Post Reply
1 of 1
Feds about to get serious about testing?
4,476 Views |
33 Replies |
Last: 5 yr ago by cone
They said the same thing weeks ago. It's time for more results and less talk and backslapping
Any day Walmart/CVS/Walgreens will be up to 10 testing sites
The reality is that we have already dramatically increased our ability to test in the US. We're closing on 3.5m tests performed and are now barely behind SK on tests per capita and our testing trend is exploding upward. If we aren't already fairly close to what we need in testing capacity then not many other places in the world are either.
I'm not sure what kind of daily capacity we need to hit for the whole country, but we have so many different testing labs and testing arrangements for each healthcare provider that the goal for each region regarding increasing testing capacity is going to vary greatly.
I'm not sure what kind of daily capacity we need to hit for the whole country, but we have so many different testing labs and testing arrangements for each healthcare provider that the goal for each region regarding increasing testing capacity is going to vary greatly.
Worth noting that the information in that twitter thread is now 10 days old.
We had tested about 1.9m at that point, and should be well over 3.4m at end of today. Our daily testing rate is on a pretty steep upslope still as well.
We had tested about 1.9m at that point, and should be well over 3.4m at end of today. Our daily testing rate is on a pretty steep upslope still as well.
April 13th is 3 days ago?
HotardAg07 said:
April 13th is 3 days ago?
The tweet was from April 13, referencing what was going on "the previous Tuesday" per the tweet itself.
It's a story about LAST MONTH.
USA has tested over 3 million people in a month, close to 1% of our population.
Is it perfect, no.
I'm not bothered that the CDC didn't "trust' the tests from other countries. The entire world looks to the FDA for testing on an everyday basis and the "tests" from other countries have proven to be faulty.
Abbott will have 20 million antibody tests available in May and every month after that. That's one company. It's coming....
USA has tested over 3 million people in a month, close to 1% of our population.
Is it perfect, no.
I'm not bothered that the CDC didn't "trust' the tests from other countries. The entire world looks to the FDA for testing on an everyday basis and the "tests" from other countries have proven to be faulty.
Abbott will have 20 million antibody tests available in May and every month after that. That's one company. It's coming....
https://coronavirus.1point3acres.com/en/testHotardAg07 said:
Our daily testing capacity has actually plateaued.
This site says 3.3mm tested.
These are the figures for public hospital systems only.Freeze Frame said:https://coronavirus.1point3acres.com/en/testHotardAg07 said:
Our daily testing capacity has actually plateaued.
This site says 3.3mm tested.
They do not include places like Quest Diagnostic and how many they have tested.
I think there has been some misinformation about the Abbott test specifically. It does produce fast, point of care responses. However, since one test can go through it at a time, and each test takes 5-13 minuets, it does not have the same volume of throughput as some of the other technologies. Apparently it's being positioned for use on people where the rapid response would have greater value, like on healthcare workers:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/investigations/2020/04/13/abbott-labs-live-up-coronavirus-testing-expectations/2941027001/
I think we are going to get there on testing, we just have to continue to remove bottlenecks as they come up.
The reason I posted the thread from Rukmini Callimachi was that she systematically goes through the test from drive through to result and identifies all the potential sources for bottlenecks, such as nurses to take the samples, PPE, reagents, machines, lab capacity, etc. It's a complicated multi-variate problem, which is why we haven't been able to resolve it in one month.
While I am disappointed in the current plateau in daily testing capacity, I do have faith that we'll overcome the issues.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/investigations/2020/04/13/abbott-labs-live-up-coronavirus-testing-expectations/2941027001/
I think we are going to get there on testing, we just have to continue to remove bottlenecks as they come up.
The reason I posted the thread from Rukmini Callimachi was that she systematically goes through the test from drive through to result and identifies all the potential sources for bottlenecks, such as nurses to take the samples, PPE, reagents, machines, lab capacity, etc. It's a complicated multi-variate problem, which is why we haven't been able to resolve it in one month.
While I am disappointed in the current plateau in daily testing capacity, I do have faith that we'll overcome the issues.
The date of that tweet was April 13th, where 2.9MM tests was accurate.
If you go to the source of the data, it says the same:
https://covidtracking.com/data/us-daily
If you go to the source of the data, it says the same:
https://covidtracking.com/data/us-daily
That's not true, we haven't done 3.3MM tests excluding private testing labs.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/16/abbott-abt-earnings-q1-2020.html
it's not just the ID now test...they have another one. I was wrong about May, it's June they'll have 20mm.
it's not just the ID now test...they have another one. I was wrong about May, it's June they'll have 20mm.
Most of the western world has already passed South Korea.DTP02 said:
The reality is that we have already dramatically increased our ability to test in the US. We're closing on 3.5m tests performed and are now barely behind SK on tests per capita and our testing trend is exploding upward. If we aren't already fairly close to what we need in testing capacity then not many other places in the world are either.
The US is at 10,108 per 1 million residents. South Korea is at 10,509.
Much of Europe is at 16,000 plus.
Germany, Portugal, Spain, Norway, and others are all at 20,000 or above.
South Korean numbers are so low because they don't need to be much higher.
They started testing early and often. The layered that on top of contact tracing and isolation of those that test positive.
It doesn't take as many test to maintain a containment strategy once you reach a fairly flat invection rate
They started testing early and often. The layered that on top of contact tracing and isolation of those that test positive.
It doesn't take as many test to maintain a containment strategy once you reach a fairly flat invection rate
Duncan Idaho said:
South Korean numbers are so low because they don't need to be much higher.
They started testing early and often. The layered that on top of contact tracing and isolation of those that test positive.
It doesn't take as many test to maintain a containment strategy once you reach a fairly flat invection rate
And today they had 22 new cases. Extremely flat.
229 total deaths.
And you know what they got along with those nice charts?
A functional economy and a more relaxed population.
A functional economy and a more relaxed population.
We have multiple drive-in sites within half an hour of us, and we are fairly rural.
Anecdotally, the testing is ramping up.
Anecdotally, the testing is ramping up.
I know a lot about a little, and a little about a lot.
Duncan Idaho said:
And you know what they got along with those nice charts?
A functional economy and a more relaxed population.
They used 'invasive' contact tracing, phone tracking. Personal experience says that wont fly here. I wish it would, but it won't.
The important ratio is not tests per capita, it's test per case load. South Korea has tested something like 50 people for every positive they find. We've tested like 6 per every case. In order to find all the people you've contacted and test them in a non shutdown world, you need to be able to test 10-20 people per positive test to stop the spread. Maybe more if they went to church, or a party, etc.
lol getting serious now?
this is ridiculous
this is ridiculous
ETFan said:Duncan Idaho said:
And you know what they got along with those nice charts?
A functional economy and a more relaxed population.
They used 'invasive' contact tracing, phone tracking. Personal experience says that wont fly here. I wish it would, but it won't.
GIve up an inch, a mile gets taken.
And nor should it. That thing from the 1700's....I'm a believer.Beat40 said:ETFan said:Duncan Idaho said:
And you know what they got along with those nice charts?
A functional economy and a more relaxed population.
They used 'invasive' contact tracing, phone tracking. Personal experience says that wont fly here. I wish it would, but it won't.
GIve up an inch, a mile gets taken.
something about crying over spilled milk at this point...
Maybe a stupid question, but given this is so contagious, doesn't it stand to reason that for an individual, being tested more than once might be required? In other words, I get tested this week, I'm good - 10 days later, I start feeling bad, get tested again, maybe I'm ok, maybe I'm not. A month later, again. If this is true for everyone, doesn't that put a tremendous strain of the program?
OKC~Ag said:
something about crying over spilled milk at this point...
Or it could be saying "maybe we should get a mop and clean this mess up instead of walking around/through it and ****ing up the rest of the house."
It's very important to know whether people are resistant so that they can go one with their lives. Folks who are not resistant should continue following the guidelines of social distancing, etc. until an effective antiviral has been found or vaccine developed. That is the true value of the antibody testing.One-Eyed Fat Man said:
Maybe a stupid question, but given this is so contagious, doesn't it stand to reason that for an individual, being tested more than once might be required? In other words, I get tested this week, I'm good - 10 days later, I start feeling bad, get tested again, maybe I'm ok, maybe I'm not. A month later, again. If this is true for everyone, doesn't that put a tremendous strain of the program?
One-Eyed Fat Man said:
Maybe a stupid question, but given this is so contagious, doesn't it stand to reason that for an individual, being tested more than once might be required? In other words, I get tested this week, I'm good - 10 days later, I start feeling bad, get tested again, maybe I'm ok, maybe I'm not. A month later, again. If this is true for everyone, doesn't that put a tremendous strain of the program?
True and true.
Gov. Abbott acknowledged in his press conference that testing is going to dramatically increase in Texas and correspondingly positive cases are expected to go up. Testing ramps up towards end of April or early May, but no real details shared.
Yep, that seems to be whole basis on which opening up is predicated; as it should be.Fitch said:
Gov. Abbott acknowledged in his press conference that testing is going to dramatically increase in Texas and correspondingly positive cases are expected to go up. Testing ramps up towards end of April or early May, but no real details shared.
those real details are pretty criticalQuote:
Testing ramps up towards end of April or early May, but no real details shared.
Featured Stories
See All
36:20
7h ago
2.7k
Expect dramatics: A&M hoops heads back to OKC in March
by Olin Buchanan
Aggies outlast LSU as Perez stays hot in 3-2 win
by Kayla Gaither