How to Stop the Corona Virus NOW, and Get Back to Work

[CarlinAnnArbor]

Test Everyone. That's it. We need to follow the example of a small town in Italy where they starved the virus of new hosts.

How to Stop the Virus Now

CommentaryThere is a relatively simple way to stop the coronavirus dead in its tracks. It might sound impossible at first, but it’s well within our capabilities, and it’s far less costly and disruptive...

m.theepochtimes.com

This solution was demonstrated on a small scale in study reported a few days ago in The Guardian. Researchers at the University of Padua tested all 3,300 residents of the Italian town of Vò and separated those carrying the virus — both symptomatic and asymptomatic — from those who were virus free. Transmission stopped immediately.

Could we test all 329,425,643 men, women, and children in the U.S.? It sounds like a tall order, but it’s not much different than taking the census, and the only bodily fluid needed is a small amount of nasal mucus (yes: snot). Because of economies of scale, the per unit cost of 300 million tests will likely be less than a dime, but even if, taking administrative costs and the usual inefficiencies into account, the total cost of each test turns out to be $20, the $6.5 billion price tag for Universal Coronavirus Testing will still be $600 million less than we’ll be spending this year alone on the census.

Just today, it was announced that researchers at three universities in the UK have developed a cheap coronavirus test that people could administer at home, although it will still take a $100 machine to analyze the results. They’re exploring now how to mass produce the necessary hardware. Also promising: On March 28th, the FDA approved a 15-minute test for use in the U.S.

And here’s an interesting possibility: With 334 million tests on the line in the U.S. alone — perhaps even billions over time — the same companies that manufacture those cheap at-home pregnancy tests might quickly develop a dirt cheap, self-contained, at-home test. Just shove it up your nose, and, seconds later, a plus-sign on the device says you’re carrying the virus, and a minus-sign says you’re not. Disposable devices of this sort could even be used to screen people entering venues where it’s especially important that infected people not mingle — the White House, perhaps?

 

[Camp]

Duh! Why didn't Trump do that months ago when all the experts were telling him we needed more tests?

 

[miketx]

Duh! Why didn't Trump do that months ago when all the experts were telling him we needed more tests?

He wanted all you vermin to die.

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

Duh! Why didn't Trump do that months ago when all the experts were telling him we needed more tests?

We dont have the test kits quite ready. We could, SOON, if we put CAPITALISM to work.

 

[toobfreak]

Test Everyone. That's it. We need to follow the example of a small town in Italy where they starved the virus of new hosts.

How to Stop the Virus Now

CommentaryThere is a relatively simple way to stop the coronavirus dead in its tracks. It might sound impossible at first, but it’s well within our capabilities, and it’s far less costly and disruptive...

m.theepochtimes.com

This solution was demonstrated on a small scale in study reported a few days ago in The Guardian. Researchers at the University of Padua tested all 3,300 residents of the Italian town of Vò and separated those carrying the virus — both symptomatic and asymptomatic — from those who were virus free. Transmission stopped immediately.

Could we test all 329,425,643 men, women, and children in the U.S.? It sounds like a tall order, but it’s not much different than taking the census, and the only bodily fluid needed is a small amount of nasal mucus (yes: snot). Because of economies of scale, the per unit cost of 300 million tests will likely be less than a dime, but even if, taking administrative costs and the usual inefficiencies into account, the total cost of each test turns out to be $20, the $6.5 billion price tag for Universal Coronavirus Testing will still be $600 million less than we’ll be spending this year alone on the census.

Just today, it was announced that researchers at three universities in the UK have developed a cheap coronavirus test that people could administer at home, although it will still take a $100 machine to analyze the results. They’re exploring now how to mass produce the necessary hardware. Also promising: On March 28th, the FDA approved a 15-minute test for use in the U.S.

And here’s an interesting possibility: With 334 million tests on the line in the U.S. alone — perhaps even billions over time — the same companies that manufacture those cheap at-home pregnancy tests might quickly develop a dirt cheap, self-contained, at-home test. Just shove it up your nose, and, seconds later, a plus-sign on the device says you’re carrying the virus, and a minus-sign says you’re not. Disposable devices of this sort could even be used to screen people entering venues where it’s especially important that infected people not mingle — the White House, perhaps?

To really be effective, you need to test everyone once a week so that you not only catch the sick, but the infected carriers before they show symptoms and become contagious. I just read a blog where they said to go out and take walks, it is good for you. But in order to explain the pattern of viral spread, you must assume it is airborne and not just going from person to person! So ideally, stay away from people and stay in as much as possible.

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

Through testing and retesting of all 3,300 inhabitants of the town of Vò, near Venice, regardless of whether they were exhibiting symptoms, and rigorous quarantining of their contacts once infection was confirmed, health authorities have been able to completely stop the spread of the illness there.

Redirect Notice

www.google.com

 

[SmokeALib]

Ship all infected to NY.

 

[Maxdeath]

Duh! Why didn't Trump do that months ago when all the experts were telling him we needed more tests?

So I hate to ask something that requires something like normal thought here. But do you think that the tests just happen to materialize? It takes time to understand what you are testing for. False positives do no good as do false negatives. Then you have to manufacture them. Then you have distribution. Then you have to have the people who understand how to test.

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

Duh! Why didn't Trump do that months ago when all the experts were telling him we needed more tests?

So I hate to ask something that requires something like normal thought here. But do you think that the tests just happen to materialize? It takes time to understand what you are testing for. False positives do no good as do false negatives. Then you have to manufacture them. Then you have distribution. Then you have to have the people who understand how to test.

Yep. Capitalism! There is a huge incentive to get these test kits into production, and with economies of scale, they could make a fortune while keeping the individual cost of testing dirt cheap.

 

[JOSweetHeart]

How many times should a person be tested if one time is not enough?

God bless you always!!!

Holly

 

[Markle]

Through testing and retesting of all 3,300 inhabitants of the town of Vò, near Venice, regardless of whether they were exhibiting symptoms, and rigorous quarantining of their contacts once infection was confirmed, health authorities have been able to completely stop the spread of the illness there.

Redirect Notice

www.google.com

I can only presume that you're being facetious.

If not, you are trying to tell us that there is no difference in testing and retesting 3,300 people and 330,000,000 people. Is that what you're telling us?

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Duh! Why didn't Trump do that months ago when all the experts were telling him we needed more tests?

I don’t know for sure if your post is sarcasm but I’m responding as though it is. And if it is it’s fucking hilarious!