An argument for *random* COVID-19 testing. Tesing is biased toward the sick & ill. So we don't know how much COVID-19 there is or how dangerous it is. This uncertainty => over and/or under reaction. We can't manage what we don't measure respresentatively. https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/17/a-fiasco-in-the-making-as-the-coronavirus-pandemic-takes-hold-we-are-making-decisions-without-reliable-data/ …
I disagree wholeheartedly. With an infinite supply of testing and a perfectly happy population, perhaps, but in the real world we care most about identifying as many cases as possible in as short a space of time with limited testing facilities
-
-
Imagine if your sick relative was denied testing because the government decided they wanted a good statistical sample. Can you imagine? It'd be chaos
-
See the thread on ethics... There are lots of utilitarian vs deontological dilemmas here... Testing is but one of them. In itlay they are denying 80 year olds ICU's in favor of 40 year olds.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Wow, yes, we completely disagree. Learning about the prevalence of cases in regional & demographic subpopulations will help us find more true positives. Assuming testing ramps up over time, the tests later are better deployed with knowledge of where to deploy them.
-
Ofc testing will ramp up over time, but so will cases. If there's some hypothetical future where we are on top of the epidemic and have extra tests to run, sure. For now, it's not a good suggestion imo
- Show replies
New conversation -
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.