Live data from Hacker News

A Third Solution

paulbuchheit.blogspot.com

441–450 of 535 posts

Re: A Third Solution

#441

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi, Walker here, one of the PreDxion co-founders. Up until recently we've been focused on developing our technogy as a point of care biosensor for us in patients experiencing dysfunctional immune responses (e.g., sepsis, ARDS, and the immune responses induced by certain cancer immumotherapies). The technical implementation of a viral detection assay is much simiplier to implement than our quantitative, multiplexed sm…

It’s critical to not underestimate the non-technical steps here, in terms of how do you deploy at scale, convince venues to install, deal with throughput rates, tie results to individuals, etc. All solvable, but it’s important to think about those sooner rather than later. I have some experience on the security side here and how to deploy technologies like this at scale... happy to help (my email is in bio).

Yup, lets look at the actual and physical supply chain of “at scale” to be tackled to succeed.

And i am wishing them success, and my brother is the director of the VA for the entire state of Alaska, an Airforce Colonel (commander, tenth medical wing) and ive personally built/designed/commissioned 10+ hospitals (el camino, sf general, sequoia, nome, and more)

((All on the tech implementation and design side))

Anything i could contribute i would.

(My creds can be freely confirmed)

Re: A Third Solution

#443
> It is my belief that the best cure for any disease is to avoid the disease.

That's not a cure. That is prevention.

> As such, I want to avoid ever catching this virus. I’m optimistic that we will eventually have a good vaccine, but until then I need to avoid those who are contagious.

Completely unrealistic. Same person would have said in 1918 that they want to avoid ever catching the flu. Maybe back then some HN users would think it sounds smart, but today we know it sounds just silly, because it's unrealistic, unnatural, against how life works and simply unnecessary.

Try your best to stay healthy, but please stop compromising life in ways which are completely unnatural because there is a possibility that your immune system has to do a bit of work. Our immune system has to work all the time, we are exposed to viruses all the time. This is how nature works. If there's a vaccine then yes let's all get it, like we should with other vaccines. Only a fool wouldn't get vaccinations, but until we have a vaccine let's just respect nature and how nature works and please live life like animals like us are meant to live. Freely.

Re: A Third Solution

#444
Most of the statements in this article are false or exaggerated. There are no studies to back them up. These are just personal believes born out of fear.

Computer engineers like him should be shamed in public for speaking so confident about things they have not been trained.

We, as society, should point the finger at such frauds.

Re: A Third Solution

#446

> It is my belief that the best cure for any disease is to avoid the disease. That's not a cure. That is prevention. > As such, I want to avoid ever catching this virus. I’m optimistic that we will eventually have a good vaccine, but until then I need to avoid those who are contagious. Completely unrealistic. Same person would have said in 1918 that they want to avoid ever catching the flu. Maybe back then some HN us…

The author doesn't understand the virus and makes many dubious statements about it.

> Catching this virus is a bit like playing a round of Russian roulette. You’ll probably be fine, but you could end up dead.

This is a poor analogy. In Russian roulette you have a 1 in 6 chance of getting a bullet in the head. The overall infection fatality rate of COVID-19 is under 1%, and the vast majority of fatalities are people with comorbidities.

It's more accurate to say that catching the virus is like Russian roulette only if you have a serious pre-existing condition.

> It is my belief that the best cure for any disease is to avoid the disease.

Avoiding the disease is not a cure. The only cure we have at this time is in fact the opposite: exposure and resulting immunity. This is the population level cure too; as immunity in the population grows, the reproduction rate of the virus declines.

There are still valid reasons for encouraging people to isolate and avoid infection. Like keeping the hospitals running, and minimizing the exposure of vulnerable individuals while the rest of us develop immunity. But curing the disease isn't a reason. And it also postpones the only true cure we have, which is the thing dying off due to herd immunity.

> The great challenge with avoiding this virus is that people with minimal symptoms are responsible for much, if not most, of the disease transmission.

This is true simply because people with minimal symptoms are most of the people who have it. So of course they represent the largest number of transmissions; they are the largest number of cases. Again, getting COVID-19 is not the same as Russian roulette, unless you're already sick.

> It appears that the virus travels through the air, so whenever possible, it’s important to avoid crowds of people or indoor spaces with shared air.

One authority after another has said that the main way this virus is transmitted is through respiratory droplets. Can it aerosolize? Yes. Can someone get sick from inhaling it in that aerosolized state? Probably yes. Is this a common form of transmission? Despite endless media coverage of studies in which the virus was deliberately aerosolized or found to be aerosolized, the answer is no. It is not. Neither the WHO nor the CDC has changed their view on this. Most transmission occurs at home or in tightly packed public transport.

There's no evidence that we need to avoid indoor spaces with shared air. There's an abundance of evidence that we should stay six feet away from each other and wear masks, wherever we are. (Since day one, all health authorities have acknowledged that wearing a mask reduces your risk of spreading the disease to other people.)

Re: A Third Solution

#447

There is an episode of Sliders (Fever, Season 1, Episode 3), where they slide into a world affected by an infection with no cure, and scanners have been placed at the entrance to every store to detect if you have it. In the show the disease is used as a classist thing or something. Anyways, its bacterial not viral, and they discover than antibiotics were never discovered so the Professor scrapes some fungus off some…

I remember that episode!

Love the Sliders reference. I might stream that all weekend.

Re: A Third Solution

#448

Most of the statements in this article are false or exaggerated. There are no studies to back them up. These are just personal believes born out of fear. Computer engineers like him should be shamed in public for speaking so confident about things they have not been trained. We, as society, should point the finger at such frauds.

Any examples? It really reads like common sense to me.

Re: A Third Solution

#449

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.

Agree to that point. The German, French and other media repeat that idea in the past weeks.

One of the oldest and largest biomedical institutes, the Robert Koch Institute in Germany, recently had a few press releases, urging for tests for at least ALL respiratory tract infections.

What one of the leading experts, Prof. Drosten, also mentioned is that current (PCR) tests have considerable false positives. The effect of such FP at large scale can hardly be estimated.

I really hope that you are able to find a solution and can bring up a scalable and reliable solution, after the promises. If not, there will only remain the impression that this could be a Silicon Valley type of talk the walk, as people heard it from other companies in the past.

Re: A Third Solution

#450

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's the mandatory part that's rankling centimeter, and I see their point. Once you give powers to the state in an emergency situation it's really hard to roll them back. See the PATRIOT act for example. Is there a way to effectively get universal compliance without implicitly granting permanent new powers to violate civil liberties? I suspect relying on people to test themselves daily without mandating it wo…

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 it.

Post reply on HN