Dillinger

Many coronavirus testing advocates claim that the objective of such testing should be around 1% positives ... to show that there is sufficient testing coverage. Currently, the country is running at about 18% positives ... meaning we might have to expand testing by a factor of at least 5x or even higher. Is this ambitious objective sensible ... or counter-intuitive?

Although Congress just appropriated enough money ($25 billion) to test everyone in the United States once, this still might not be enough ... particularly when many people may need to be tested repeatedly.

It would seem to this observer that giving a test to someone where the results are 99% negative is a tremendous waste of resources that should be reserved for those of a higher probability of a positive result ... those with one or more symptoms. This is particularly questionable when a person with a negative test may catch COVID-19 the very next day ... and perhaps we could save the taxpayer say $20 billion?

What did John Dillinger say? “I rob banks because that is where the money is.”