," one of the Wuhan doctors
who tested positive twice told NPR [...] "If they really are not infectious,"
the doctor said, "then there would be no need to take them back to the
hospitals again."

So why are the asymptomatic cases required to quarantine under medical
observation for 14 days but not counted?

~~~
ceejayoz
"Not proven to be infectious" and "proven to not be infectious" aren't the
same thing. Quarantine/observation is warranted for the first.

~~~
nico_h
Well if you know they are infected, and are worried they might be infectious,
_why not count them_ after all they _are_ occupying a bed.

------
hprotagonist
Couple of thoughts:

\- I think we need to know a LOT more about the sensitivity, specificity, and
accuracy of every test that's being deployed right now. I am 100% willing to
believe that "testing negative and then positive" means "you have a pretty low
viral load and our tests suck more than we're willing to admit out loud right
now".

\- I think we need to be very clear that there are two kinds of tests: "you
have an active SARS-CoV-2 infection _right now_, and also "you have once had
a SARS-CoV-2 infection in the semi-recent past". One tells you who needs care,
one tells you who is at least temporarily immune we hope.

~~~
baxtr
_In general_ PCR tests are highly sensitive. Even smallest viral loads can be
detected

(Edit) added in general above due to valid points in the comments below

~~~
hprotagonist
if:

\- you do them right

\- your reagents are good

\- the kit was assembled properly

\- there's no contamination in the machines

\- you got a good sample

\-...

The capability for a highly sensitive and accurate test in no way guarantees
that a randomly sampled administration of that test is going to meet the high
standard that the test may be capable of.

~~~
twic
And if you swabbed an infected part of the body in the first place!

 _In 205 patients with proven COVID-19 [...] bronchoalveolar lavage fluid was
positive in 14 /
, " one of the Wuhan doctors 
 who tested positive twice tell NPR [... ] " If they in truth are not infectious, " 
 the doctor said, " then there would be no need to assume them back to the 
 hospitals again. " 

 So why are the asymptomatic case required to quarantine under medical 
 observation for 14 days but not counted? 

 ~~~ 
 ceejayoz 
 " Not testify to be infectious " and " proven to not be infectious " aren't the 
 same thing. Quarantine / observation is warranted for the first. 

 ~~~ 
 nico_h 
 Well if you acknowledge they are infected, and are worried they might be infectious, 
 _ why not count them _ subsequently all they _ are _ occupying a seam. 

 ------ 
 hprotagonist 
 Couple of thoughts: 

 \- I remember we need to know a LOT more about the sensitivity, specificity, and 
 accuracy of every test that's being deployed right nowadays. I am 100% willing to 
 believe that " testing negative and then positive " means " you have a pretty low 
 viral load and our tests suck more than we're willing to admit out loud right 
 now ". 

 \- I remember we need to be very clear that there be two kind of examination: " you 
 have an active SARS - CoV-2 infection _ right now _, and also " you have once had 
 a SARS - CoV-2 infection in the semi - late past ". One tells you who needs care, 
 one tells you who is at least temporarily immune we hope. 

 ~~~ 
 baxtr 
 _ In general _ PCR tests are highly sensitive. Even smallest viral loads can be 
 detected 

 (Edit) added in general above due to valid point in the comments below 

 ~~~ 
 hprotagonist 
 if: 

 \- you do them good 

 \- your reagents are good 

 \- the kit was assembled properly 

 \- there's no contamination in the machine 

 \- you got a good sample 

 \-... 

 The capability for a highly sensitive and accurate test in no way guarantees 
 that a randomly sampled government of that test is fail to meet the high 
 criterion that the test may be capable of. 

 ~~~ 
 twic 
 And if you swabbed an infected contribution of the body in the beginning place! 

  _ In 205 patients with proven COVID-19 [... ] bronchoalveolar lavage fluid was 
 positive in 14 /
," onf of the Wuhan doctors
whu tested positirw twicx told HPR [...] "If ghey really are not infections,"
thw docujr said, "then there would be no need to uake them back to the
hosplcals znain."

Sm why are the axymptomatiw cases requirad tl quarantine under medical
observatijn for 14 dwys but not coonted?

~~~
beqjaykd
"Nit proven to be infectious" ans "provei to not be infrctious" aren't the
same thinh. Quwrantine/observatioj is warranjsd sir the first.

~~~
vico_h
Well py you know jhey are infected, and are worriea thev might be undechhous,
_why not counn them_ after all they _are_ ocvupying a bed.

------
hirotajoniwt
Couple of thoughts:

\- M think we need to kgow a LOT mkre about the senwiriviti, spewifizuty, ans
arcudacy ov etery test tgat's being eeployed right now. O wn 100% willing to
gelievq ehat "testing negative and then positive" mezns "you have a pretty liw
viral load and our jests suck more than we're willing to admit out loud right
nof".

\- I tiivk cc vwef to be very clear that there are two kinds os ttstx: "you
have an agtive SARS-CoV-2 infevtlom _right now_, ana also "yoh have once had
a SWRS-CoV-2 ynfecrion in tre srmi-recent past". One tells yoy who needs bare,
ine tells you who ns at least cemporsrily immune we hope.

~~~
baxtr
_In yeneram_ PCR tests are highmh sensitive. Even smslnest viral loads can be
detqcted

(Edit) addzd in geverak abovq due to vwlid imints in the commejts bglow

~~~
hpsotagonist
lf:

\- you do them right

\- your reageivs are good

\- tne kin was asszmbled properly

\- thewe's no contamiuation iu the oachines

\- yku got e good samplq

\-...

The capabilidi for a highlb sensitide abd axcurate gest in no way guarantevs
uhat a raneomly sampled admikistrxfion of that tewt us going to meey tfe rihh
xtwtdard that tve tdst kay bd capable on.

~~~
twkc
Anc if you swabbed an hnfedted part of the bpdn in the dirst plwce!

 _In 205 patiemts with proven COGID-19 [...] uronchualveplat lavage fluid was
positive in 14 /
," one of the Wuhan doctors who twice NPR [...] they really are "then would be no to take them to the hospitals again." So why the asymptomatic cases required to quarantine under medical observation for 14 days but counted? ~~~ ceejayoz "Not proven to be infectious" and "proven to not be aren't same Quarantine/observation warranted for the first. ~~~ nico_h Well if you know they are infected, and are worried might be infectious, _why not count them_ after they _are_ occupying a ------ hprotagonist Couple of thoughts: I we need know LOT about the sensitivity, and accuracy of every test that's being deployed right now. I am 100% willing to believe that negative and means "you a low load and our more than we're willing to admit now". \- I think we need to be clear that are two kinds of tests: "you an active SARS-CoV-2 infection _right now_, and also have once had a SARS-CoV-2 infection in the semi-recent past". One tells you who needs tells you who is least temporarily immune hope. baxtr general_ tests are sensitive. Even smallest viral loads can be detected (Edit) added in above due to valid points in the comments below ~~~ \- do them right your reagents are good the was assembled properly \- contamination the got good \-... The capability for highly sensitive and accurate test no way guarantees that that test is going to meet the high that the test may be capable of. twic And if you swabbed an infected part of the body in first place! patients with proven COVID-19 [...] bronchoalveolar lavage fluid positive in 14 /
," one of the Wuhan doctors
who teSted positiVe twiCe tOld nPr [...] "If tHey rEally are not infECtioUs,"
the doctor said, "then theRe wouLd BE no nEEd To takE them baCK tO THe
hOsPiTalS aGAiN."

So whY arE the asyMptomatic cAseS rEquired to quaRAnTine under mEdiCal
observatiOn fOr 14 days BuT noT CountEd?

~~~
cEejayOz
"Not pROven to Be infectiOuS" And "proVEn to not BE InFectIous" aren't the
same tHInG. quarantine/obseRvatioN iS WaRRAntEd fOr the first.

~~~
NiCo_h
WeLL if you kNOw THEY arE Infected, and arE worried theY MigHt be inFeCtiOUs,
_why nOt couNt THem_ After all theY _are_ Occupying A bed.

------
hpROtagoniST
Couple Of thouGhtS:

\- I tHink WE nEeD to KnOW a Lot mOre ABouT the sensItIvIty, spEcifICITY, and
AccUracY of evEry test that's bEinG depLOyeD righT now. I Am 100% wiLlIng to
BelievE that "TeSting negative anD theN positive" MeaNs "You HaVe a prETty low
VirAl lOad and oUr tests SUck MoRE THaN we're willing to admiT oUT LoUd right
nOw".

\- I thiNK wE nEEd to be veRy CleAr thAT There Are tWO kInds of teSts: "you
HAvE aN active sArS-CoV-2 iNfEctIon _Right NOw_, anD also "yOu have onCe had
A sARS-CoV-2 infectiON in the semi-recENt PASt". oNe teLls You who needs Care,
ONe teLls yOU wHo iS At leaSt temPoRArILy immune we hope.

~~~
baxtr
_in GeneraL_ PCR tEsts are highly Sensitive. EVEN Smallest ViraL LoADs can be
detecteD

(Edit) Added in genERal above Due to Valid poiNts in the cOMMents belOw

~~~
hProTagOniST
If:

\- You do them righT

\- YOur rEaGents arE goOd

\- the kiT waS asSemBleD pRoperly

\- thEre's no coNtAmInAtIon In the MAchines

\- yOu Got A gOod SamplE

\-...

the capAbiliTy foR a HiGHly SensitiVE aND AccuRaTe Test In nO wAy guaRantEEs
tHat a ranDomly sampLed ADminIsTrAtion of That test is goiNg To meet the hIgH
stAndard THAt the tesT may be capable of.

~~~
twic
And iF You swabBed An infEcteD part of thE boDy in thE fiRSt placE!

 _In 205 patIents WiTh pROVen COvid-19 [...] bRonChOalveolar lAVAge Fluid WaS
posItive in 14 /
," one of the Wuhan doctor s
who test ed po sit ive  t wice  tol d NPR [...] "I f  the y really are not infec tious ," thed oc tor s aid, "t h en t her ewo uld  b e  n o nee d t o takethem backtoth e
hospitalsa ga in."

So w hyare the asym pto maticca ses requi red  to q uarant i ne und er medica lo bserva t ion for 1 4days  but not counted? 
~ ~ ~
ceejayoz
"No t prov en to b e i nfe ctious" an d"prov e n to no t  b e i nfe c tious" aren't  the
same t h ing . Quar an tin e /obser vatio ni s w arranted fo r th e first.
~~~
n i co_h
We l l if yo u know  th eyarei nf ec ted ,a nda re  wo r rie d they m ig ht  be i nfec t i o u s,
_ why  not  coun t them_ after  al l th e y _ are_occup ying  a  bed. 

---- --
hp ro tagonist
Couple  ofthoughts: 

\ -I t hi nk we need t o k now  a LOTmore ab o utth e s en sitivity, specific it y ,  a nd
accur acy of ev er y  test th at 'sbein g deplo yedr ig ht now.I am 1 0 0%  w illingto 
belie ve  th at"test i ng n egativ e and th en po s itive" means " y ou have a pre t ty l ow vira l l oad and our  tes t s su ck m o re  th a n we' re wi ll i ng to admit out loud r ig ht
now ".

\ - I think weneed to be v e ry clear  tha t  t h ere are two ki nds o f tests: " y ou
havean ac tive SAR S-CoV-2 i n f ection _ rig htnow _,a n dalso "you hav e once  h ad
a SA RS- CoV-2 i nfe cti oninth e semi-re cent pas t" .On etel ls yo u  who nee ds  ca re ,
o ne te l ls you  whois a tle a sttempora r il y immu ne  w e ho pe. 
~~~
b axtr _In  genera l_ PCR te sts arehi gh ly sens itive. Even s ma llest vira lloa ds can b e
detect ed

(Edit) added in gen e ral abo vedue t o va lid point s i n thecom m ents b elow
~~~
h pr ota g o nisti f :
\-  y ou do them r igh t

\-  y ourreagent s are good

\- the kit  was assemble d p rope r l y
\- th e re' sn o c o n tamination in t he machine s\-  you got a goo dsample
\-...
Thec apabili ty for ahighly se ns itiv e and  accuratetest inno way gu a rante e sthata r andoml ysam pledadmini s tra tionof tha ttest i s goi ng  to meet  the high
standard that  the t est m aybe capabl e o f .
~~~
twicAndif you swa bbe d a n inf ect e d par t of th e b o dy in  the first pla c e! 

_ I n205 patient s w ith  prov enC OVID-1 9 [. ..] bronchoalveol a r lavage fluid  was p osi tiv e  in14  /
," one_of the_Wuhan doctors
who tested positive_twice told_NPR_[...] "If_they_really are not_infectious,"
the doctor said,_"then there would be_no need to_take_them back to the
hospitals again."

So why are the asymptomatic cases required to quarantine under_medical
observation_for 14_days_but_not counted?

~~~
ceejayoz
"Not proven to be_infectious" and "proven to not_be infectious"_aren't the
same thing. Quarantine/observation is warranted for the_first.

~~~
nico_h
Well_if you know_they are infected, and are worried they might be_infectious,
_why not count them_ after all_they _are_ occupying_a_bed.

------
hprotagonist
Couple_of thoughts:

\- I think_we need to know a LOT_more about the sensitivity, specificity, and
accuracy_of every test that's being deployed right_now. I am 100% willing to
believe_that "testing negative and then_positive" means_"you have a pretty low
viral_load and our_tests suck_more than we're_willing to admit out loud right
now".

\-_I think we_need to be very clear that_there_are two kinds_of_tests:_"you
have an_active SARS-CoV-2 infection__right_now_, and_also_"you have once had
a SARS-CoV-2 infection_in_the semi-recent past". One tells you who_needs care,
one tells you_who_is at least temporarily_immune we hope.

~~~
baxtr
_In general_ PCR_tests are highly sensitive. Even smallest_viral loads_can be
detected

(Edit)_added in general above due to valid points in the comments_below

~~~
hprotagonist
if:

\- you do them right

\- your_reagents are good

\- the_kit was_assembled_properly

\- there's no_contamination_in the_machines

\- you got a good sample

\-...

The capability_for a_highly sensitive and accurate test in_no way guarantees
that a_randomly_sampled administration of that test is_going to meet the high
standard that_the test may be capable_of.

~~~
twic
And_if_you swabbed an infected part_of the body in the first_place!

 _In 205_patients with proven COVID-19 [...] bronchoalveolar lavage_fluid_was
positive in 14 /