Why don't we do this?

[The Walk of the Penguin Mich]

A few days ago, I was reading an article where they were able to test way more per capita in other countries because they were pooling samples.  It's an interesting concept and has some validity.

Here's how it works.  You want to test 100 samples = 100 tests.  However, the RT-PCR that is currently being run can handle being diluted quite a bit and you do not need a lot of sample.  So pool 5 individual samples together so 100 samples = 20 tests.  If the test comes up negative, all 5 samples are cleared.  If the test comes up positive, all 5 of the samples need to be retested individually (not resampled as they still have sample remaining).  

The only kicker is determining what the true rate of infection is in the population.  If it is under 10%, then you are good.  If it is about 20%, then not so much.

So the math works out this way, if you have a rate of infection of 10%, you'd expect 10 samples to be infected of the 20 tests you have pooled.  Assuming that you do not have 2 positive samples in one test, that is (at max) 10/20 of the tests run.  So you rerun those 10 tests.  Most tests you would run on 100 samples would be 70 tests (20 initial tests and 50 follow up), cutting your need for TESTING supplies (not sample supplies) by 30%.

This probably would work best if you were wanting to screen populations of workers in order to get them back to work, so a relatively healthy population where you would generally not expect a high rate of positive responses.  This wouldn't work well for those who are coming into the hospital and are presumptive Covid + based on symptoms.  

I have to wonder why something like this is not promoted??

[Tiny]

I'm not much on conspiracy theories... but I suspect at this late date - the Federal Government wants to control the narrative on Covid19 - so will leave this kind of thing up to the individual States who also want to control the narrative (for how Covid19 is effecting the State. So, knowing concretely the number of people with or without it or how prevalent it is in an area is probably not something anyone in government really wants to find out. Since less virus is better.

FWIW: I'm kind of seeing how my "local people" are making up their mind about Covid19 related stuff based solely on what's happening in their neighborhood. Which means no one has Covid19, no one has died from it, and the stores that are closing for cleaning are just trying to work the system in order to not pay their employees.

I think THAT's why we won't have more testing. It's easier to control the narrative if no one knows much of anything. Vagueness and Ambiguity are powerful. We saw that with the Presidential campaign in 2016. Keep it vague and let people fill in their own narrative.

[pulmonarymd]

May 9, 2020 15:13:32 GMT -5 Tiny said:

I'm not much on conspiracy theories... but I suspect at this late date - the Federal Government wants to control the narrative on Covid19 - so will leave this kind of thing up to the individual States who also want to control the narrative (for how Covid19 is effecting the State. So, knowing concretely the number of people with or without it or how prevalent it is in an area is probably not something anyone in government really wants to find out. Since less virus is better.

FWIW: I'm kind of seeing how my "local people" are making up their mind about Covid19 related stuff based solely on what's happening in their neighborhood. Which means no one has Covid19, no one has died from it, and the stores that are closing for cleaning are just trying to work the system in order to not pay their employees.

I think THAT's why we won't have more testing. It's easier to control the narrative if no one knows much of anything. Vagueness and Ambiguity are powerful. We saw that with the Presidential campaign in 2016. Keep it vague and let people fill in their own narrative.

Works well as long as infections don’t explode. Once it happens, it will be impossible to ignore. It will be funny to see the reaction if a prominent person at the white gets it, or significantly more infections occur

[NastyWoman]

May 9, 2020 15:29:06 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

May 9, 2020 15:13:32 GMT -5 Tiny said:

I'm not much on conspiracy theories... but I suspect at this late date - the Federal Government wants to control the narrative on Covid19 - so will leave this kind of thing up to the individual States who also want to control the narrative (for how Covid19 is effecting the State. So, knowing concretely the number of people with or without it or how prevalent it is in an area is probably not something anyone in government really wants to find out. Since less virus is better.

FWIW: I'm kind of seeing how my "local people" are making up their mind about Covid19 related stuff based solely on what's happening in their neighborhood. Which means no one has Covid19, no one has died from it, and the stores that are closing for cleaning are just trying to work the system in order to not pay their employees.

I think THAT's why we won't have more testing. It's easier to control the narrative if no one knows much of anything. Vagueness and Ambiguity are powerful. We saw that with the Presidential campaign in 2016. Keep it vague and let people fill in their own narrative.

Works well as long as infections don’t explode. Once it happens, it will be impossible to ignore. It will be funny to see the reaction if a prominent person at the white gets it, or significantly more infections occur

Actually I want the man on the golden throne to get a raging case of it as well as mama's boy. Now mind you, I 100% do not want either one to die. I want them to suffer fully through what they have unloaded on the country by their vile, uncaring, self  serving actions and/or the lack thereof!