 |
By *uckymoo OP Man
over a year ago
Mid-Cheshire |
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1109066/coronavirus-testing-in-europe-by-country/
USA n/a
Germany 1.7m tested
UK 382k tested
Number of confirmed
USA 679K
Germany 137k
UK 103k
https://www.statista.com/page/covid-19-coronavirus
Not drawing any conclusions you will already have your own, but those who are interested this is a good source or ref.
Russia and Italy very very high on number of tested not Just Germany, so maybe each country has its own unique situation so one plan does not fit all. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *uckymoo OP Man
over a year ago
Mid-Cheshire |
"I guess it helps when you don't have your chief medical officer telling your prime minister that testing isn't all that important "
Well when you actually look at the numbers thats a lot of resource on testing to identify such a low number of positive tests.
Getting people locked down is key
Testing the key workers is priority
Then once antibody test is ready then we do need to test hard and fast.
If we had tested more the actions would still be the same, lock down, isolate etc.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I guess it helps when you don't have your chief medical officer telling your prime minister that testing isn't all that important
Well when you actually look at the numbers thats a lot of resource on testing to identify such a low number of positive tests.
Getting people locked down is key
Testing the key workers is priority
Then once antibody test is ready then we do need to test hard and fast.
If we had tested more the actions would still be the same, lock down, isolate etc.
"
If we had tested more people then the infected wouldn't have spread it as much, that's the real benefit. I take your point about the % of positive tests but it's a small price compared to the cost of lockdown. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
