• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

OT: Coronavirus Resources - and other things to not worry about

Preston

The Artist Formerly Known as Goldust

This is good for us in Canada because we are professionals at following and not leading/innovating. We have what, 38 million people in Canada? This really won't be all that expensive to roll out. These are cheap tests and will allow us to keep everything open in all honesty. Lockdowns wouldn't really be necessary. There will still be risks and masks will be required, but this is a tool that we have available collecting dust that will greatly reduce those risks.
 
Last edited:

hockeylover

Well-known member
The important part would be messaging, which seems to be where we struggle. It would be important to stress that this wouldn't actually replace social distancing and masking but I think many people will treat it that way.

It'd be wonderful in healthcare settings and places like my work though.
 

UWHabs

Well-known member


Nice videos on the tests for those wondering how it'll work.

I do think this simplifies it a little too much in assuming that people will actually do these tests before going out. But you could probably do it in a limited way by saying, "hey, schools are open, but you need to show this morning's quick test results before we can let you in".

I do think their problem though is that with however many of them you have out there, you're going to have a ton of false negatives. And you're going to have a ton of assholes who will take like 3 or 4 of them to try to sneak in a negative result so that they can be allowed into the store/restaurant/whatever.

And then, you're also going to get way too many people who take it easy because of the tests. People already have trouble following the rules - can you imagine the Karens who have a negative test result but are still told to wear a mask at the grocery store?
 

Preston

The Artist Formerly Known as Goldust
I do think this simplifies it a little too much in assuming that people will actually do these tests before going out. But you could probably do it in a limited way by saying, "hey, schools are open, but you need to show this morning's quick test results before we can let you in".

I do think their problem though is that with however many of them you have out there, you're going to have a ton of false negatives. And you're going to have a ton of assholes who will take like 3 or 4 of them to try to sneak in a negative result so that they can be allowed into the store/restaurant/whatever.

And then, you're also going to get way too many people who take it easy because of the tests. People already have trouble following the rules - can you imagine the Karens who have a negative test result but are still told to wear a mask at the grocery store?
False negatives aren't much of an issue with these for the reasons given in the first video. But yeah, of course there will be people who give zero fucks or who will abuse the system like with anything in life. That doesn't mean you shouldn't do it though. This has been proven to work across several countries. It's not a silver bullet. Nothing is. Not even the vaccines most likely. But it's something that will help a shit ton. The same people who don't take the pandemic seriously now won't take these tests seriously; I don't think there will be much of a difference in behavior. They said the same thing with people wearing masks and I'm not really seeing the difference.

Combined with vaccines it'll get us to a relatively normal life fairly quickly. And honestly even in the absence of vaccines things probably would be fairly normal with just these tests in the summer. Not that I expect them to be available by then but it probably would cut down on the case numbers a poop ton. It ain't a pandemic ender by itself but it's just another tool we have waiting for us that we haven't used yet. Unacceptable.

And btw I don't think you'll need proof of a negative to go anywhere. It would be relying on human decency which I do think most folks have. But obviously some don't. That's why I said there is some risk and it's not a silver bullet. But you would hope, say, at least 90% of people with a positive test don't go out in public. That's good enough to help a fucking lot honestly.
 

UWHabs

Well-known member
False negatives aren't much of an issue with these for the reasons given in the first video. But yeah, of course there will be people who give zero fucks or who will abuse the system like with anything in life. That doesn't mean you shouldn't do it though. This has been proven to work across several countries. It's not a silver bullet. Nothing is. Not even the vaccines most likely. But it's something that will help a shit ton. The same people who don't take the pandemic seriously now won't take these tests seriously; I don't think there will be much of a difference in behavior. They said the same thing with people wearing masks and I'm not really seeing the difference.

Combined with vaccines it'll get us to a relatively normal life fairly quickly. And honestly even in the absence of vaccines things probably would be fairly normal with just these tests in the summer. Not that I expect them to be available by then but it probably would cut down on the case numbers a poop ton. It ain't a pandemic ender by itself but it's just another tool we have waiting for us that we haven't used yet. Unacceptable.

And btw I don't think you'll need proof of a negative to go anywhere. It would be relying on human decency which I do think most folks have. But obviously some don't. That's why I said there is some risk and it's not a silver bullet. But you would hope, say, at least 90% of people with a positive test don't go out in public. That's good enough to help a fucking lot honestly.

You're way too much of an idealist in these. Even if you have them and give them out for free on every street corner, if you rely on human decency for this then we're not really any better than would be now if things are open. If you allow, say, a bar to be open but don't force them to see proof of a negative test before letting you in, then the same assholes who don't care now are going to go out and still infect others. The only reason numbers are starting to trend is because those assholes literally cannot go infect others because nothing is open.

Now, I would agree that having them would be better than not having them. And I think in places that are slightly more self-policing, you could allow things to open up in a limited capacity more by self-regulating. In that, if you have them available and basically tell schools and offices, "hey, we're going to let you open, you should be damn sure people showing up test negative on a daily basis." But the problem is that unless if you actually force people to show the negative result, people aren't going to use it. It's kind of like the Covid apps - sure, having the apps is nice, and if 90% of people who use the app use it properly, it helps. But if only a fraction of people are using it, then it's not worth a damn penny.

But really, the freaking White House tried this system out and still had multiple outbreaks because they relied on this to try to lead a normal life. Sure, they probably had a higher number of idiots who didn't care than the general population, but I'm not sure it's a lot higher.

tl;dr: people are assholes and I wouldn't trust the average person with my life
 

Preston

The Artist Formerly Known as Goldust
You're way too much of an idealist in these. Even if you have them and give them out for free on every street corner, if you rely on human decency for this then we're not really any better than would be now if things are open. If you allow, say, a bar to be open but don't force them to see proof of a negative test before letting you in, then the same assholes who don't care now are going to go out and still infect others. The only reason numbers are starting to trend is because those assholes literally cannot go infect others because nothing is open.

Now, I would agree that having them would be better than not having them. And I think in places that are slightly more self-policing, you could allow things to open up in a limited capacity more by self-regulating. In that, if you have them available and basically tell schools and offices, "hey, we're going to let you open, you should be damn sure people showing up test negative on a daily basis." But the problem is that unless if you actually force people to show the negative result, people aren't going to use it. It's kind of like the Covid apps - sure, having the apps is nice, and if 90% of people who use the app use it properly, it helps. But if only a fraction of people are using it, then it's not worth a damn penny.

But really, the freaking White House tried this system out and still had multiple outbreaks because they relied on this to try to lead a normal life. Sure, they probably had a higher number of idiots who didn't care than the general population, but I'm not sure it's a lot higher.

tl;dr: people are assholes and I wouldn't trust the average person with my life
Oh bars and restaurants should not be open other than patio seating. I'm not gonna go along with that in any case. You could open almost everything else though, with the same safety measures in place. Of course, you only do this after the virus is in control. You wouldn't go into a province with a 5+% positivity rate and say "oh we have these tests now, it's open house!" You do continue keeping things, including schools, closed until we're in a better spot. I think you're getting hung up on the outliers that will actively infect people on purpose. They will exist but it's an insignificant issue compared to the benefits that testing will have.


And again.. These tests have proven to work in other countries. It's a no brainer really.
 

Preston

The Artist Formerly Known as Goldust
Some evidence that the new UK variant is a touch more deadly. For every 1,000 60+year olds who are infected with the original virus, roughly 10 would be expected to die. With the new variant 13 or 14 people might be expected to die. Not fully verified data but they think this is likely the case based on PRELIMINARY DATA. Obviously nowhere near obtaining enough data for the other variants.
 

mbow30

Well-known member
Some evidence that the new UK variant is a touch more deadly. For every 1,000 60+year olds who are infected with the original virus, roughly 10 would be expected to die. With the new variant 13 or 14 people might be expected to die. Not fully verified data but they think this is likely the case based on PRELIMINARY DATA. Obviously nowhere near obtaining enough data for the other variants.

Death numbers should also be expected to go up if more people are hospitalIzed.
 

Preston

The Artist Formerly Known as Goldust
impressive virus
A virus' first version is always its worst version! Mutations will obviously slow down once the virus is less prevalent. But for now we're looking at dealing with a more transmissive and possibly slightly more deadly virus that will soon take over North America (but vaccines should work on it quite well) and eventually we have at least 2 variants that have more immunity escape potential but aren't too prevalent in NA just yet. We got this though. Science BABY!
 
Top