About frequent rapid testing and the TRUMP White House:
I agree with ppl that the WH cluster f%^* is a shining example of how throwing caution to the wind in response to neg tests is a terrible idea
But it does NOT mean frequent rapid tests don’t help stop outbreaks
1/x
No single protective layer is 💯% for this virus. We need to remain vigilant.
We’ve said all along that frequent rapid tests help to stop spread similar to how masks help and should be considered similar to masks in how they are considered as a tool to curb outbreaks..
2/x
A frequent rapid test can detect MANY people who are infectious, but not everyone - just a bad swab (potentially intentional) can cause a positive to look negative.
But the point is that if used frequently, they can catch ppl early in their infection...
3/x
Because a test is never 💯%, we still need to work to stop additional virus in the air that may infect others. A test cannot stop this. Masks and distancing can
The WH failed this step in an epic way. The advisors who determined the plan in the Rosegarden were simply wrong
4/x
But even here, frequent tests are working to curb the outbreak!
It is for frequent testing that Trump and others were identified and isolated early from others so that they can no longer be a danger to others, including many vulnerable ppl, at least while in isolation.
5/x
Masks and distancing alone cannot identify someone who is transmitting virus and tests alone cannot stop someone from transmitting. Tests can help identify ppl and give them knowledge about their status so they don’t put others in harms way
But we need to maintain all three
6/x
The goal of massive rapid frequent testing is to identify not everyone transmitting but simply enough ppl to drop R below 1 and bring outbreaks to a crawl. That’s their real power.
7/x
If frequent testing is used inappropriately as passports to party, they can backfire in individual cases. But the population outcomes can still far outweigh the backfires. In this case, onward spread from the superspreading event is being halted bc of frequent testing.
8/x
We should see this not as a moment to say frequent testing doesn’t work, but as a teaching moment to allow the public - and WH - to understand that public health programs must work and be organized together to succeed.
Spread can still happen for any number of reasons...
9/x
To curb spread we want to identify as many transmitting people as we can and ask them to isolate so they don’t transmit and we want to ask everyone else to continue taking basic precautions. They synergize and work much much better together than in isolation.
10/10
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
For a number of decades, syphilis has been trending up in the U.S.
The cause isn’t singularly but likely is associated with relaxations of prevention of STIs in the context of more effective prophylaxis for HIV (PrEP). Plus general lack of awareness
When left untreated, Syphilis can have devastating consequences on human health
Luckily there is very simple treatment for it (a form of Penicillin) but it only works if you take it - and you only take it if you know you have syphilis
Here we go again with this asinine cautious approach to testing for H5N1
CDC is NOT recommending that people with no symptoms - but who have had contact w infected animals - be tested at all… and certainly are not recommending a swab w any frequency.
Though we should have learned it in 2020, Here’s why this doesnt make sense:
1/
Firstly, tests are our eyes for viruses. It’s literally how we see where viruses are
If we wait until people are getting sick, we may have missed a major opportunity to find viruses jumping into humans before they learn to become so efficient in us that they cause disease
2/
So waiting until we actually have highly pathogenic strains harming humans - when we have a pretty discreet population at the moment to survey - is short sighted
3/
A particularly deadly consequence of measles is its erasure of previously acquired immune memory - setting kids and adults up for infections that they shouldn’t be at risk from!
We found for example that measles can eliminate as much as 80% of someone’s previously acquired immunity to other pathogens! science.org/doi/full/10.11…