C-19 is asymptomatic in too many people for the idea that more testing can eliminate it. Impossible.

[THEfightsAREfixed]

Yes, there isn't really another possibility in a clinical setting.
I looked at your sources. None of them contradict that there is asymptomatic transmission. Just the opposite in fact with the one from February. It suggests it might be happening and needs further investigation.

Yeah man no point in the discourse any more, if you can't comprehend the definition of presumed and read and understand scientific literature and the scientific methodology required to make substantiated claims then best of luck to you you're gonna need it

 

[Ruprecht]

Yeah man no point in the discourse any more, if you can't comprehend the definition of presumed and read and understand scientific literature and the scientific methodology required to make substantiated claims then best of luck to you you're gonna need it

Hah! So basically you've got no real point and were just spouting bullshit.
My bad for assuming you weren't just a total time waster.

 

[ocean size]

Its way too late in the infection stage for contact tracing now. SK used it to great effect early on, but its impossible for us now. However, I think antibody testing should be an important component of opening back up. People with antibodies don't need PPE at work, for example, and can work in close quarters with others.

Except presence of antibodies does not confirm robust immunity. We don't know enough yet for a population wide recommendation.

Also once new transmission #s are down, if testing capacity is scaled up enough, contact tracing is going to be very useful in allow restrictions to be eased and not have to be reimplemented due to surges in cases

 

[SBJJ]

If only there was some precedent for the government doing that kind of short-term one-off massive hiring of 500k people for a once-in-a-decade event. Like, if only we knew it was possible because it happens for the purposes of taking demographic information.

By the way, don't forget to participate in the census this year!

If only there was some precedent for the government doing that kind of short-term one-off massive hiring of 500k people for a once-in-a-decade event. Like, if only we knew it was possible because it happens for the purposes of taking demographic information.

By the way, don't forget to participate in the census this year!

Obviously I'm the only one of the 2 of us who has participated in a census since you seem to think census workers could handle contact tracing.

Maybe we could just add poll workers to the mix.

 

[spamking]

Isn't that exactly why testing is needed? You're positive even if asymptomatic, aren't you?

How long is a person asymptomatic? I haven't searched for that info yet . . .

 

[THEfightsAREfixed]

Hah! So basically you've got no real point and were just spouting bullshit.
My bad for assuming you weren't just a total time waster.

No I clearly outlined all my points and established the precedent of HCoV and SAR research and the findings of initial research into SAR-CoV-2, and applied established fact to interpret the current situation, including rejecting the asymptomatic transmission hypothesis (consistent with SAR-CoV-1) and the false classification of common respitory symptoms as "COVID-19" (Corona Virus 2019), the association of corona viruses with high coinfection rates, the issue of cross reactionary effects of antibodies that lead to false positives with an example of a initially believed to be isolated SAR outbreak but was later found to be one of the four common CoVs, and a study that demonstrated 1 in 7 false positives with nucleopetide test of common CoV for SAR-CoV-1

The implication is that there is a general misunderstanding of what COVID-19 and corona virus is, and what it's characteristics are, primarily due to the lack of common understanding that SAR-CoV from 2002 and SAR-CoV-2 are 89% genetically similar and that corona viruses are common and cause respiratory illness and there can be issues determining which certain CoV is present and active because they work in tandem and often exist in a coinfection, this leads to an abundunce of reported cases and the consideration of SARS-Cov-2 as the sole cause of respiratory illnesses partly due to the catch-all definition of COVID-19 and it's misuse in place for SARS-CoV-2 which contributes to confusion, and also due to the resultant panic and extensive testing of non-critical patients creates the stastical dichotomy between SAR-CoV(1) and SAR-CoV-2, specifically the signifantly lower number of reported cases and higher mortality of SAR-CoV (8k cases / 800 deaths = 10% mortality) vs high number of reported cases and lower mortality for SAR-CoV-2 (somewhat TBD but trend is clear)

Also, there is evidence of recombination of the SARS-CoV-2 virus as described in the initial genetic analysis, and the development of the ability to splice, test, and manipulate CoVs has advanced enough that SARS-CoV-2 could possibly be a product of a lab creation which is like a neat Dean Koontz storyline or something

I think that about sums it up

 

[Ruprecht]

Obviously I'm the only one of the 2 of us who has participated in a census since you seem to think census workers could handle contact tracing.

Maybe we could just add poll workers to the mix.

I think you're overestimating the numbers. It's all done by the Public Health Units here, which numbers around 150 people for the most populous state NSW (7.5 million) with the most infections (3000 cases).
So success might be limited in your most overpopulated states with the most current cases, but more testing and contact tracing will still provide better outcomes.

 

[The XL]

Testing is a waste of time. It's already spread throughout the country. It's too widespread for it to matter at this point.

 

[Ruprecht]

No I clearly outlined all my points and established the precedent of HCoV and SAR research and the findings of initial research into SAR-CoV-2, and applied established fact to interpret the current situation, including rejecting the asymptomatic transmission hypothesis (consistent with SAR-CoV-1) and the false classification of common respitory symptoms as "COVID-19" (Corona Virus 2019), the association of corona viruses with high coinfection rates, the issue of cross reactionary effects of antibodies that lead to false positives with an example of a initially believed to be isolated SAR outbreak but was later found to be one of the four common CoVs, and a study that demonstrated 1 in 7 false positives with nucleopetide test of common CoV for SAR-CoV-1

The implication is that there is a general misunderstanding of what COVID-19 and corona virus is, and what it's characteristics are, primarily due to the lack of common understanding that SAR-CoV from 2002 and SAR-CoV-2 are 89% genetically similar and that corona viruses are common and cause respiratory illness and there can be issues determining which certain CoV is present and active because they work in tandem and often exist in a coinfection, this leads to an abundunce of reported cases and the consideration of SARS-Cov-2 as the sole cause of respiratory illnesses partly due to the catch-all definition of COVID-19 and it's misuse in place for SARS-CoV-2 which contributes to confusion, and also due to the resultant panic and extensive testing of non-critical patients creates the stastical dichotomy between SAR-CoV(1) and SAR-CoV-2, specifically the signifantly lower number of reported cases and higher mortality of SAR-CoV (8k cases / 800 deaths = 10% mortality) vs high number of reported cases and lower mortality for SAR-CoV-2 (somewhat TBD but trend is clear)

Also, there is evidence of recombination of the SARS-CoV-2 virus as described in the initial genetic analysis, and the development of the ability to splice, test, and manipulate CoVs has advanced enough that SARS-CoV-2 could possibly be a product of a lab creation which is like a neat Dean Koontz storyline or something

I think that about sums it up

Like I said. This isn't the 2003 SARS pandemic.
Rejection of the findings regrading asymptomatic/presymptomatic transmission on the basis of SARS-CoV-1 characteristics is essentially baseless. You continued to say there was no documented evidence, even when shown that there clearly was.
None of the studies (that I've read or posted) into asymptomatic (or "presymptomatic") transmission are including cases which haven't been confirmed as SARS-COV-2 by PCR, and the possibilities for methods of transmission excluding coughing or sneezing have been adequately established even if they have yet to be accurately attributed statistically at this stage.

 

[SBJJ]

I think you're overestimating the numbers. It's all done by the Public Health Units here, which numbers around 150 people for the most populous state NSW (7.5 million) with the most infections (3000 cases).
So success might be limited in your most overpopulated states with the most current cases, but more testing and contact tracing will still provide better outcomes.

Which is exactly what I said in my original post. But it now looks like for every person showing symptoms there is at least one more not. But probably more.

This would have been great right in the beginning or in new areas its popping up. But in a city like NYC or Detroit it would be a colossal waste

And using your small sample size. I underestimated the manpower it would likely take in the states. We would likely be looking at a million or more

 

[SBJJ]

Testing is a waste of time. It's already spread throughout the country. It's too widespread for it to matter at this point.

And most are already under some sort of quarantine

 

[wufabufa]

I feel like the antibody tests coming out are going to be the real way to make sure that it's safe to truly start running our counties normally. Of course you can't test all 360 million Americans, that would take far too long. Samples should be collected from populations around the country in both urban and rural populations to assess how much of the population has built immunity to the virus.....how many to get an accurate estimate of the number that are immune, I don't know. If we get to that 60% number the experts are talking about and herd immunity is supposedly in place then it's time to get things moving.

 

[Ruprecht]

And most are already under some sort of quarantine

People aren't as strict with their social distancing and hygiene as you might imagine.
There's been reports from confirmed cases here that have even managed to avoid spreading it to their partners despite cohabitation.
That's highly unlikely if they didn't know they were infected.

 

[Cuauhtemoc]

It works with contact tracing. That's the point of how places like south Korea did it.

Just testing everyone misses the point and is kinda a dumb idea. We need expanded testing of anyone who has been in contact. The number of asymptomatic people means that testing only sick people is pointless.

Yes, TS is obviously wrong and his post doesn't even make sense, it sounds like pointless rambling.
A few things to add are that asymptomatic people are very likely less contagious as their viral load seems to be smaller. Also that we do not need to completely eradicate it, the more tests, the more people isolated, the better even if some people still catch and even die from it.
The only caveat in comparing to South Korea is size. South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, these are small countries, in terms of population and geography. Contact tracing people in the US, Brazil, Russia, or the EU as a whole, would be much harder. Singapore is also a very authoritarian place and some of the actions they've taken are just not possible in a democracy.

 

[Amerikuracana]

Except presence of antibodies does not confirm robust immunity. We don't know enough yet for a population wide recommendation.

Also once new transmission #s are down, if testing capacity is scaled up enough, contact tracing is going to be very useful in allow restrictions to be eased and not have to be re-implemented due to surges in cases

I totally get the thought process, and you did add the modifier "once new transmission #s are down," but seriously man, contract tracing has to be combined with a border shut-down, and massive, massive surveillance over massive, massive amounts of space and people, even after the numbers come down a little. It's really only a feasible plan to implement similar to how Australia did it really, really early in the process.

 

[SBJJ]

People aren't as strict with their social distancing and hygiene as you might imagine.
There's been reports from confirmed cases here that have even managed to avoid spreading it to their partners despite cohabitation.
That's highly unlikely if they didn't know they were infected.

We are doing great around here with it.

 

[Amerikuracana]

Yes, TS is obviously wrong and his post doesn't even make sense, it sounds like pointless rambling.
A few things to add are that asymptomatic people are very likely less contagious as their viral load seems to be smaller. Also that we do not need to completely eradicate it, the more tests, the more people isolated, the better even if some people still catch and even die from it.
The only caveat in comparing to South Korea is size. South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, these are small countries, in terms of population and geography. Contact tracing people in the US, Brazil, Russia, or the EU as a whole, would be much harder. Singapore is also a very authoritarian place and some of the actions they've taken are just not possible in a democracy.

No. I'm right. It's preposterous and you haven''t thought about it with any depth. At a time in the future when the numbers are 1/1000th of what they are now, it's possible you could use it to stop a second wave or something, but I still don't see it working here. You are 100% wrong and *yawn* people that use common sense and then apply some specific numbers (common sense and general numbers are all a smart person needs to figure this one) will validate what I'm saying after hacks are done using as a political football. I really don't think you can keep up.

 

[THEfightsAREfixed]

Like I said. This isn't the 2003 SARS pandemic.
Rejection of the findings regrading asymptomatic/presymptomatic transmission on the basis of SARS-CoV-1 characteristics is essentially baseless. You continued to say there was no documented evidence, even when shown that there clearly was.
None of the studies into asymptomatic (or "presymptomatic") transmission are including cases which haven't been confirmed as SARS-COV-2 by PCR, and the possibilities for methods of transmission excluding coughing or sneezing have been adequately established even if they have yet to be accurately attributed statistically at this stage.

The precedent of SARS-CoV-1 characteristics have driven and guided the research of SARS-CoV-2 since it was discovered, it may have been a hint that one is called SARS-CoV-1 and the other is called SARS-CoV-2, this is because after the discovery of the nCoV2019 they classified it as being in the subgenera Sarbecovirus due to genetic similarity to SAR-CoV(1), thus SAR-CoV-2
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41564-020-0695-z#Fig2

initial studies demonstrated "2019-nCoV caused clusters of fatal pneumonia with clinical presentation greatly resembling SARS-CoV."
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30183-5/fulltext

So, in the beginning " The initial working case definitions for suspected NCIP {Novel Coronavirus–Infected Pneumonia} were based on the SARS and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) case definitions, as recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO) in 2003 and 2012 " with a consideration for a connection to the seafood market, until January 18th when they began performing specific tests

"We estimated an R0 of approximately 2.2 {for SARS-CoV-1} , meaning that on average each patient has been spreading infection to 2.2 other people. In general, an epidemic will increase as long as R0 is greater than 1, and control measures aim to reduce the reproductive number to less than 1. The R0 of SARS was estimated to be around 3"

"Although infections in health care workers have been detected {for SARS-CoV-1}, the proportion has not been as high as during the SARS and MERS outbreaks."

"Super-spreading events have not yet been identified for NCIP, but they could become a feature as the epidemic progresses."
https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMoa2001316


"It appears that 2019-nCoV uses the same cellular receptor as SARS-CoV (human angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 [hACE2]),3 so transmission is expected only after signs of lower respiratory tract disease develop. SARS-CoV mutated over the 2002–2004 epidemic to better bind to its cellular receptor and to optimize replication in human cells, enhancing virulence.7 Adaptation readily occurs because coronaviruses have error-prone RNA-dependent RNA polymerases, making mutations and recombination events frequent. By contrast, MERS-CoV has not mutated substantially to enhance human infectivity since it was detected in 2012."
{based on the shared characteristics of SARS-CoV 1&2 (hACE2 receptor transmission) SARS-CoV-2 doesn't begin transmission until you get symptoms which is of course logical as the viral load is highest after onset of symptoms}
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMe2001126

"Together, these observations suggest that the affinity of S protein for ACE2 is an important determinant in the overall rate of viral replication and in the severity of disease. If so, adaptations within the S protein that are critical for high‐affinity association with human ACE2 may have contributed to the unusual severity of SARS."
{hACE2 receptor strong determinant for overall rate of viral replication and in the severity of disease}
https://www.embopress.org/doi/10.1038/sj.emboj.7600640

"In addition, we found bat SARSr-CoV strains with different S proteins that can all use the receptor of SARS-CoV in humans (ACE2) for cell entry, suggesting diverse SARSr-CoVs capable of direct transmission to humans are circulating in bats in this cave. Our current study therefore offers a clearer picture on the evolutionary origin of SARS-CoV and highlights the risk of future emergence of SARS-like diseases."
{from 2017, eerily predictive}
https://journals.plos.org/plospathogens/article?id=10.1371/journal.ppat.1006698

"Currently, there was no evidence of air-borne transmission. Viral RNAs could be found in nasal discharge, sputum, and sometimes blood or feces.1,9,10,13,15 But whether oral-fecal transmission can happen has not yet been confirmed. Once people are infected by the 2019-nCoV, it is believed that, like SARS, there is no infectivity until the onset of symptoms.15 However, one report describes infection from an asymptomatic contact but the investigation was not solid.10 The infectious doses for 2019-nCoV is not clear, but a high viral load of up to 108 copies/mL in patient’s sputum has been reported.10 The viral load increases initially and still can be detected 12 days after onset of symptoms.9 Therefore, the infectivity of patients with 2019-nCoV may last for about 2 weeks. However, whether infectious viral particles from patients do exist at the later stage requires validation."
{wow crazy how these guys came to same conclusion as me from logical analysis, your mind must be blown lol}
https://journals.lww.com/jcma/FullText/2020/03000/The_outbreak_of_COVID_19__An_overview.3.aspx

 

[ocean size]

Obviously I'm the only one of the 2 of us who has participated in a census since you seem to think census workers could handle contact tracing.

Maybe we could just add poll workers to the mix.

The bulk of the workload is probably very similar to the Census - yes there are some statisticians, some analysts and managers making workflow decisions, but most of the labor is people in cubicles cold calling long lists they are given (e.g. everyone in the same apartment building) and asking scripted questions, no critical thinking needed.

No doubt it would have lower bang-for-the-buck now than when the country had 15 cases, but once new cases really drop and quarantine measures are lifted, new cases will again be more localised, fewer in number and often present as clusters as they had early on. Contact tracing will make a lot of sense.

 

[A Lurker]

P.S. Oh, has anybody noticed that a bunch of Doctors and scientists have now done appropriate balancing tests with available data, and realized that a great depression level destruction of the economy would definitely kill more people early than the virus itself? Gee.. Who said that first and had morons make moronic comments about it?

Literally everyone has said it. Anyway, I thought you were a flu bro?