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

461–470 of 535 posts

Re: A Third Solution

#461

Post by pbhjpbhj »

alkonaut wrote: post #457

Prediction: no test development will be faster than the spread of the disease so when tests are easily available many or most densely populated areas will be at over 50% immunity.

>over 50% immunity. //

As you say "the" disease I assume you mean Covid19, not just a future disease. AFAIAA is not been shown that recovered (or long-term asymptomatic) cases are immune and there's some suggestion that at least a few people don't have immunity after recovery. I think I'd stick with "at 50% infection rate".

But then if at 50% infection rate you've had 0.2% death rate (seems to be about the right order for confirmed deaths+anticipated numbers of not confirmed {ie excess deaths during the period of the diseases spread}, in UK) then testing might save huge numbers of deaths.

The death rate in the second half of the population I'd expect to be higher, they include those with pre-existing conditions (including the more elderly) who isolated early, testing of the caregivers and families will be very important.

Re: A Third Solution

#462

Post by noobermin »

amirhirsch wrote: post #359
predxionbio wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi, Walker here, one of the PreDxion Bio co-founders. Heres a some more information on the technology underlying the test we are developing: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25790830/ . Unfortunately, up until about a month ago us like many folks, were blissfully minding our business developing a rapid point of care cytokine detection platform for use in monitoring patients experiencing certain immune responses follow…

I worked at Integrated Plasmonics in 2012–14, the major problem you will face is fluidics and sample handling not so much the sensor design. You should consider stochastic plasmonic features grown using dna self-assembly on the surface of a cmos sensor (lots more recent work on DNA-based plasmonic nanostructures). I worked on varieties of ways to characterize a chemical signal even from stochastically distributed pla…

If you have to do that for every sensor the cost goes up a lot. Also, "stochastic plasmonic features" without knowing much more sounds like something that varies by time of day, wind currents in the lab, whether you hit it ten minutes ago with a socket wrench or didn't.

Re: A Third Solution

#463

Post by CryptoPunk »

scott_s wrote: post #40
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.

Paul Romer, an economist at NYU, has been advocating for testing millions of people a day for a few weeks. He is co-author of a piece in The Atlantic, "Without More Tests, America Can’t Reopen", https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/04/were-testi... Googling for "romer covid 19" should turn up a lot of news sources covering the notion of testing millions of people a day.

Paul Romer is also a recipient of the Nobel Prize in Economics.

Re: A Third Solution

#464

Post by benibela »

johncalvinyoung wrote: post #360
taneq wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I should emphasize that what we need is physical -distancing, not social. Good distinction. We should be focusing more on hygiene while finding ways to connect remotely with the people who are important to us.

> while finding ways to connect remotely with the people who are important to us Good stop-gap, but not remotely viable long-term. Humans aren't made for isolation, even if video calls help take the edge off soon. FaceTime and Zoom have a significant cognitive load, too. As long as we're talking about how society should adapt to this sort of risk, we can't just go to living in individual hermetic pods with internet c…

"We are for the most part more lonely when we go abroad among men than when we stay in our chambers."

- Henry David Thoreau

Re: A Third Solution

#465

Post by notahacker »

RonanTheGrey wrote: post #450
tempestn wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure new state powers would be required. The state already can (and does and should) compel people who are known to be infected to be quarantined, or at least self-isolated. As far as testing, companies can already require employees to be tested as a requirement to work. A lot of companies already do drug testing of employees, something I actually don't agree with in most cases, but it's already a norm. In no…

Ok, simple basic counterargument. When is the pandemic over? When does the pervasive testing stop? The argument can - and will - be made that "unless we keep testing until the end of the human race, you will all die tomorrow of a horrible virus-ridden death." I don't particulary mind doing pervasive testing for awhile. I would desperately not want to live in a world where I could not feed my family unless I give into…

> When is the pandemic over? When does the pervasive testing stop?

When we stop seeing non-trivial numbers of test results. The idea that governments want to spend billions on mandatory virus testing outside every building until the end of the human race out of some Orwellian enjoyment of inconveniencing people is not supported by evidence. Even China isn't doing this. Back in the real world, even the SARS vaccination research programmes, which cost relatively little and inconvenienced nobody, were shut down when SARS stopped circulating and the even keeping a few scientists employed as part of a pandemic task force looking out for the future was a step too far for the US govt.

Re: A Third Solution

#466

Post by schnischna »

I wonder if it could be possible to mix test samples to test several people at once? Like maybe take 10 or even 100 samples, mix them together, and the test shows positive if any of the 100 has the disease? In that case, the samples could be tested individually.

Also I don't think the consensus is that only a vaccine can end the thread, or that it is necessarily much more dangerous than the flu. I know three people who died from the flu. And there are also cases of younger, healthy people dying from the flu, or people getting permanent health issues like inflammation of the heart.

Re: A Third Solution

#467

Post by alkonaut »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #461
alkonaut wrote: post #457

Prediction: no test development will be faster than the spread of the disease so when tests are easily available many or most densely populated areas will be at over 50% immunity.

>over 50% immunity. // As you say "the" disease I assume you mean Covid19, not just a future disease. AFAIAA is not been shown that recovered (or long-term asymptomatic) cases are immune and there's some suggestion that at least a few people don't have immunity after recovery. I think I'd stick with "at 50% infection rate". But then if at 50% infection rate you've had 0.2% death rate (seems to be about the right orde…

Yes - I’m only talking a about Covid. This can definitely be interesting for Covid-31 though.

Testing and contact tracing will indeed save lots of lives, I’m just not optimistic about this pandemic.

Re: A Third Solution

#468

Post by CPLX »

post_below wrote: post #405
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.

Why not? It doesn't matter if he's... Elon Musk. What he's accomplished in fields he wasn't trained in is significant. I think that makes OPs point just fine.

Because Elon Musk has made a series of incorrect, misleading, and ignorant statements about the Coronavirus crisis in order to benefit himself personally.

Re: A Third Solution

#470

Post by wuschel »

dekhn wrote: post #319
tptacek wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to my biochem-undergrad kid, surface plasmon resonance is a thing; it had come up in classes. "It's like doing an ELISA with no secondary antibody". Someone here will know what that means. I don't!

It's a very sensitive detection technique that uses some cool properties of light. We used it 20+ years ago in grad school (they were very expensive machines that were extremely hard to master; everything from calibration to routine operation was significantly more challenging than most devices I worked with) and I think it has quite a history before that. Never heard of it being used for rapid detection in a public…

Can confirm that. Source: Worked with SPR/OW spectrocopy many a time during my time in research.
Post reply on HN