[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by jdsl1998

Can you be nice?

Who are you asking? There are 29 other posts on this thread before yours.

Back on topic and in response to DianeM who asks:

In all sincerity, what will testing everybody prove? You may test negative on Monday but you may test positive on Thursday and asked to remain at home which we should be doing anyway. Will we ask those who may have a mild infection to wear a “C” on their shirts until they’re negative? Sounds like something tried before. You are not shoving a stick up my nose for no good reason.

At some point, anyone who tests *positive* might be ordered into isolation or given a stay-at-home *order* rather than request with tons of exceptions. That would be to restrict spreading to the general populace.

They can't do that if you don't get tested at all.

Yes you could test negative today and contract the virus tomorrow.

However if you know you do NOT have the virus, you know you're able to take necessary precautions from catching it - and can breathe a sigh of relief - at least today.

And if you DO have the virus - precautions can be made so YOU don't spread it to anyone else.

You're free to do as you please UNTIL your freedom steps on the freedoms of everyone else.

My freedom - and right - to LIFE - supersedes your freedom and right to congregate in close proximity to me.

[DianeM]

Originally Posted by GoPacers

I've yet to hear from anyone who understands what is really happening in the US and globally suggest that we don't need more widespread testing. While you may not want a "stick up your nose" it is not for "no good reason." This isn't going away until we have a vaccine or until enough people contract the virus and develop antibodies and are not able to continue to spread the virus (R naught is < 1). Many (most?) epidemiologists believe this is probable but we don't know enough to say for certain. We don't know how quickly the virus mutates and more importantly, if the antibodies are effective against the mutations. This is why the serological test that Dr. Birx is talking about is so important and then they'll stick a needle in your arm to draw blood.

That "stick up your nose" may save a stick in the ground for someone else, possibly even a friend or loved one. While I don't want to contract the virus myself, I'm more worried about being asymptomatic and infecting other people - particularly my friends and family.

So you want to test 330 million? I get testing for those exhibiting symptoms. I will not submit to tests for exploration if I’m not symptomatic. Like I said earlier, you can be negative on Monday and positive on Thursday. And as for drawing blood, can’t do that without my permission either.

[DianeM]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

Who are you asking? There are 29 other posts on this thread before yours.

Back on topic and in response to DianeM who asks:


At some point, anyone who tests *positive* might be ordered into isolation or given a stay-at-home *order* rather than request with tons of exceptions. That would be to restrict spreading to the general populace.

They can't do that if you don't get tested at all.

Yes you could test negative today and contract the virus tomorrow.

However if you know you do NOT have the virus, you know you're able to take necessary precautions from catching it - and can breathe a sigh of relief - at least today.

And if you DO have the virus - precautions can be made so YOU don't spread it to anyone else.

You're free to do as you please UNTIL your freedom steps on the freedoms of everyone else.

My freedom - and right - to LIFE - supersedes your freedom and right to congregate in close proximity to me.

I did address symptoms requiring testing and being instructed to stay home. I am not foolishly congregating and hanging out but rather I am adhering to stay at home advice and social distancing. I will not get a stick up my nose to assuage someone else’s fear. Not going to happen.

[GoPacers]

Originally Posted by DianeM

So you want to test 330 million? I get testing for those exhibiting symptoms. I will not submit to tests for exploration if I’m not symptomatic. Like I said earlier, you can be negative on Monday and positive on Thursday. And as for drawing blood, can’t do that without my permission either.

SMH and

[Marathon Man]

Some people simply refuse to be part of the solution.

[biker1]

The asymptomatic testing at the Polo Grounds is for a research study. It has nothing to do with fear and everything to do with collecting data to shed additional light on the coronavirus. Do what you want but don't make up nonsense reasons for not helping the researchers.

Originally Posted by DianeM

I did address symptoms requiring testing and being instructed to stay home. I am not foolishly congregating and hanging out but rather I am adhering to stay at home advice and social distancing. I will not get a stick up my nose to assuage someone else’s fear. Not going to happen.

[GoPacers]

I know I'm wasting my time trying to educate some folks as to why testing matters but here goes...

"In the US, an estimated 25% of coronavirus carriers have no symptoms," said the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

There is similar data from all over the world if you don't believe the CDC.

[DianeM]

You can say what you wish. We cannot test 330 million citizens. And even if we could, Monday you’re negative and Thursday you’re positive. You would need to test daily to remain sure you are negative. It is way more important to be able to test someone exhibiting possible signs to get them some help than it is to waste the tests and lab time on someone without symptoms who has practiced suggested distancing.

[Aloha1]

Originally Posted by JoMar

The modeling comes from Harvard and Columbia University for a couple, the success has been documented in cases in Washington State and the Bay Area and they are two areas that were very high in cases and they locked down far harder than in Florida and even New York and New Jersey. The data is out there.

Not my question. I asked where the source was that 38 cases were Villagers.