my comments you consider unsubstantive. I'd say most my comments are terse and I don't care to provide references unless requested. My terseness has a point and I try to rely on big picture details that we can all agree on and are readily available to be provided if someone was curious to ask or look themselves (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/burden.html https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/burd...). When so many people are vocally willing to set a dangerous new precedent in a state of emergency I think a biting tone may become appropriate. Although I understand that this isn't necessarily a forum meant for discussing such politically charged happenings and you have precedents to worry about yourselves as moderators of this forum.
    - dang 5y ago
      What you're calling "terse" and "biting tone" is frequently flamebait. When you do this, you're breaking the site guideline which says: "Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive." as well as "Eschew flamebait", of course. Examples: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28515653 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28515653 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28514509 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28514509 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28531159 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28531159 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28530286 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28530286 Comments like that aren't worth it to have on HN because the negative effect they have on the threads, and on the culture of the site, dominates any value they're adding. It seems obvious, reading through your comment history, that you have an agenda about this topic. There's nothing wrong with having a view, of course, but an agenda is something different—that's when you're using the site to wage a battle in favor of your view. At that point curiosity has left the building, and curiosity is supposed to be the animating value here.
      - peteradio 5y ago
        Definitely I've behaved selfishly and with an agenda. However it is not with a particular outcome in mind except to see a discussion happen among an excellent group of people under excellent moderation. I'm deeply concerned that I have wrong information and am begging to be skewered with the truth. I do think others wanted to see the discussion had as well, so while its selfish on my part its not without broader appeal. This forum is amazing and I thank you so much for your patient moderation.

tim333 5y ago

"Tests are only available to certain groups." I had to pay £50 for my one in the UK.