• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trump...wants to keep...cruise passengers on the ship so... virus #s dont go up

Chomsky said:
Yes. But what equipment and supplies does the "clinical lab" require?

I think you may be underestimating the technical complexity & difficulty of the task. You initially claimed "any hospital" can do it (without the kit). You haven't produced any evidence of this. And I suspect if it were that easy, every hospital would be doing it! No?
Click to expand...

My link is from the University of California, San Francisco's hospital. It claims clinical laboratories are authorized to employ FDA approved diagnostics under the Emergency Act. Whatever those requirements may be, the University of California San Fran claims they can do it. To my reading, any clinical laboratory is capable.

Hospitals are testing without kits all over the country. Not every positive test was a kit.
 
Last edited:
Chomsky said:
Yes. But what equipment and supplies does the "clinical lab" require?

I think you may be underestimating the technical complexity & difficulty of the task. You initially claimed "any hospital" can do it (without the kit). You haven't produced any evidence of this. And I suspect if it were that easy, every hospital would be doing it! No?

Look, if you have specific knowledge as to what's required to do this test, then that's fine. But if you're surmising any hospital can do this with what they ordinarily have at hand, that's very possibly an errant hypothesis.

My career in technology took me through a stint in medical diagnostics equipment. I was not involved with the biology, but I was involved in developing the hardware. While I don't know the specific biology, I can assure you the testing we developed was extremely complex involving specialized equipment, specialized reactants & reagents, and conditions that were not usually available at clinics and hospitals. In fact, the reactants & reagents were often the predominate marketable products, where they were our intellectual property, and in some of those cases we gave the equipment we developed away at cost in order to sell our high-profit protected assay support products.

So unless you specifically know the testing methodology, I don't see how you can make your claim with certainty.
Click to expand...

If you’re not quarantined on an air base or cruise ship, the only way to get a coronavirus test is through a healthcare professional, according to the National Institutes of Health website.

If your doctor thinks you might have the coronavirus, he or she will contact the CDC or your local health department for instructions on testing.

According to the Association of Public Health Laboratories, there are 69 local and state public health labs that cover 46 states, including Washington D.C.

The five states that await lab verification are Wyoming, Oklahoma, Alabama, Ohio and West Virginia. There are 12 additional labs in the verification progress, three of which should be testing by the weekend.

When all the selected labs have been verified, there will be 100 local and state public health labs testing, with a potential testing capacity of 10,000 tests per day.

A few private companies are also testing.

LabCorp developed its own test and began testing Thursday. According to the company, the new test detects the presence of the underlying virus that causes COVID-19.

Quest Diagnostics said it can start receiving samples from doctors for testing on Monday. It’s unclear if only select labs or all labs will be testing. The company didn’t immediately respond to USA TODAY’s request for comment.
Click to expand...

Coronavirus test kit: How can I get tested in US for COVID-19 virus?


We can test them. Right now.
 
Last edited:
Metric Mouse said:
Many facilities including state labs, private laboratories and academic hospitals can, and routinely do, develop their own tests. What happens in cases like this is the CDC issues an emergency and all tests that are developed have to be approved by the FDA (to ensure they are accurate and safe) No one applied for an FDA waiver right away, trusting the CDC test it had announced back in January would work and be distributed in less time than it would take to get cleared by the FDA to produce their own test.

Didn't work out that way, but basically Eco is right. (Are they ever really wrong?)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/what-went-wrong-with-the-coronavirus-tests/2020/03/07/915f5dea-5d82-11ea-b29b-9db42f7803a7_story.html
Click to expand...
Thanks for weighing-in to provide context.

This explanation may be fair, but it still reflects that the hospitals in general had not developed adequate testing protocols & systems. Nor do we no how long it would take them to successfully do it. If it was simple at the time to do the tests, they would have been done. So to say the peeps on the ship could be 'tested by any hospital' does not seem to be true at that time. It may be coming true for certain hospitals, labs, or clinics, now. But it was not true at the time of the incident. And having seen some of this stuff even though I don't have knowledge of the biology, I can say that without knowing the specific methodology of the testing - you guys are surmising at how easy it is to test for this specific virus. but it may be more complex and more specialized than you realize.
 
ecofarm said:
My link is from the University of California, San Francisco's hospital. It claims clinical laboratories are authorized to employ FDA approved diagnostics under the Emergency Act. Whatever those requirements may be, the University of California San Fran claims they can do it. To my reading, any clinical laboratory is capable.

Hospitals are testing without kits all over the country. Not every positive test was a kit.
Click to expand...
Alright, thanks for presenting your argument. I'm not going to beat this to death. It seems that for whatever reason, testing was not initially available at the hospital & clinic level. And that was not a good thing at all.
 
Chomsky said:
This explanation may be fair, but it still reflects that the hospitals in general had not developed adequate testing protocols & systems. Nor do we no how long it would take them to successfully do it. If it was simple at the time to do the tests, they would have been done. So to say the peeps on the ship could be 'tested by any hospital' does not seem to be true at that time. It may be coming true for certain hospitals, labs, or clinics, now. But it was not true at the time of the incident. And having seen some of this stuff even though I don't have knowledge of the biology, I can say that without knowing the specific methodology of the testing - you guys are surmising at how easy it is to test for this specific virus. but it may be more complex and more specialized than you realize.
Click to expand...

We're thinking along the same lines. You posted that while I posted #127. I don't know the methods, but I know how many labs have been certified. That article was two days ago.
 
ecofarm said:
We're thinking along the same lines. You posted that while I posted #127. I don't know the methods, but I know how many labs have been certified. That article was two days ago.
Click to expand...
Fair enough, and thanks for the link.

I'm pretty impressed that you & I work through our subjects to generally come to a collaborative (& often corroborative!) finding. It's similar to the efforts I've done at work with good co-workers in good teams, and it's always enjoyable.

Thanks for the conversation! :cheers:
 
Chomsky said:
Fair enough, and thanks for the link.

I'm pretty impressed that you & I work through our subjects to generally come to a collaborative (& often corroborative!) finding. It's similar to the efforts I've done at work with good co-workers in good teams, and it's always enjoyable.

Thanks for the conversation! :cheers:
Click to expand...


I just don't see why you make me look stuff up. My guesses are usually pretty good.

;)
 
Utility Man said:
Chicago Public Schools Employee 6th Coronavirus Patient in Illinois

Published March 6, 2020 • Updated on March 6, 2020 at 9:35 pm

...The woman, who remains hospitalized in stable condition, recently traveled on the Grand Princess - the cruise ship on which 21 passengers tested positive for the coronavirus....
...After returning home on Feb. 24, the patient went to her job at Vaughn Occupational High School, a specialty school for students with special needs and disabilities. The unidentified employee was last present at work on March 2....
Click to expand...


:shock:
Click to expand...

Chomsky said:
Now we know why cases have been popping-up in Chicagoland. A school employee contracted the disease from the contaminated ship, and then was at school for over a week? I suppose the good news is kids have much better prognosis, but that may not mean they can't be carriers.
Click to expand...

Indeed...passengers from a cruise ship introduced the virus to Utah and Colorado as well. Same thing, they were held in quarantine on the ship and then released to go home and then a week later, they test positive for the virus.

Health officials working to identify Utahns who interacted with coronavirus patient before illness was detected

Second ‘presumptive positive’ Colorado coronavirus case is Douglas County woman who traveled internationally


It's getting closer to home, now. So I guess we won't be going out much.
 
Last edited:
Chomsky said:
Thanks for weighing-in to provide context.

This explanation may be fair, but it still reflects that the hospitals in general had not developed adequate testing protocols & systems. Nor do we no how long it would take them to successfully do it. If it was simple at the time to do the tests, they would have been done. So to say the peeps on the ship could be 'tested by any hospital' does not seem to be true at that time. It may be coming true for certain hospitals, labs, or clinics, now. But it was not true at the time of the incident. And having seen some of this stuff even though I don't have knowledge of the biology, I can say that without knowing the specific methodology of the testing - you guys are surmising at how easy it is to test for this specific virus. but it may be more complex and more specialized than you realize.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah, these people totally aren't getting tested tomorrow at the local clinic. They'll have to wait until CDC tests are produced in number because no one else right now is developing a test. It wouldn't take very long, but probably better at this point to wait.

But a local lab or hospital could produce a test, probably in a few days, that would be accurate, if given a waiver by the FDA. It wouldn't be enough to test 3500 people, but it could happen.
 
Mycroft said:
What has Trump lied about?

Who doesn't have compassion for those affected?
Click to expand...

1- there are lists of his lies that run into the thousands, easily available; 2- the only thing Donald “Take Out Their Families” Trump has compassion for is his pocketbook.
 
Metric Mouse said:
Oh yeah, these people totally aren't getting tested tomorrow at the local clinic. They'll have to wait until CDC tests are produced in number because no one else right now is developing a test. It wouldn't take very long, but probably better at this point to wait.

But a local lab or hospital could produce a test, probably in a few days, that would be accurate, if given a waiver by the FDA. It wouldn't be enough to test 3500 people, but it could happen.
Click to expand...

See post #127. There's nearly 100 certified labs and two private testing companies. Testing 3500 people is doable. With about 80 labs certified now, those alone are capable of 8000 tests per day. The private companies, I dunno.

There's nothing stopping us from helping those people.
 
Last edited:
Moot said:
Indeed...passengers from a cruise ship introduced the virus to Utah and Colorado as well. Same thing, they were held in quarantine on the ship and then released to go home and then a week later, they test positive for the virus.

Health officials working to identify Utahns who interacted with coronavirus patient before illness was detected

Second ‘presumptive positive’ Colorado coronavirus case is Douglas County woman who traveled internationally


It's getting closer to home, now. So I guess we won't be going out much.
Click to expand...
It's getting 'closer to home', pretty much everywhere:

(Johns-Hopkins) Coronavirus COVID-19 Global Cases by Johns Hopkins CSSE

 
What if...? said:
Only nobody said any such thing.

So you just made it up.

There are procedures for situations like this that don't include leaving people on a boat until everything just runs it's course.
Click to expand...

Apparently your TDS is getting in the way of your ability to read the news. The ship is docking and people will be getting off. You should have known this before making your ridiculous post.
 
ecofarm said:
That's moronic. The people should be tested, quarantined and treated at an actual medical facility. Not left to die on the Death Boat. No one is suggesting they enter the populace untested. No one is suggesting they go to Disney Land. People are suggesting they have access to a real medical facility so they don't die.
Click to expand...

"Moronic" is acting as though I was arguing to keep them out. Calm yourself.
 
Harshaw said:
"Moronic" is acting as though I was arguing to keep them out. Calm yourself.
Click to expand...

No. The moronic part is you believing they'll be sent to Disney Land without testing.
 
What if...? said:
That's taking care of itself.

Over 500 now. All over the country.

Probably be over 600 by morning.
Click to expand...

That's not answering the question.....and 600 is a pretty low number for a nation of over 300 million. So, again, would you prefer the numbers to go up?
 
ecofarm said:
No. The moronic part is you believing they'll be sent to Disney Land without testing.
Click to expand...

The administration hamstringed themselves by refusing to use tests that were already being suggested by the WHO.
 
Fishking said:
That's not answering the question.....and 600 is a pretty low number for a nation of over 300 million. So, again, would you prefer the numbers to go up?
Click to expand...

The virus does not care what you or I want.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom