Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A Third Solution

paulbuchheit.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 535 posts

Re: A Third Solution

#421

Post by remote_phone »

pb wrote: post #22
caymanjim wrote: post #13

This isn't a unique idea. This is the mainstream view. Everyone knows we need more testing and that testing is the only way to effectively ease distancing rules. That was a pretty extensive writeup to say what we've been hearing from all rational information outlets for a month.

I have not found any mainstream sources that advocate screening everyone every day (which is very different from simply doing "more testing"). Would love some pointers if I'm wrong.

You won’t be able to scale your solution before a vaccine is out, rendering your entire solution useless unfortunately.

Johnson and Johnson have already started scaling their vaccine and plan to have 1 billion doses available by January 2021. If their vaccine is approved, it will be an instant solution and better than testing everyone every day.

Moderna has also started the process of scaling their solution as well but J&J have a head start and a known platform.

Re: A Third Solution

#422

Post by luckylion »

lend000 wrote: post #400
CPLX wrote: post #399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Citing Elon Musk in this context is definitely not making the point you think it’s making.

Name one aeronautical engineer phD who deserves more credit for giving America the ability to put humans in space next month than Musk. He's quite involved with technical decisions. His social media behavior is irrelevant here -- this is about the ability to innovate outside of physics or economics, which is what he learned about in college.

> Name one aeronautical engineer phD who deserves more credit for giving America the ability to put humans in space next month than Musk.

Why limit it to them? Without the Internet, there would have been no X.com, no PayPal, no billion dollar paycheck. If "funding" a large project is the equivalent of "being a scientific genius", I think we'll add a lot of geniuses to the books, and we should probably include every government official that makes decisions about funding large projects.

And really ... who deserves more credit for putting a man on the moon than Karl Marx? Without Marx no communism, without communism no Soviet Union, without SU no American fear of losing dominance, and without that no ambitious and well-funded space program.

Re: A Third Solution

#423

Post by garmaine »

ahupp wrote: post #63
caymanjim wrote: post #13

This isn't a unique idea. This is the mainstream view. Everyone knows we need more testing and that testing is the only way to effectively ease distancing rules. That was a pretty extensive writeup to say what we've been hearing from all rational information outlets for a month.

Everyone says "we need more testing", but there's actually very little discussion of how that testing would translate into lower transmission. I'm skeptical any program less aggressive than the one proposed here would get R0 < 1.

R0 is less than 1 already in many regions...

Re: A Third Solution

#424

Post by Larrikin »

pb wrote: post #22
caymanjim wrote: post #13

This isn't a unique idea. This is the mainstream view. Everyone knows we need more testing and that testing is the only way to effectively ease distancing rules. That was a pretty extensive writeup to say what we've been hearing from all rational information outlets for a month.

I have not found any mainstream sources that advocate screening everyone every day (which is very different from simply doing "more testing"). Would love some pointers if I'm wrong.

Every single country that has had any success containing the virus, including the origin country of China, has had rigorous continuous testing to contain the spread. It's hard to find a country with success containing the outbreak that doesn't do constant ubiquitous testing.

Re: A Third Solution

#425

Post by _ph_ »

mcherm wrote: post #90
pb wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have not found any mainstream sources that advocate screening everyone every day (which is very different from simply doing "more testing"). Would love some pointers if I'm wrong.

> I have not found any mainstream sources that advocate screening everyone every day That's because we currently aren't capable of testing everyone who is obviously sick just once. If we got there, we wouldn't even be close to being capable of testing key personnel (like health care workers). If we got there we wouldn't even be close to being able to test everyone once. If we got there we wouldn't even be close to be…

The concept for restarting the German football league involves daily testing of all players. So the idea is indeed widespread, but often enough just impractical for the numbers of tests required.

Testing a few hundred people daily would be doable, as Germany has relatively good testing capacity - probably one main reason for the overall better handling of the pandemic so far. But the concept still gets critisized, as this would mean a fast track to testing for the players while parts of the population don't have equal access to testing.

For the whole population, it would be a good first step to be test really everyone who has any assumptions of symptoms and some time later, everyone in contact. And perhaps a biweekly test for the general population.

Re: A Third Solution

#426

Post by celticninja »

major issue I have here is that once you put these turnstiles in they aren't coming back out. then they start scanning for other stuff and there goes your medical privacy.

Re: A Third Solution

#427

Post by Kiro »

> Unfortunately, I’m still seeing people at the supermarket with their mouths uncovered

In Sweden masks are so uncommon that you react when you see one.

Re: A Third Solution

#428

Post by londons_explore »

manmal wrote: post #384
lrpublic wrote: post #380

Quotes from the article: “It’s easy to fall into dystopian visions of the future — a world shut down by one virus after another” “It doesn’t have to be that way. ..... Ubiquitous screening is the key.” The approach is interesting and the possibility of eliminating large scale spread of covid, flu and others is attractive. However the idea of requiring a saliva swab from every visitor to an office or event has the pot…

An easy fix would be to require that all saliva samples are disposed of into the same container, mixing all samples of all tested persons.

Or you do the test yourself, and just show the already-completed test to the guy at the office door, and keep the test hardware, just like you currently show but keep an ID badge.

Sure, some people could fake the test, but for this approach to work, all that matters is that most people don't fake it.

Re: A Third Solution

#429

Post by lolc »

macintux wrote: post #104
chatmasta wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if you infect someone on your way back?

You’re still in a much better position than we are today, where you’d infect several people in the store, and again the next day, and the next.

I'm weirded out by this binary thinking arguing against masks or testing. It's like the people who say that helmets don't prevent all injuries, which they conclude means one shouldn't be wearing one. Except that where helmets are only individual protection, measures against infection are affective at a population level, where you profit from others' actions.

Re: A Third Solution

#430

Post by sub7 »

A) Does he have any financial interest in PreDxion Bio? This sounds like another smaller startup claiming bullshit.

B) Testing for O2 levels using already cheap + widely available pulse oximeters is probably an insufficient but necessary measure.

Post reply on HN