TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

A Third Solution

673 点作者 rafaelc大约 5 年前

97 条评论

dekhn大约 5 年前
I was curious about the company that&#x27;s being touted in this post so I did a little searching. The website doesn&#x27;t seem to have much on it.<p>I guess it&#x27;s a YC17 company. The founders are Caroline Landau, Tim Cornell, Walker McHugh. From 2016: Landau was an MBA candidate, the other two founders have biomedical research&#x2F;medical backgrounds: Walker McHugh, Co-Founder, PreDxion Bio &#x2F; Biomedical engineering candidate, University of Michigan Dr. Tim Cornell, Co-Founder, PreDxion Bio &#x2F; Pediatric Critical Care Physician, University of Michigan (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.hbs.edu&#x2F;openforum&#x2F;openforum.hbs.org&#x2F;goto&#x2F;challenge&#x2F;health-acceleration-challenge-2016&#x2F;predxion-bio-faster-results-saving-lives.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.hbs.edu&#x2F;openforum&#x2F;openforum.hbs.org&#x2F;goto&#x2F;challen...</a>)<p>At least until recently, the company focused on making diagnostics for immune disorders (microkine) for CAR-T patients which I can&#x27;t find much detail on. I don&#x27;t know if it&#x27;s related to the SPR-based tests mentioned in the pb post.<p>They received a government business grant (SBIR) in 2018 and have some VC funding.<p>It looks like this post demonstrates their pivot to a specific infectious disease, and from a hospital provider setting to a public setting.<p>As an ex-advisor to a successful (in bio) VC fund, this is not something I would really spend a lot of time considering. There are too many non-technical hurdles that would need to be jumped before this was widespread, popular, effective, and profitable.
评论 #22974633 未加载
评论 #22974603 未加载
评论 #22979292 未加载
评论 #22977380 未加载
评论 #22976844 未加载
lrpublic大约 5 年前
Quotes from the article:<p>“It’s easy to fall into dystopian visions of the future — a world shut down by one virus after another”<p>“It doesn’t have to be that way. ..... Ubiquitous screening is the key.”<p>The approach is interesting and the possibility of eliminating large scale spread of covid, flu and others is attractive.<p>However the idea of requiring a saliva swab from every visitor to an office or event has the potential to create an equally terrifying dystopian future where those samples are used to collect and use other data (DNA for example).<p>How long before screening companies offers to provide free screening and access control systems in return for anonymised data?<p>This kind of solution needs to have very well thought out privacy rules supported by strong and enforceable legislation to protect the individuals rights.
评论 #22976857 未加载
评论 #22975951 未加载
评论 #22977675 未加载
caymanjim大约 5 年前
This isn&#x27;t a unique idea. This is the mainstream view. Everyone knows we need more testing and that testing is the only way to effectively ease distancing rules. That was a pretty extensive writeup to say what we&#x27;ve been hearing from all rational information outlets for a month.
评论 #22973732 未加载
评论 #22973913 未加载
评论 #22974022 未加载
评论 #22976918 未加载
评论 #22973775 未加载
评论 #22978077 未加载
ggreer大约 5 年前
I really hope this works. Without some new testing technology, I just don&#x27;t see how we can stop the spread of this disease. A month ago, the US did about 100,000 tests per day. Yesterday, the US did about 200,000 tests. Growth in testing started off as exponential but now it looks linear.[1] Even if testing capability doubled every month, it would take 8 months before we could test every American once a week. (200,000 * 2^8 == 51,200,000, which is 15% of the population.)<p>It only took a couple of months for 20% of New Yorkers to get infected.[2] If we assume that half the population will get this disease over the next two years, and we assume an infection fatality rate of 0.3%, that&#x27;s around 500,000 deaths. (328,000,000 * 0.5 * 0.003 == 492,000). Those are optimistic projections. The IFR is likely higher and the R0 is somewhere between 3 and 9[3], so that means at somewhere between 60% and 90% of the population needs to be infected before we get herd immunity.[4]<p>Unless there are radical improvements in testing and&#x2F;or treatment, I think we&#x27;ll end up with at least 500,000 deaths in the US. That would mean we&#x27;re about 10% of the way through this catastrophe. So strap in, it&#x27;s gonna be a long ride.<p>1. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;COVID19Tracking&#x2F;status&#x2F;1253807175945744391" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;COVID19Tracking&#x2F;status&#x2F;12538071759457443...</a><p>2. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;NYGovCuomo&#x2F;status&#x2F;1253353516803993600" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;NYGovCuomo&#x2F;status&#x2F;1253353516803993600</a><p>3. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;wwwnc.cdc.gov&#x2F;eid&#x2F;article&#x2F;26&#x2F;7&#x2F;20-0282_article" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;wwwnc.cdc.gov&#x2F;eid&#x2F;article&#x2F;26&#x2F;7&#x2F;20-0282_article</a><p>4. For the relationship between R0 and herd immunity, see figure 2 of this paper: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;academic.oup.com&#x2F;cid&#x2F;article-pdf&#x2F;52&#x2F;7&#x2F;911&#x2F;847338&#x2F;cir007.pdf" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;academic.oup.com&#x2F;cid&#x2F;article-pdf&#x2F;52&#x2F;7&#x2F;911&#x2F;847338&#x2F;cir...</a>
评论 #22979038 未加载
评论 #22975624 未加载
zmmmmm大约 5 年前
The post refers to an alternative method of testing for COVID-19 based on surface plasmon resonance that would have significant advantages, but unfortunately it provides absolutely no real substantiation that the test exists or works. The link about surface plasmon resonance goes to a generic Wikipedia page, the link about saliva is a small scale study that was conducted on RT-PCR not surface plasmon resonance, and the actual link to the team goes to a nothing more than splash screen with the company logo on it.<p>If there is substance to this then it would be massively in Paul&#x27;s (and the company&#x27;s) interest to better link to that in both the post and the company web site. At the moment, it looks like at worst vaporware or at best, something so early stage it&#x27;s years out from viability.
评论 #22974729 未加载
评论 #22974490 未加载
评论 #22974837 未加载
评论 #22974526 未加载
评论 #22974731 未加载
tlb大约 5 年前
You can rank people by the likely benefit of testing them. Interestingly, it goes up as the square of the number of people they interact with daily. (Because their risk of having it increases, and also the number they are likely to spread it to.)<p>So you can allocate tests by sorting by (# of daily contacts in a closed space) ^ 2.<p>But as PB says, it should be practical to test everyone every day.
评论 #22973674 未加载
评论 #22977713 未加载
jawns大约 5 年前
&gt; If we were able to identify and quarantine everyone who is contagious, including those who are asymptomatic, then we could let everyone else out of lockdown and resume ordinary social and economic activity.<p>&gt; Even with imperfect screening, if we are able to prevent 90% of disease transmission, then the virus’s reproductive number, or R0, will drop below one and the pandemic will quickly fade. There is no risk of reintroduction from the outside because any new outbreaks will quickly be caught and contained. If used consistently, there will be no second wave, ever.<p>I&#x27;m not sure this &quot;test and release&quot; strategy works unless absolutely everybody gets tested simultaneously.<p>Even if testing of the total population can be completed in a week (a highly ambitious timeframe), there&#x27;s still time for people released on Day 1 to be reinfected by people who don&#x27;t get tested until Day 6.<p>Then you have to go through who knows how many follow-up rounds of testing absolutely everybody not in quarantine to identify those people. When responding to new outbreaks involves re-testing large populations of people, you&#x27;re going to run into many problems. Notification, compliance, testing fatigue, etc.<p>Sounds like a logistical nightmare.
评论 #22973710 未加载
评论 #22974105 未加载
评论 #22973786 未加载
评论 #22973745 未加载
评论 #22973733 未加载
评论 #22973847 未加载
评论 #22974070 未加载
distantaidenn大约 5 年前
This is essentially what South Korea did. Granted it was done in a different way but everyone was “tested.” I was there just as covid-19 was on the rise and every shop, every station, and every high traffic area had people set up with thermal guns. Shop staff were having their temps checked before their shifts started. Everyone was gloved and masked. And once they had a proper test in place it was made easily accessible — even set up drive through testing.<p>And now they are pretty much back to normal while much of the world is still at a standstill.
评论 #22974656 未加载
评论 #22974644 未加载
vikramkr大约 5 年前
Really interesting read and sounds like it could be a game changer for testing - I know in NY we&#x27;ve been clamoring for increased testing for a while to help us reopen. I&#x27;ve got two questions I&#x27;m curious about:<p>0) Sensitivity&#x2F;specificity: Any data yet on what the sensitivity and specificity of this form of test for SARS-COV-2 will be? And, is work in characterizing all of that far enough along that we can expect to see emergency authorization by the FDA and scale up happening sooner rather than later?<p>1) Reagent supply: The biggest problem with PCR tests and all seems to have been reagent shortages and supply chains dependent on manufacturers not able to scale. Assuming the test is approved, are there any operational advantages to this approach in terms of securing reagents to overcome that problem?<p>Thanks for the fascinating read!
评论 #22974308 未加载
评论 #22974338 未加载
nopinsight大约 5 年前
A very recent Yale study suggests promises for saliva-based detection:<p>“While saliva has shown promise for SARS-CoV-2 detection, very few studies have directly compared it to the current gold standard, nasopharyngeal (NP) swab. So, we compared NP and saliva samples from COVID-19 patients and self-collected samples from asymptomatic healthcare workers”<p>“COVID-19 patients: SARS-CoV-2 detection from saliva is comparable to (or better than!) NP swabs and more consistent over time ...”<p>“Plus, the detection of SARS-CoV-2 from the saliva of two asymptomatic healthcare workers (...and counting!) who tested negative from their NP swabs suggests that saliva could be a viable alternative for identifying mild or subclinical infections.”<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;awyllie13&#x2F;status&#x2F;1252996627217801218?s=20" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;awyllie13&#x2F;status&#x2F;1252996627217801218?s=2...</a>
Animats大约 5 年前
They&#x27;re in a &quot;startup incubator&quot; for bio firms in South San Francisco.[1][2] The incubator is run by a unit of Johnson and Johnson. Multiple companies (51 are listed, but some may no longer be there) share 30,000 square feet of workspace there. &quot;We welcome new resident companies with the infrastructure and tools they need to get up and running on day one. This capital efficient model takes time and investment out of the equation—eliminating the normal setup typically required of a startup.&quot;<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;businesssearch.sos.ca.gov&#x2F;Document&#x2F;RetrievePDF?Id=04265673-26160052" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;businesssearch.sos.ca.gov&#x2F;Document&#x2F;RetrievePDF?Id=04...</a><p>[2] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;jlabs.jnjinnovation.com&#x2F;locations&#x2F;jlabs-ssf" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;jlabs.jnjinnovation.com&#x2F;locations&#x2F;jlabs-ssf</a><p>[3] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;jlabs.jnjinnovation.com&#x2F;JLABSNavigator#&#x2F;location&#x2F;Bay%20Area%20-%20SSF" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;jlabs.jnjinnovation.com&#x2F;JLABSNavigator#&#x2F;location&#x2F;Bay...</a>
husein10大约 5 年前
PB, can you elaborate on which other possible answers you&#x27;ve found for fast, easy, and abundant tests?<p>I&#x27;m working with a team that has a test that detects proteins associated with covid. It works like a pregnancy test and does not need a special scanner. Would love to discuss further.
评论 #22974041 未加载
darkerside大约 5 年前
Solutions like this give me hope that we can actually return to something resembling normal life in the future. I hope Paul&#x27;s got everything he needs in funding and resources to pursue all three of his goals.
danieltillett大约 5 年前
I hope everyone has noticed that if this approach could wipe out COVID-19 it could wipe out influenza and even the common cold.
评论 #22974872 未加载
评论 #22974454 未加载
not_a_moth大约 5 年前
A fourth way: We throw as many resources as we can at sampling undiagnosed populations, like the recent NYC study that suggests 20% of the city (10% of the state) has antibodies already.<p>We could get real confidence that it&#x27;s safe enough to return to normal, acceping that COVID is a new disease that&#x27;s just going to be around, the 5th coronavirus that we deal with seasonally.
评论 #22974306 未加载
tolmasky大约 5 年前
There is an episode of Sliders (Fever, Season 1, Episode 3), where they slide into a world affected by an infection with no cure, and scanners have been placed at the entrance to every store to detect if you have it.<p>In the show the disease is used as a classist thing or something. Anyways, its bacterial not viral, and they discover than antibiotics were never discovered so the Professor scrapes some fungus off some trash and takes it and is cured.
评论 #22976910 未加载
DrNuke大约 5 年前
Cheap &amp; working saliva test would be such a tracking game changer that I am really hoping it works, so good luck!
sub7大约 5 年前
A) Does he have any financial interest in PreDxion Bio? This sounds like another smaller startup claiming bullshit.<p>B) Testing for O2 levels using already cheap + widely available pulse oximeters is probably an insufficient but necessary measure.
seafoam大约 5 年前
Thank you Paul. Two questions :<p>Does this approach bypass the reagent shortages ?<p>What are the specificity &#x2F; sensitivity metrics ?
评论 #22974982 未加载
levpopov大约 5 年前
Paul, is there anything HN readers can do to help with this?
patcon大约 5 年前
Ah, of course. We create a new type of [patentable] ubiquitous technology and sell our way out of this. Leave it to the entrepreneurial mind...<p>Sorry for being cynical -- I just feel suspicious of this particular tired mindset to addressing complex public health and social issues, ones that intersect with (and aggravate) many other pre-existing social dilemmas. There are a thousand other ways to look at this that don&#x27;t involve a small cornered market, I just doubt the entrepreneurial mind knows how to parse for it on its own. When you have a hammer...<p>Wake me up when someone&#x27;s talking about this sort of thing amongst members of a consortium building open patents, not from some guy with plain-as-day zero-to-one ambitions. I&#x27;ll root for someone who sees the interlocking opportunities, not someone who speaks about personal aspirations to &quot;wipe out COVID-19&quot; in 2020
IdoRA大约 5 年前
I’m having difficulty understanding why SPR would be more scalable than LFAs for this type of frequent screening? And what does the ROC look like for this startup’s SPR assay?<p>Frankly, I don’t understand how this test is supposed to work, and I’ve used a Biacore! It might be helpful to have a technical explanation available, for domain experts to evaluate.
评论 #22974267 未加载
alex_young大约 5 年前
&gt; Even with imperfect screening, if we are able to prevent 90% of disease transmission, then the virus’s reproductive number, or R0, will drop below one and the pandemic will quickly fade. There is no risk of reintroduction from the outside because any new outbreaks will quickly be caught and contained. If used consistently, there will be no second wave, ever.<p>This is dangerously wrong.<p>If you reduce R0 below 1, you may stop community spread. You will not eradicate it however, unless this is done globally for a prolonged period of time with no error. This cannot be done with the proposed solution.<p>We can (probably) stop this from hurting the vulnerable population while we find a long term solution like an inoculation, but we cannot just skip that and call everything good after some period of low &#x2F; no new cases in a region.
评论 #22976368 未加载
rossjudson大约 5 年前
The latest on the COVID-19 R0 is a median of 5.7, up from the previously thought range of 2.2 - 2.7.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;wwwnc.cdc.gov&#x2F;eid&#x2F;article&#x2F;26&#x2F;7&#x2F;20-0282_article" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;wwwnc.cdc.gov&#x2F;eid&#x2F;article&#x2F;26&#x2F;7&#x2F;20-0282_article</a><p>This means herd immunity kicks in at 82% of the population.<p>Antibody testing appears to be showing infection rates are a lot higher than previously thought as well.<p>Both of those things together mean that 1) &quot;there&#x27;s no way to stop it&quot; 2) &quot;it might not be as dangerous as we thought&quot;.<p>But who knows, right? There&#x27;s a ton of science that needs to be done to find out what&#x27;s really going on. Large-scale, accurate, randomized testing will hopefully fill out the data picture.<p>Because the US has an awful medical system where access to care comes through your job, it seems to me that more people will die (from non-virus causes) than from the economic damage than from the virus itself.<p>I guess we&#x27;ll know more in a few years.
评论 #22974350 未加载
评论 #22974517 未加载
auston大约 5 年前
Not sure if I&#x27;m missing something, isn&#x27;t Saliva based testing almost&#x2F;basically here?<p>1. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;finance.yahoo.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;orasure-technologies-receives-barda-contract-100010049.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;finance.yahoo.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;orasure-technologies-receives...</a><p>2. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.politico.com&#x2F;states&#x2F;new-jersey&#x2F;story&#x2F;2020&#x2F;04&#x2F;23&#x2F;rutgers-saliva-based-covid-test-could-be-key-to-unlocking-new-jerseys-economy-1279421" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.politico.com&#x2F;states&#x2F;new-jersey&#x2F;story&#x2F;2020&#x2F;04&#x2F;23&#x2F;...</a>
thaumaturgy大约 5 年前
After the whole Theranos debacle, I&#x27;m most curious how due diligence was done on this team and their technology.
_ph_大约 5 年前
The most important thing was mentioned at the top of that article: there is a very effective thing everyone can do right now and does not require any technology: keep your distance. Stay at home, if you can, and in the public, keep distances. Face masks are an important help in this distancing, as there are always situations, where you can&#x27;t quite maintain the &quot;safe&quot; 2m distance. If we all kept perfect distancing, the virus would be erradicated in 4-8 weeks.<p>As this isn&#x27;t always possible and mistakes are made, testing is indeed the other important part of fighting any spreadable disease. The comparison of the Covid-19 infections across different countries show clearly, how effective strict testing is. Any technology, which allows for frequent, wide-range testing is a big help in fighting diseases. If you could run a test when you are like feeling like getting a cold, the common cold and the flu would become much rarer diseases. (Especially if the west picks up the asian habit on wearing face masks, when you have the flu or a cold).<p>HIV could be erradicated quickly, if there was even a yearly test of the whole population and anyone tested positive would get treated with the antiviral medicine which already exists for quite a while. Once treated, the virus count decreases rapidly and there is very little risk of spreading the virus, especially when taking minimal precautions.<p>All above of course require for the tests to be available to literally everyone. So this should be a state run function, where you can get tested without any question asked about possible health insurance and also certain treatments should be given free of any charge.
jl2718大约 5 年前
There’s not enough consumable tests, and there is currently no installed base of surface plasmon resonance machines, nor any of the other myriad types of constant-monitoring systems that have actually been proven to work for many years now in high-risk facilities (I developed some for the government 15 years ago and it wasn’t new).<p>If you want my opinion, the right way to approach this is using the consumable tests to maximum effect for mass viral surveillance by contact group hierarchies. For instance, pool an entire school district on a single test, and then hunt down positives by school then class etc. There won’t be enough tests to find every case. That’s okay; others in contact are suspect anyway even if their test would have been negative at that time. The contact group discovery is simple too: cell tower data (civil liberties notwithstanding).<p>This is pretty obvious, but it doesn’t work because our medical system is set up to charge individuals, and the highest priority will always be hospital admittances. This does little for the patient, but does protect others in the hospital.
swang75大约 5 年前
An honest query by a non-medical professional as I&#x27;m sincerely curious...<p>Paul advocates daily saliva-based testing, but as an intermediary imperfect, but &quot;better than nothing&quot; measure, what are the benefits and drawbacks of requiring people entering public shared spaces to have their body temperatures taken via handheld temperature guns or infrared monitors, a measure that&#x27;s already taking place in much East Asia (Greater China, Japan, Korea, etc.) in public shared spaces like malls, restaurants, office buildings? My understanding is that these methods are not as accurate as direct thermometers or Paul&#x27;s saliva-based test; nonetheless, they would detect a good portion of mildly symptomatic people and also have the benefit of externally signaling to the populace to continue &quot;sheltering-in-place&quot; if they have a fever.<p>Is there any issue with supply chains? Or is there scientific evidence disproving the effectiveness of this precautionary measure that&#x27;s already in place in so many regions that have already seemed to have crested the first wave of the pandemic?
评论 #22974262 未加载
评论 #22974438 未加载
Eric_WVGG大约 5 年前
I’m sure this is the last of their concerns, but the word “disposable” and “daily” immediately made me think, “great, more garbage.”<p>It would be nice if they could figure out a recycling system — or at least make sure the vials are made of somewhat environmentally neutral glass — out of the gate, rather than have another problem to solve after there are millions of these out there
martini333大约 5 年前
This is not a third solution... It&#x27;s the first ever thought of. But impractical, very expensive, and therefore, unrealistic.
vadym909大约 5 年前
An inadvertant Masterclass on how to convince a non-technical audience to invest in a tech startup. - Take a huge and important problem - Show the current challenges&#x2F;lack of solutions - Propose a &#x27;radical&#x27; alternative - Lend credence to the competency of the team - &#x27;How world can be saved&#x27; - Imply the resultant victory
评论 #22975867 未加载
mrfusion大约 5 年前
It’s a cool solution but I don’t like the fear mongering at the beginning. Reminds me of this (0)<p>If you’re a numerate person you’ll know it’s very unlikely you’ll lose a leg to corona virus. People argue that the fear is needed to keep people accepting quarantine but I’d submit that honesty is the best policy. We need to find a way to make honesty work.<p>The alternative is people losing trust in science the more they’re misled.<p>In the event his solution isn’t a available soon, What do you think of a solution like this? (1)<p>(0) <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;mobile.twitter.com&#x2F;billmaher&#x2F;status&#x2F;1251350310045413377?s=20" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;mobile.twitter.com&#x2F;billmaher&#x2F;status&#x2F;1251350310045413...</a><p>(1) <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;thehill.com&#x2F;opinion&#x2F;healthcare&#x2F;494034-the-data-are-in-stop-the-panic-and-end-the-total-isolation" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;thehill.com&#x2F;opinion&#x2F;healthcare&#x2F;494034-the-data-are-i...</a>
lorsting大约 5 年前
Most of the statements in this article are false or exaggerated. There are no studies to back them up. These are just personal believes born out of fear.<p>Computer engineers like him should be shamed in public for speaking so confident about things they have not been trained.<p>We, as society, should point the finger at such frauds.
评论 #22976966 未加载
评论 #22976969 未加载
评论 #22976911 未加载
stickhandle大约 5 年前
Sounds like the start of a plan. My questions would be around those 10 minutes at the entry door. What do we do with people? How are they connected to the test? How do we keep separation between people? How do we grant access after the passed test? What happens to those around if someone is +ve?
评论 #22974691 未加载
danieltillett大约 5 年前
This is a solution that could work provided we have a rapid on the spot test. David States has recently proposed exactly such a test and apparently his company is woking on developing it [1].<p>The major problem with all self-testing and isolation strategies is getting population buy in and what to do about poor countries.<p>It is difficult to get population buy in if the economic cost of being positive is high (which it would be for many). If people have to isolate for weeks then it will be difficult to get the working poor to test and&#x2F;or quarantine themselves if positive. This virus is so infectious that even a small percentage of people not voluntarily participating is a problem. It might be possible to overcome this issue via some rewards (say a cash payment), but this would need to be carefully structured to not encourage people to infect themselves and&#x2F;or fraud.<p>A daily test is unlikely to be viable for most poor countries in the world. I am not sure how we would overcome this problem outside of a cheap vaccine.<p>1. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;statesdj&#x2F;status&#x2F;1253794887062958081" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;statesdj&#x2F;status&#x2F;1253794887062958081</a>
评论 #22974706 未加载
nickysielicki大约 5 年前
&gt; It appears that the virus travels through the air, so whenever possible, it’s important to avoid crowds of people or indoor spaces with shared air. The virus is about the same size as the particles in cigarette smoke (though it would usually be part of a larger droplet), so I find it helpful to imagine a smoker exhaling smoke, and what it would take to avoid inhaling too much of that second-hand smoke.<p>I just got back from a bike ride and I went through an area where a lot of homeless hang out. I could strongly smell urine and smoke while I was waiting at a stop light under a bridge. Do I need to be concerned that I just exposed myself?
评论 #22974860 未加载
评论 #22975190 未加载
DominikD大约 5 年前
I&#x27;m tired of reading that it spreads through the air and so we should avoid indoor spaces where we share air. It spreads through droplets large enough for the gravity to pull them down relatively fast.<p>It&#x27;s not measles, you can&#x27;t contract it by breathing the same air someone infected did unless you&#x27;re in a medical setting and AGP is performed on someone who&#x27;s infected. If it was airborne, masks that aren&#x27;t fitted wouldn&#x27;t protect anyone: they wouldn&#x27;t prevent absorbing nor would they prevent spreading.
评论 #22980213 未加载
epicureanideal大约 5 年前
Let&#x27;s hope this works, and if it does, that we use it for every other kind of disease as well. I&#x27;d sure like to never get the flu, or the common cold again, because we brought their R0 to near 0 also.
ezoe大约 5 年前
Unless we have a fool-proof self test kit that is so cheap to mass produce and distribute so everyone can use it every morning by simply dropping saliva and the result is available within 5 minutes while the probability of false-negative&#x2F;false-positive are practically zero, A Third Solution the linked article suggested never happens.<p>There are 7 billion humans in the world. Even the very low probability of false-negative lead to millions of infected people go outside, or millions of healthy people rushed to the hospital for detailed test every day.
alkonaut大约 5 年前
Prediction: no test development will be faster than the spread of the disease so when tests are easily available many or most densely populated areas will be at over 50% immunity.
评论 #22977106 未加载
refurb大约 5 年前
I think the ubiquitous testing is the right approach, but I don&#x27;t think we need a new test. Any test that requires a machine is going to be a severe bottleneck in testing.<p>Far better to use one of the antibody test strips. Prick your finger to get blood, or spit some saliva on a strip and you know in 5 minutes if you have antibodies.<p>Just keep testing everyone on a regular basis, and once they test positive, they are quarantined for 14 days. After that, they are assumed to be immune.
评论 #22974470 未加载
评论 #22975050 未加载
评论 #22974687 未加载
stonogo大约 5 年前
Not only is it completely unrealistic at scale, the specific approach in the blog post is wildly impossible at all.<p>It requires screeners to directly manipulate saliva samples; this is dangerous in a pandemic. The assays referred to (lazily) in a Google Scholar search are almost overwhelmingly antibody assays; this does not allow the screener to differentiate between &quot;has COVID-19&quot; and &quot;had COVID-19&quot;. Also, there is no evidence that the described test <i>actually exists</i>.<p>Finally, maybe irrelevantly, there is no way in hell you&#x27;re going to get people at large to stand around for two hours a week waiting for test results. Ten <i>minutes</i> for a screening whenever you try to enter a public building; that&#x27;s ten minutes to get into work, and we&#x27;ll say ten minutes to get into another place each day. &quot;But wait,&quot; I hear you say, &quot;you only need to be screened once per day, and the first place can share that data with the next place.&quot; This plan was constructed by someone who is unfamiliar with medical records laws.<p>This is no &quot;third solution.&quot; It&#x27;s an engaging thought experiment, but it&#x27;s just too far away from reality to get here from there.
评论 #22974167 未加载
评论 #22974075 未加载
评论 #22974095 未加载
评论 #22974094 未加载
评论 #22974268 未加载
评论 #22974379 未加载
评论 #22974245 未加载
评论 #22974513 未加载
gremlinsinc大约 5 年前
I doubt people are going to want to do this everywhere they go. It&#x27;s definitely good though to have more testing options.<p>I&#x27;ve seen posts of using drones to detect &#x27;sick&#x27; people... could they create a drone w&#x2F; some sort of scanner and microscope that could actually detect covid19 in the air?<p>Imagine if it could spot it on surfaces, air, etc...might be a bit dystopian, but at least it&#x27;d have a further reach than voluntary testing enmasse.
repied大约 5 年前
&gt; Catching this virus is a bit like playing a round of Russian roulette.<p>Well, the comparison is a bit unfair, recent studies [1] give : P(death | infected) = 0.05% overall which is order of magnitude less than Russian&#x27;s roulette where P(death | play) = 16%<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;death-proba-website.appspot.com&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;death-proba-website.appspot.com&#x2F;</a>
评论 #22978683 未加载
inglor大约 5 年前
This really reminds me of the old Newgrounds stuff and the old Room game <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.newgrounds.com&#x2F;portal&#x2F;view&#x2F;547307" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.newgrounds.com&#x2F;portal&#x2F;view&#x2F;547307</a><p>Tom Fulp had a bigger impact on my childhood than most - &lt;3 newgrounds. Good Times.
fzeroracer大约 5 年前
I don&#x27;t think this tracks.<p>What do you do if someone denies the test? You can deny them entry, but if they protest or decide to force the issue, then the police have to deal with it. Then if the police get sick, they have to self-quarantine, and what do you do when you don&#x27;t have the power to enforce the test?<p>Even if we managed to dress up our entire police force in hazmat suits to reduce the risk of infection, they can still infect people out and around the building. Turning away someone doesn&#x27;t mean we&#x27;re reducing the R0, we&#x27;re just moving someone that&#x27;s infected around. Given that there are asymptomatic people (and a certain number of people that would likely claim the test is a false positive or fake), all we&#x27;re really doing is encouraging more people to gather in a single location as a potential infection vector.<p>Let&#x27;s assume next then that somehow we had an automated solution. All the doors to said buildings are locked unless you complete a saliva test to go through. Barring the huge logistical concerns, we&#x27;re still dealing with potentially infected people spreading the virus on surfaces and areas that people are travelling to and from.<p>Tech isn&#x27;t going to save us from COVID-19.
sitkack大约 5 年前
We need micro PCR machines built into our phones. They could basically test for everything all the time.
评论 #22975048 未加载
评论 #22975035 未加载
known大约 5 年前
You may get a negative result if you’ve only had the coronavirus a short time. And it’s possible to get exposed and not develop antibodies. You may also get a “false positive” i.e. you have antibodies but had a different kind of virus e.g Hepatatis-B<p>archive.vn&#x2F;NzNRO
buboard大约 5 年前
This assumes that &quot;economic activity will restart&quot;. Humans won&#x27;t participate in dangerous activities. They may test the waters e.g. by ggoing to gyms, but as soon as a single case is found they &#x27;ll be scared back into their homes. It will happen even more so as the disease spreads and people learn about the death of someone they know. This will happen regardless of how much testing.<p>If you &#x27;re doing contact tracing right, you should need to test very few people per million every day. If you need to do a lot of testing, you ve probably already lost and will be forced to shutdown again. The solution is probably the second: antivirals.<p>OTOH i wonder what&#x27;s the effectiveness of optical-based methods to detect viral particles: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;phys.org&#x2F;news&#x2F;2006-11-laser-nanotechnology-rapidly-viruses.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;phys.org&#x2F;news&#x2F;2006-11-laser-nanotechnology-rapidly-v...</a>
评论 #22974017 未加载
davidwhodge大约 5 年前
How can people help you succeed?
justnotworthit大约 5 年前
&gt; With early detection, we can get the best known treatments<p>From WHO: What is the treatment for the coronavirus disease? No pharmaceutical products have yet been shown to be safe and effective for the treatment of COVID-19.<p>What is the author referring to?
评论 #22974611 未加载
评论 #22974592 未加载
gorgoiler大约 5 年前
If I test positive, do I need to go straight to hospital as a precaution? I’d like something constructive to happen to happen to <i>me</i> (and by Golden Rule extension, anyone else who shows up as a carrier) while everyone else is running away in fear and revulsion.<p>What happens when I reach the front of the line at Disneyworld, enter the testing booth, and the big red light flashes? Will Disney Corporation have a record of my identity at this point as well?<p>It’s all very challenging. There are chilling warnings from history of both the havoc caused by mass viral illness, and also of discrimination and ostracizing based on fear.<p>Ideally I’d want the test to be anonymous, private, and administered by me. Like taking my temperature or feeling for swollen neck glands. Hopefully we’ll get to that point in my lifetime.
ajarmst大约 5 年前
I don&#x27;t particularly disagree with any of this, but as a society, we have a bad habit of assuming that people with an impressive record of innovation and expertise in one field should be treated as authoritative in others. At the very least, they should take their idea to people with sufficient expertise to evaluate it before using their notoriety to take it to the public. I think Elon Musk, Steve Jobs, Linus Pauling and any number of failed unicorn startups should have taught us some caution. I don&#x27;t want to know what a famed early architect of social media thinks about this topic, at least not before a famed virologist, immunologist or public health practitioner comments on it first.
_pmf_大约 5 年前
&gt; t’s confusing to me that we’ve implemented harsh and expensive lockdown measures, but have been slow to implement a basic mask mandate.<p>That&#x27;s what baffles me the most.
tmsh大约 5 年前
If the proposed test takes 10 minutes, as Steve Jobs would say, that&#x27;s not good enough. Try to make it work in 10 seconds. Like a breathalyzer. Add more liquid to the solution if necessary. I am not a doctor, but am just imagining TSA-style x-ray detectors that you walk through, while issued a disposable container to blow into, and put back into the large spinner machine.<p>A quick search actually reveals something:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nsmedicaldevices.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;astrotech-breathtest-1000-covid-19&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nsmedicaldevices.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;astrotech-breathtest-1...</a>
评论 #22975576 未加载
jacquesm大约 5 年前
If a test doesn&#x27;t give a result in a few seconds the queues at the testing stations will become a perfect venue for spreading the virus.
Kiro大约 5 年前
&gt; Unfortunately, I’m still seeing people at the supermarket with their mouths uncovered<p>In Sweden masks are so uncommon that you react when you see one.
pugworthy大约 5 年前
“Ubiquitous daily screening” has this William Gibsonesque edge to it.<p>Add the idea that anyone who has already had it gets a pass and it sounds worse.
transfire大约 5 年前
Or we could just have a mandatory global quarantine for two weeks. Not only Covid, but all transmittable diseases would plummet.
fsh大约 5 年前
Grandiose statements with zero technical details make this sound a lot like &quot;Theranos for Viruses&quot;.
flaque大约 5 年前
I may have missed this, but how physically is this test done?<p>Is it “spit in a tube” or “swab the back of the throat”?
评论 #22974959 未加载
known大约 5 年前
Is it possible to create an artificial antibody in lab that can stimulate the immune system?
dustinmoris大约 5 年前
&gt; It is my belief that the best cure for any disease is to avoid the disease.<p>That&#x27;s not a cure. That is prevention.<p>&gt; As such, I want to avoid ever catching this virus. I’m optimistic that we will eventually have a good vaccine, but until then I need to avoid those who are contagious.<p>Completely unrealistic. Same person would have said in 1918 that they want to avoid ever catching the flu. Maybe back then some HN users would think it sounds smart, but today we know it sounds just silly, because it&#x27;s unrealistic, unnatural, against how life works and simply unnecessary.<p>Try your best to stay healthy, but please stop compromising life in ways which are completely unnatural because there is a possibility that your immune system has to do a bit of work. Our immune system has to work all the time, we are exposed to viruses all the time. This is how nature works. If there&#x27;s a vaccine then yes let&#x27;s all get it, like we should with other vaccines. Only a fool wouldn&#x27;t get vaccinations, but until we have a vaccine let&#x27;s just respect nature and how nature works and please live life like animals like us are meant to live. Freely.
评论 #22976908 未加载
评论 #22977422 未加载
SomeoneFromCA大约 5 年前
I absolutely agree with the point, and it goes 100% against to Sweden is doing.
arcticbull大约 5 年前
&gt; This could be a reason why so many otherwise young and healthy doctors and nurses have been killed by this virus.<p>This isn&#x27;t well supported by data. In the sense that (a) young people just aren&#x27;t particularly affected any more so than with the flu (old and sick people of course are much worse off) and (b) in Italy&#x27;s data, no health professionals under the age of 49 died. There have been some deaths outside Italy but on average the trend mirrors the broader trend: if you&#x27;re young and healthy, you&#x27;re <i>just fine</i>. [1, 2]<p>I get that there&#x27;s wide-spread panic, but we should allow the data to guide us where it exists. This isn&#x27;t the time to spout off unsubstantiated fear-inducing commentary.<p>We need to keep our wits about us if we&#x27;re going to tackle this effectively.<p>[1] Oxford CEBM, cached since it appears down: <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;webcache.googleusercontent.com&#x2F;search?q=cache:6rohagxzQR4J:https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.cebm.net&#x2F;covid-19&#x2F;global-covid-19-case-fatality-rates&#x2F;&amp;client=safari&amp;hl=en&amp;gl=us&amp;strip=1&amp;vwsrc=0" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;webcache.googleusercontent.com&#x2F;search?q=cache:6rohagx...</a><p>[2] Original data here in Italian: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.epicentro.iss.it&#x2F;coronavirus&#x2F;bollettino&#x2F;Bollettino-sorveglianza-integrata-COVID-19_26-marzo%202020.pdf" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.epicentro.iss.it&#x2F;coronavirus&#x2F;bollettino&#x2F;Bolletti...</a>
评论 #22974383 未加载
评论 #22974230 未加载
评论 #22974341 未加载
评论 #22974243 未加载
评论 #22974405 未加载
projektfu大约 5 年前
Paul, have you partnered with an epidemiologist to produce a paper on the method?
评论 #23013712 未加载
m3kw9大约 5 年前
You need a test in real time. Ten minutes for millions is gonna be hard to enforce them to sit and wait every day. I’m assuming you need to test them every day. You need a real time scanner and even that may or may not work depending the speed and invasivness of collecting before the actual scan.
celticninja大约 5 年前
major issue I have here is that once you put these turnstiles in they aren&#x27;t coming back out. then they start scanning for other stuff and there goes your medical privacy.
gowld大约 5 年前
&gt; (less than $1&#x2F;test).<p>How much less than $1? $6B&#x2F;day is a lot of money.
评论 #22973832 未加载
评论 #22974027 未加载
评论 #22973789 未加载
bagacrap大约 5 年前
&quot;First of all, it’s not “just the flu”. It is something much more dangerous. Catching this virus is a bit like playing a round of Russian roulette. You’ll probably be fine, but you could end up dead.&quot;<p>Whether this virus is more or less dangerous than the flu depends on who you are. For a child it&#x27;s much less dangerous. This virus is not like Russian Roulette, the outcome of which is random and impossible to predict. It has a much greater likelihood of affecting certain groups than others. Flu is much more random. Like covid and most other respiratory illnesses, the flu is also transmitted by asymptomatic individuals.<p>Most of the motivating factoids presented in this article are false or misleading. Since the author&#x27;s stated goal is to never become infected he should hide in a closet until the vaccine is ready.
stefankeys大约 5 年前
A blogspot&#x2F;google blogger blog how quaint
schnischna大约 5 年前
I wonder if it could be possible to mix test samples to test several people at once? Like maybe take 10 or even 100 samples, mix them together, and the test shows positive if any of the 100 has the disease? In that case, the samples could be tested individually.<p>Also I don&#x27;t think the consensus is that only a vaccine can end the thread, or that it is necessarily much more dangerous than the flu. I know three people who died from the flu. And there are also cases of younger, healthy people dying from the flu, or people getting permanent health issues like inflammation of the heart.
mastermojo大约 5 年前
Why are there so many armchair quarterbacks in this thread spouting dismissive criticism? Paul already acknowledges that &quot;success is far from guaranteed.&quot; If this works, great! If it doesn&#x27;t, I don&#x27;t think any of us are worse off...<p>This seems like a heavy application of The Copenhagen Interpretation of Ethics <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.jaibot.com&#x2F;the-copenhagen-interpretation-of-ethics&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.jaibot.com&#x2F;the-copenhagen-interpretation-of-eth...</a>
评论 #22974649 未加载
评论 #22974591 未加载
noobermin大约 5 年前
The issue with testing particularly in the US is not at all about the availability of tests or their expense, it is almost entirely political. Political discussions can often be fraught but when it almost the sole reason we don&#x27;t have adequate testing in the US. It has almost nothing to do with the lack of a technical solution.
xivzgrev大约 5 年前
The article proposes daily broad testing. I thought that is what governments were shooting for?
cryptonector大约 5 年前
&gt; It is my belief that the best cure for any disease is to avoid the disease.<p>&gt; Again, the best cure for any disease is to avoid the disease.<p>Sure, if we&#x27;re talking about HIV or HSV (any variant), then yes, the best cure is to avoid getting it in the first place.<p>Some diseases you don&#x27;t really get a choice. When 21% of NYC has had a disease that has been spreading for only a few weeks in spite of extreme public safety measures (social distancing, shutdowns), you have to wonder if you can avoid getting it, for how long, and at what cost. If you don&#x27;t get it now, how do you keep from getting it later? Eradication is typically a decades-long project. Vaccination is anywhere from a months-long project if you don&#x27;t care about establishing vaccine safety to a multi-year effort -- enough to eradicate if you&#x27;re serious about it and have a vaccine that can cope with mutation rate (probably not).<p>&gt; Catching this virus is a bit like playing a round of Russian roulette. You’ll probably be fine, but you could end up dead.<p>But that&#x27;s not really the case. Risk factors for covid-19 are fairly well understood at this point: old age, past history of pneumonia, obesity, and diabetes. That&#x27;s not not-a-big-deal, but it&#x27;s in the realm of the manageable: isolate those at risk. But stopping the progression of this virus through the population is clearly not an option at this point -- we long ago passed the point where that was feasible. We can only slow down the progression, and definitely not long enough to obtain a tested vaccine because that&#x27;s well over a year away and might be closer to two years if anything goes wrong with the current candidates. In terms of morbidity rates, this thing is not that bad as it has <i>not</i> overwhelmed the U.S. healthcare system (a few hospitals, yes, but the vast majority are far from capacity), and some treatments are available.<p>So it&#x27;s not clear that we need to slow covid-19&#x27;s progression further, or that we could if we really wanted to. Transmission rates are just extremely high.<p>&gt; With this test, we can screen for the virus at the entrances to buildings and other areas, much like we currently use metal detectors to screen for weapons. [...] Longer term, it can be used to safely reopen more crowded areas such as festivals, sporting events, and even Disneyland.<p>With... a test that... takes 10 minutes to run? Color me skeptical. By the time amusement parks get the go-ahead to reopen, covid-19 will have worked its way through well over 50% of the population. The way things are going, that&#x27;s not too long from now, maybe two more months and NYC will be at 50% -- by the end of the year maybe most of the U.S. will be past 50%.<p>Covid-19 is just too infectious. We can&#x27;t stop it.
known大约 5 年前
TL;DR<p>Test, Test and Test
smhg大约 5 年前
I think it is a good idea to keep some interpretation of the stages of grief [0] in the back of your head while reading posts like these (especially now, related to SARS-CoV-2).<p>I don&#x27;t want to say they are all wrong, but you tend to see the type of responses evolve as countries are further down the whole lockdown-process.<p>[0] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;K%C3%BCbler-Ross_model" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;K%C3%BCbler-Ross_model</a>
agentdrtran大约 5 年前
&gt; Ctrl+f theranos no results<p>have we learned nothing?
mastermojo大约 5 年前
We have Trump claiming things like &quot;we don&#x27;t have a shortage of tests&quot; and &quot;everybody who needs a test gets a test&quot; and &quot;the US is testing more people than every other country combined&quot;. These are daily press conferences broadcast on a national level. Unfortunately, rational information outlets are covering this too.<p>Trump would rather pretend that we don&#x27;t need more tests than admit to something the administration could do slightly better. I&#x27;m sure if we took the pulse of all Americans there would be a shockingly large number of people who didn&#x27;t think testing was a big deal.
aaron695大约 5 年前
This is badly written but very much in the correct direction.<p>Screw Vaccines and Cures, if these could &#x27;just&#x27; be found for Covid-19 then we wouldn&#x27;t have <i>any</i> sickness in this world.<p>Work on both cheap and quick tests while we wait for the long, if even possible, timeframes of Vaccines and Cures.<p>So why aren&#x27;t Bill Gates self swabs out yet? <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.gatesfoundation.org&#x2F;TheOptimist&#x2F;Articles&#x2F;coronavirus-interview-dan-wattendorf" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.gatesfoundation.org&#x2F;TheOptimist&#x2F;Articles&#x2F;coronav...</a>
human大约 5 年前
“It is my belief that the best cure for any disease is to avoid the disease.”<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;m.imgur.com&#x2F;dL807yM" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;m.imgur.com&#x2F;dL807yM</a>
bsaul大约 5 年前
I can&#x27;t help feeling a bit uneased reading about computer science people doing salespitch for solving a world epidemic.<p>If a famous medical doctor was trying to convince me that his database product was really the best, while making grandiose statement, i think i&#x27;d be very very harsh with them.
评论 #22976280 未加载
评论 #22976410 未加载
评论 #22976301 未加载
评论 #22976369 未加载
评论 #22976313 未加载
downerending大约 5 年前
This is a pleasant thought, but we can&#x27;t even get most people to obey speed limits most days, even though it&#x27;s far easier and we <i>know</i> it would save large numbers of lives.
评论 #22973956 未加载
评论 #22974006 未加载
troughway大约 5 年前
Another round of fear porn. I really wish HN would tone this down, because these articles&#x2F;blog posts do not actually help or offer new insights in any way.<p>This &quot;Third Solution&quot; has been offered all the way back in February. It suffers from the same lack of information around reinfection and spread rates as it did the first time around.
zaroth大约 5 年前
Dr. Fauci explained very clearly and simply the problem with daily testing.<p>Fauci’s background is in AIDS. It’s what he’s worked on his entire career. With AIDS, you can take a test, come back negative, and a year later if you haven’t done any at risk activities, you can be assured you are still negative. Not so with SARS-CoV-2.<p>With a virus as transmissible and prevalent as corona, you can test negative on Monday, and be shedding virus on Tuesday. A negative test gives you some confidence that you weren’t infected yesterday. It gives you no confidence that you weren’t exposed this morning.<p>The final nail in the proverbial Daily Testing coffin, even aside from the absurd logistical challenges, even aside from the civil rights issues of baring someone from leaving their home unless they wear a special colored armband, the biggest problem is that it just doesn’t work. The false positive rates on a test like this will be high enough that daily repeated testing will give the average uninfected person a 50% chance of testing positive by the end of the week. Don’t forget that we now have evidence that even a 14-day quarantine is insufficient, and that totally asymptomatic people can shed virus.<p>Ignoring that TFA is a sales pitch, which makes the whole thing rather nauseating, I hope that people will start taking a hard look at the absurdity of such a response, and perhaps not usher in a totalitarian regime with such open arms.<p>There’s certainly some sick irony involved in this post’s title. Gives me shivers.
uhnuhnuhn大约 5 年前
Can we stop hyping blog posts by tech people writing about epidemiology and medicine? I&#x27;m shocked how much baseless speculation and misinformation is being shared on HN.
评论 #22973685 未加载
评论 #22973700 未加载
评论 #22974516 未加载
评论 #22973670 未加载
esahione大约 5 年前
A fourth solution: force the boomers and vulnerable to retire. Let&#x27;s bail them out. Let the young take control of the economy. Everybody wins.
评论 #22974618 未加载
nickthemagicman大约 5 年前
A lot of fear mongering and FUD in this article.<p>They say COVID is like Russian roulette.<p>LIFE is Russian roulette.<p>In the under 54 crowd Covid is no more deadly than the flu.<p>So any time you go outside during flu season you&#x27;re playing Russian roulette?<p>The only people who need fear this bug are the over 54 crowd.<p>They need to remain quarantined until the vaccine is released or herd immunity is built up.
temac大约 5 年前
There are insanely high amount of speculation in there.<p>To my knowledge no <i>significant</i> amount of non droplet or hand-to-face contamination as been demonstrated out of medical contexts where aerosolization is more a problem, because of technical gestures and cares.<p>Even the linked page supposed to serve as a reference is <i>completely</i> speculative on the subject of the potential for the virus to be airborne: &quot;In addition, it is possible that SARS-CoV might be spread more broadly through the air (airborne spread) or by other ways that are not now known.&quot;<p>So yeah, it also has not been proven that airborne transmission does not happen. But there are no strong signs showing we should highly worry about that highly speculative subject. The <i>main</i> contamination paths are well-known: droplets, and hand-to-face. If you want to strongly reduce the rate, you must focus on that.<p>&gt; Even if we don’t avoid the virus 100%, reducing it by 80% could be the difference between something mild and something life-threatening. This could be a reason why so many otherwise young and healthy doctors and nurses have been killed by this virus.<p>Yeah, no. This is also completely speculative at this point. There is no strong technical reason for why it should be the case, given how viruses work... So not completely impossible, but short of real reasoning and evidences and studies, this is not a theory to particularly to focus on... ANYWAY, it is a good idea to avoid spreading the virus on all surfaces, but simply because this will statistically reduce the contamination rate (maybe without any impact on the severity for those who <i>will</i> be contaminated)<p>More generally, I&#x27;d like essays on that subject from people working in the medical field. And I&#x27;d <i>probably</i> not like essays on CS from virologists and epidemiologists...
评论 #22973822 未加载
评论 #22973803 未加载
评论 #22973821 未加载
marcell大约 5 年前
&gt; First of all, it’s not “just the flu”. It is something much more dangerous. Catching this virus is a bit like playing a round of Russian roulette. You’ll probably be fine, but you could end up dead<p>I think this is mischaracterizing it. People have to die eventually. One year of existence has a mortality rate of 1%. For a 75-84 year old individual it is nearly 5%. Above 85 it&#x27;s 14%. [1]<p>The coronavirus infection fatality is likely around 0.5-1%, but it&#x27;s heavily skewed towards older individuals. Younger people do die from it, but a very low rates. And young people die from other causes as well, the annual mortality rates for a 20-something is around 0.1%. Getting coronavirus for a 20-something or 30-something is roughly equivalent to the mortality rate of a few months of life.<p>Death is sad and terrible, but we don&#x27;t shut down society because people die.<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.mdch.state.mi.us&#x2F;osr&#x2F;deaths&#x2F;ageadjdxARS.asp" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.mdch.state.mi.us&#x2F;osr&#x2F;deaths&#x2F;ageadjdxARS.asp</a>
评论 #22973689 未加载
评论 #22973723 未加载
评论 #22973791 未加载
评论 #22974197 未加载
评论 #22973713 未加载
triyambakam大约 5 年前
The article begins by stating that this is not like the flu, yet we know people die from complications or directly from the flu every year. And further, we&#x27;re seeing more and more evidence of huge numbers of the population with antibodies, i.e. already infected and immune. We also have seen the damage that using ventilators have had due to misunderstanding how this virus starves the body of oxygen (through the blood, not like pneumonia). We should continue to focus on treatment and realize that treatment along with population immunity is the best way to handle it now. Waiting a year for a vaccine that may not work or rushing a poorly tested vaccine is not good.
评论 #22973720 未加载
vanniv大约 5 年前
No, we definitely don&#x27;t want a world in which government officials have little kiosks outside every business where they get to decide who has to be removed from society with no due process.
danielovichdk大约 5 年前
Soon you will realize, that the cost of keeping people alive times the growing number of new people on earth will be the thing that will kill us all.<p>Fuck your third solution.<p>No one has been promised a long life nor a happy life. The gift of life is imminent, and you should aim for being well and in a good state until you cannot.<p>Nature is the only religion than you really need to respect and obey. The rest is just for fun.<p>Let the virus go. Let people go. We cannot act as god, it&#x27;s unfair for everyone.
762236大约 5 年前
One way to achieve ubiquitous screening is for people to perform regular VO2max tests (loosely speaking; you can do submaximal exercises for this). You quickly figure out if you have a stress on your immune system (by watching various metrics), and there are sports-science papers showing this (because they use it to avoid overtraining, which also appears as a stress on the immune system). This is of course not easy to achieve with our current culture. It used to be that physical achievement was valued. Only a small fraction of society pushes against their VO2max in a regular way that can be measured and tracked to detect the immune-system stress. If people were to pursue this approach, they&#x27;d become a lot healthier in general.
评论 #22974014 未加载
评论 #22973749 未加载
评论 #22973742 未加载
arcticbull大约 5 年前
&gt; First of all, it’s not “just the flu”. It is something much more dangerous.<p>It is for some demographics, not all. It&#x27;s safer than the flu for young folks, especially the under 10&#x27;s which the flu hits pretty hard. For some it&#x27;s worse, especially over 70s.<p>&gt; Catching this virus is a bit like playing a round of Russian roulette. You’ll probably be fine, but you could end up dead.<p>Also true of the flu. Yes, even for the seemingly young and healthy.<p>It&#x27;s amazing how freaked out people are getting over this. All the data points to it being worse than the flu, but not drastically [1]. Certainly not &quot;immunity checkpoints at all building entrances&quot; worse, it&#x27;s not ebola.<p>[1] <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;cebm.net&#x2F;oxford-covid-19-evidence-service&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;cebm.net&#x2F;oxford-covid-19-evidence-service&#x2F;</a>
评论 #22974085 未加载