Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by mekster | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

mekster

> they have declined to test me because I don't meet the critical criteria: age > 60

What kind of nonsense rule is that? They're intentionally breaking the statistics.

Which country is this, if you don't mind saying?

View on HN

This is definitely happening all over the US.

The reason the counts are so low is the CDC refuses to test anyone.

Not just in the US. In most countries tests are extremely limited so they screen out massively.

Yes, I think CH and FR do that, they ask to self quarantine if you have symptoms. Italy was actually testing everyone afaik.

Japan does virtually no tests at all for example. On the other hand South Korea is a lot more into testing everyone.

And it takes 3-5 days for CDC results to come back. My whole family is in isolation due to potential exposure while we wait to find out if the sick person has cov-19.

Trump Inc gave up on CDC testing week and unleashed the more competent private sector. The first CDC portable test kit was defective making them [re]test at their central lab.

That meme is false and needs to die. Look at testing here [0], from the CDC website [1]. The CDC is just a part of this, and public labs are testing thousands per day right now. Expect this chart to keep going up.

[0] https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/images/lab-data-gr...

[1] https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/test...

The testing capacity simply doesn't exist.

It's a huge failure, but it's not a nonsense rule, it's a result of poor planning and mistakes made weeks ago.

In many cases testing shouldn't actually change the result, either. Suspected patients need to self-isolate, regardless of whether they actually are positive or not. Being positive doesn't necessarily require additional treatment and anyone who is sick enough to need hospitalization will need it whether they are positive or not. The main benefits I see of wider testing are a) better handle on spread of virus, b) despite the above, knowing one is positive could make the patient take self-isolation more seriously ("oh it's just a cold, I'll continue as normal" doesn't bode well).

I don't see much point in using limited resources just to satisfy the curiosity of people who are able to isolate themselves and recover unaided. In fact I had something with COVID-19 symptoms a week ago and I am certainly curious to know if I did have it or not. But I have since recovered and nobody I was with (so far) is sick so there's not a lot to gain by me being tested.

Feds have failed. We need to allow the states to determine who can run tests.

The testing capacity exists, if you count devices that have (still) not been approved for use. That is the primary nature of of the failure here.

This is a state Senator saying that there isn't enough reagent that is needed to prepare the samples for testing:

https://twitter.com/JeffJacksonNC/status/1238811865481990144

So if that is true, the testing capacity isn't going to be limited just by device approvals. Also need to establish the protocols for other reagents and so on.

Citation please?

Why does it seem like people are using this rapidly spreading deadly virus as an argument for their political views...

Yeah, but won't they at least put you in line if they intend to test? Sounds like the lack of capacity is a good excuse to lower the statistics.

My state is monitoring more people than they are testing:

https://www.michigan.gov/coronavirus/

I don't know what the decision matrix is, I am just saying that lack of testing capacity is a real part of it.

That's the reality my country as well, the czech republic

Reply on news.ycombinator.com