Re:Surviving the coronavirus, then testing positive again
by pmoriarty on Friday March 13, 2020 @12:50PM
(#22568804)
"Testing is NOT a solution. Testing will not make a sick person better. ... Tracking this is a waste of resources"
This is just wrong on so many levels.
First, on an individual level, if doctors know you're infected with COVID-19, and your illness is severe enough, they might be willing to try an experimental treatment (like chloroquine) that they wouldn't for seasonal influenza or some other illness.
You might also be offered to participate in one of the hundreds of research studies that are ongoing in trying to find a treatment for this disease. You would not be a candidate for those studies unless they knew that you did in fact have COVID-19.
If doctors know you are infected with COVID-19, they are also more likely to isolate you and wear protective equipment that is essential to keep the disease from spreading to our precious medical personnel and vulnerable hospital populations.
Then, on the public health level, we need to understand how this disease is spreading, who is the most vulnerable and who is the least vulnerable and why. We also need to understand who has recovered and why they've done so, and if people have gotten sick again from re-infection, and why. Alternatively, maybe people have had been re-exposed to the disease but not gotten sick. Why is that?
We need to effectively plan for future outbreaks, to allocate precious resources to places that are the most affected, to quarantine areas that are hardest hit.
None of that can be done unless we have a better grasp on who has the disease and who doesn't.
Testing is critically important for all of this and more.
To advocate for the abandonment of testing simply because it's not perfect is madness. It's better to drive with one eye open than both eyes closed.
This is just wrong on so many levels.
First, on an individual level, if doctors know you're infected with COVID-19, and your illness is severe enough, they might be willing to try an experimental treatment (like chloroquine) that they wouldn't for seasonal influenza or some other illness.
You might also be offered to participate in one of the hundreds of research studies that are ongoing in trying to find a treatment for this disease. You would not be a candidate for those studies unless they knew that you did in fact have COVID-19.
If doctors know you are infected with COVID-19, they are also more likely to isolate you and wear protective equipment that is essential to keep the disease from spreading to our precious medical personnel and vulnerable hospital populations.
Then, on the public health level, we need to understand how this disease is spreading, who is the most vulnerable and who is the least vulnerable and why. We also need to understand who has recovered and why they've done so, and if people have gotten sick again from re-infection, and why. Alternatively, maybe people have had been re-exposed to the disease but not gotten sick. Why is that?
We need to effectively plan for future outbreaks, to allocate precious resources to places that are the most affected, to quarantine areas that are hardest hit.
None of that can be done unless we have a better grasp on who has the disease and who doesn't.
Testing is critically important for all of this and more.
To advocate for the abandonment of testing simply because it's not perfect is madness. It's better to drive with one eye open than both eyes closed.