One thing. People are discovering the precautionary principle live. Which we ahould be applying in many other fields
It's not just political reasoning imo - we don't have unlimited testing facilities. Using them to conduct a truly random daily sampling would be pretty inappropriate!
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Yeh that's pretty messed up. I do think the idea that we should be waiting for good evidence in a time of crisis is not well thought-out tho
End of conversation
-
-
-
And i doubt random sampling would really work anyways
-
Yes, that too. How do you practically test 'random' people without instigating panic?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
While factual, the statement that "we don't have unlimited testing facilities" countenances a reality in which 1) we are even approaching the limit of "unlimited" facilities 2) tests that ARE available are being used rationally and without any sociopolitical+economic dimension
-
To be fair, I'm talking from an Australian context where we are testing at a rate 100s of times higher than in the US. Regardless, I don't think there's any realistic suggestion that a random sample is possible and/or ethical at this point
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This is an underrated point. The primary threat here is overwhelming our surge capacity and random sampling would add demand for testing. I don't know this, but I assume few countries have the capacity to add an adequate random sample on top of need to test the sick or exposed.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.