Adoption of strategies that aim to allow people to test themselves, privately,simply, at home, 1-2x/week could help suppress outbreaks quickly. Especially in context of other public health measures.
~10M/day to achieve herd effects and drop incidence
healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/hbl…
~10M/day to achieve herd effects and drop incidence
healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/hbl…
We don’t need perfect compliance, at all. We just need decent compliance - we can achieve this. Like herd immunity, we don’t need this to be everyone, just enough people to drop R<1. I estimate 10% of people in a community would test at home per day. So need not have perfection
We still need reporting so public health officials can keep track
No problem... we work w Google, Apple and whoever else to make voluntary reporting easy as a FaceTime call. If I can see my twin brother 2000 miles away w the push of a button, I should be able to report a result
No problem... we work w Google, Apple and whoever else to make voluntary reporting easy as a FaceTime call. If I can see my twin brother 2000 miles away w the push of a button, I should be able to report a result
What will a program like this cost the US - probably $10-20B. (That includes messaging/logistics - $5-10B just for the tests). Pennies compared to the cost of the virus thus far.
Also, the purpose of this sort of public health screening is to suppress whole outbreaks vs stopping all cases. These are different. Most ppl think in terms of individual cases, but here the broader idea is to focus on ensuring stopping every outbreak, not every case....
If we can do this, maybe sooner rather than later we can find ourselves in position where we can go back to work and resume normalcy bc incidence could get very low/absent in a community.
testing could then slow down. Survey wastewater. If cases return, start the testing again
testing could then slow down. Survey wastewater. If cases return, start the testing again
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
