Covid 19 Testing

[Ellener]

I just heard a local public service announcement recommending we all try to get Covid 19 testing 'to protect our neighbours as many carriers are asymptomatic'.

Whilst I would not be surprised, many illnesses live in healthy people without producing symptoms, what does it actually mean in two ways for the current situation:

1. there still seems to be a shortage of tests in most places, surely we should be saving a significant number of the test kits for further localised outbreaks so that people can be safely admitted to hospitals etc.

and 2. what exactly does it mean if a person is asymptomatic and a potential source of infection- are they meant to stay home indefinitely?

 

[FMW]

We had the same information out this afternoon, that the goal is to test everyone, regardless of whether they have symptoms.  The thing is, unless we test every single day or lock everyone away into complete isolation forever, the test is only good for that moment in time.  

[The Outlaw]

And beyond that is supposedly mandatory vaccinations. 

[FMW]

I have no problems with vaccinations and it can't come soon enough for me.  But it will certainly be interesting to see what happens if the government actually tries to make it mandatory.  So many antivaxers around that I don't think are going to be swayed one bit by the current Pandemic.  

[Redhead14]

Yeah, and all the "citizens" who can't even be bothered with taking a couple of seconds to put on/wear masks and feeling like the government usurped their rights with lock downs, etc. will be bitching about that too . . .

They don't think about the fact that polio is extremely rare now and a number of very serious illnesses. 

Edited May 21, 2020 by Redhead14

[The Outlaw]

Just now, FMW said:

But it will certainly be interesting to see what happens if the government actually tries to make it mandatory.

That's the scary thing. 

[Foxhall]

3 hours ago, Ellener said:

what exactly does it mean if a person is asymptomatic and a potential source of infection- are they meant to stay home indefinitely?

this was the old "typhoid mary "scenario for the unfortunate lady who had to spend many years in exiled isolation,

at least covid 19 is generally only a passing illness so two to three weeks avoidance should be enough!

[Ellener]

7 hours ago, Foxhall said:

at least covid 19 is generally only a passing illness so two to three weeks avoidance should be enough!

You mean someone is only infectious for two or three weeks? 

So not a 'typhoid' situation where a carrier is a lifelong risk to others?

There's so much nonsense and speculation right now it's hard to determine what the facts are.

7 hours ago, The Outlaw said:

mandatory vaccinations. 

I can't see that happening. Not in free countries anyway.

@Redhead14 I doubt people would tolerate any vaccine being tested on thousands of children as a 'calculated risk scenario' as the polio vaccine was in 1954. 

 

[CaliforniaGirl]

I really doubt it will be mandatory.

[elaine567]

3 hours ago, Ellener said:

There's so much nonsense and speculation right now it's hard to determine what the facts are.

That is because they don't yet know "the facts".
"Facts" can take  years even decades of often conflicting research to be finally accepted as "fact"
This thing has only been here since December, we know so little about it.
We can speculate, we can assume, we can look at the numbers, we can make educated guesses, but only time will really tell.

[d0nnivain]

Testing seems pointless to me for the general public although I think it's a good idea for health care workers so they aren't spreading it.   Like somebody said, there aren't enough tests & testing negative on one day doesn't mean you won't catch it next week.  

I really hope they don't make vaccines mandatory.  I'm not an anti-vaxer per se but there is a difference between something that has been around for generations & is proven to work with no or minimal side effects but something new that we won't know how it reacts over time or what effect it may have on the next generation .. . no thanks.  It's anecdotal evidence at best but I know 3 people who developed geon beret syndrome after taking the swine flu vaccine.  

I'd be much more interested in a treatment then some alleged preventative especially because this thing mutates so fast.  

[Redhead14]

6 hours ago, Ellener said:

You mean someone is only infectious for two or three weeks? 

So not a 'typhoid' situation where a carrier is a lifelong risk to others?

There's so much nonsense and speculation right now it's hard to determine what the facts are.

I can't see that happening. Not in free countries anyway.

@Redhead14 I doubt people would tolerate any vaccine being tested on thousands of children as a 'calculated risk scenario' as the polio vaccine was in 1954. 

 

There isn't one piece of solid information available to anyone.  We don't have much choice but to speculate and assume that we need to do whatever is necessary or we feel comfortable about doing to protect ourselves.  What we do know is that everyone in China, for instance, is still wearing masks.

And, like someone said in another thread, they are admiring Trump for taking an experimental drug to prevent him from developing Covid and saving a few monkeys so maybe he can be one of the guinea pigs for the vaccine as well.  The medical/scientific communities and knowledge and procedures have come a long way since 1954. 

 

 

[Art_Critic]

3 minutes ago, Redhead14 said:

And, like someone said in another thread, they are admiring Trump for taking an experimental drug to prevent him from developing Covid

It's statements like this that make me wonder where you get your information or that you are just posting to misinform, the drug ISN'T experimental.. it has been being swallowed by HUMANS for 65 years.. and in a MUCH HIGHER DOSAGE than it is being used for Covid-19

 

 

[elaine567]

Trump is not alone in taking that drug. new trial started.
10000 UK healthcare workers and 40 000 world wide.
 

[amaysngrace]

Just now, elaine567 said:

10000 UK healthcare workers

You mean those educated people?  Go figure...

[d0nnivain]

I didn't know there were other people taking the drug for Covid. I thought it had already been debunked as ineffective.  

[d0nnivain]

36 minutes ago, d0nnivain said:

people who developed geon beret syndrome 

Sometimes I hate the internet.  I knew I didn't know how to spell this condition.  The above came back as valid but it's really Guillain-Barré syndrome.  

[elaine567]

Chloroquine, Hydroxychloroquine and placebo. Randomised trial for people who don't have Covid and have never had it, to see if it stops people from getting it.

[Redhead14]

1 minute ago, Art_Critic said:

It's statements like this that make me wonder where you get your information or that you are just posting to misinform, the drug ISN'T experimental.. it has been being swallowed by HUMANS for 65 years.. and in a MUCH HIGHER DOSAGE than it is being used for Covid-19

 

 

It is experimental for treating Covid and medications that are used to treat other conditions than they were created for can cause serious side effects besides the usual side effects.  Taking a drug for disease or condition you don't have is a bad idea.  I wouldn't "test" anything on the President of the United States especially during crisis.  There are people who are volunteering already but we haven't had much time to observe it's effectiveness.  He tested negative and doesn't doesn't have symptoms so how can you give a drug to prevent a disease and say that that drug actually did that especially since we haven't had much time to observe whether it does that or not???????

[elaine567]

4 minutes ago, Redhead14 said:

since we haven't had much time to observe whether it does that or not???????

Hence the new trial...

[elaine567]

The drug is pretty innocuous, has been used for decades and is regarded as being a safe drug, it is not as if it is likely to poison the President or anyone else, but if it stops him getting Coronavirus which could in fact kill him, then it is probably worth it.

[d0nnivain]

12 minutes ago, Redhead14 said:

 I wouldn't "test" anything on the President of the United States especially during crisis.  There are people who are volunteering already but we haven't had much time to observe it's effectiveness.  He tested negative and doesn't doesn't have symptoms so how can you give a drug to prevent a disease and say that that drug actually did that especially since we haven't had much time to observe whether it does that or not???????

The President wants it. Somebody with a DEA # thought it was a good idea to acquiesce to his demand.  Don't you know that is how Elvis, Michael Jackson & probably Prince OD'd?  They were powerful people who convinced gullible doctors to give them what they wanted.  

[d0nnivain]

1 minute ago, elaine567 said:

The drug is pretty innocuous, has been used for decades and is regarded as being a safe drug, 

It is not innocuous.  It had a lot of serious side effects including heart attacks & retinal damage:  https://www.pdr.net/drug-summary/Plaquenil-hydroxychloroquine-sulfate-1911 

[Redhead14]

Oh, I understand why it happened.  It just doesn't seem like a bright idea to use a person in a position of power as a guinea pig (which is an insult to guinea pigs in this case).  Nevertheless, its BS.  And, I want to see Trump's updated stock portfolio - how many shares of stock did he pick up with the makers of the drug???

[Redhead14]

4 minutes ago, elaine567 said:

 but if it stops him getting Coronavirus which could in fact kill him, then it is probably worth it.

How are we going to know if it prevented him from getting it????  We don't know if it prevents anyone from getting it yet.