Hacker News Reader

Comment by cies | Hacker News Reader

A person tested negative should not be able to spread. A vaxed person may still spread. Where's your logic?

A person tested negative has just not been proven positive, which is different from being proven negative. PCR test sensitivity can be as low as 70%. https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.04.16.20066787

A vaccinated person may only spread if they are indeed infected, which is less common to begin with. Then, if they are indeed infected, the rate of transmission is much lower - as they usually don't develop heavy viral loads.

> A vaccinated person may only spread if they are indeed infected

Um, this is the case also for the unvaccinated.

That's why the sentence had a second half: ", which is less common to begin with." That's the purpose of a vaccination.

So why not have the negative test to add an extra layer of precaution? You're just saying that this bar of risk is acceptable for you but the other one isn't, which is arbitrarily chosen.

Oh I'm not against testing at all. I was just talking about why people used these these extra test centers in Germany: Because a negative test receipt was of equally weight as a prove of vaccination when participating in events etc. That will end, but that doesn't mean testing will stop. You can still go to a physician for PCR or do antigen tests.

> A person tested negative should not be able to spread.

False-negative results exist.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com