Home Off Topic
Hey folks - as a member of the DawgNation community, please remember to abide by simple rules of civil engagement with other members:

- Please no inappropriate usernames (remember that there may be youngsters in the room)

- Personal attacks on other community members are unacceptable, practice the good manners your mama taught you when engaging with fellow Dawg fans

- Use common sense and respect personal differences in the community: sexual and other inappropriate language or imagery, political rants and belittling the opinions of others will get your posts deleted and result in warnings and/ or banning from the forum

- 3/17/19 UPDATE -- We've updated the permissions for our "Football" and "Commit to the G" recruiting message boards. We aim to be the best free board out there and that has not changed. We do now ask that all of you good people register as a member of our forum in order to see the sugar that is falling from our skies, so to speak.

COVID-19 Check-in 2.0

1202123252671

Comments

  • texdawgtexdawg Posts: 11,581 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    So the test only produces false negatives and not false positives?

    It seems simple to me.....a test either works or it doesn't.......and it sounds to me that we may be wasting money.

    Unfortunately...... I struggle with gray areas.....it's a weakness of mine.

    Obviously these test shouldn't be on the market if what you suggest is true.

  • dawgnmsdawgnms Posts: 5,218 mod

    If your employer was not so cheap then you could take the more expensive and proven more accurate test. Matter of money.

    My clinic will not touch the Abbott test, PCR only, we are going to start random testing pretty soon. Not saying the Abbott test are bad just not as accurate and cheaper.......old adage is you get what you pay for.....

  • YaleDawgYaleDawg Posts: 7,162 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate
    edited July 2020

    In general we know that these tests aren't going to be as accurate as PCR tests, but they produce results much faster which make them useful in certain contexts IF they identify a high enough percentage of true positive cases. You want them to identify at least 95% of true positive cases to be considered effective. There has been a lot of controversy surrounding these rapid point of care tests because many of them have been shown to identify a much lower percentage of positive cases.

    Edit: unfortunately there is a lot of gray area with this type of stuff.

  • texdawgtexdawg Posts: 11,581 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    Never thought our company was that cheap.....my brother and I.......mainly him.....spend quite a bit of money on our employees........

    Don't know if it is the Abbot test or not.......just that it's $300 a pop.....doesn't feel so cheap.

    And we are getting the test we thought was available.

  • texdawgtexdawg Posts: 11,581 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    Why is your company going to start random testing pretty soon? Why hasn't it started testing already? Too cheap?

  • dawgnmsdawgnms Posts: 5,218 mod

    When it comes to the health and wellbeing of your employees money should not be an object. There are several rapid tests and like @YaleDawg said not as accurate but this is all new to everyone and a lot of gray areas......good that your are testing your people a lot of employers would not put out the expense, they would just let them spread it around so don't get me wrong you are doing a good thing that most won't do...

  • BankwalkerBankwalker Posts: 5,348 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    @texdawg notice he said the PCR is “more accurate.” None of these things are 100%, but with any competing products of this type, there will be some that work better than others. Kind of like how a Chevy is a darn good truck, but it takes a Ford to pull one out of a ditch.

  • dawgnmsdawgnms Posts: 5,218 mod
    edited July 2020

    DOD Navy my command is Medical and they are going to random test us since we play Corona Roulette on a daily basis. Has to have like 35 signatures to be approved lol, cheap nah not when it comes from OUR tax dollars

  • flemingislanddawgflemingislanddawg Posts: 597 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    Yes it would have helped but it is all hindsight. Nobody even came close to considering masks or a shutdown in January. Some travel from China was stopped in January but was criticized when it happened.

  • texdawgtexdawg Posts: 11,581 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    OK ....the PCR is more accurate. But what good does it do to wait days for results. We wear masks in the office and warehouse.......but we aren't quarantining waiting on results.

    Employees have to be paid, warehouse lease has to be paid, huge electric bill, on and on.....can't wait for test results. If someone tests positive......we need them gone.

    But honestly.......Dallas is supposed to be ground zero........and I hardly know anyone that has tested positive.

    But we are about to lose 4 employees.......not because they tested positive or someone close to them tested positive.... they have to stay home because their kids can't be in school.

    I'm looking at 100s of cars drive by my office......non stop. We are unloading and loading trucks as fast as possible.......but our kids can't be in school or play sports.

    What universe are we living in?

    But i degrees

  • BankwalkerBankwalker Posts: 5,348 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    My interest in this article is related to quercetin in combination with zinc. Read down and you might be shocked at what viruses this combination has gained trial approval for in the US and other countries. Zinc is sold in most grocery and drug stores. Quercetin can be bought on the internet or herbal vitamin stores.

    What’s the harm if you are someone concerned about covid?

    I’ve been taking vitamin D and zinc, but know it is difficult for the body to absorb zinc

  • dawgnmsdawgnms Posts: 5,218 mod
    edited July 2020

    To put it into perspective you are making a business decision, just like the decision to play sports or open schools is a business decision, teachers that are high risk don't want to up their chance of exposure by being around school age people who may have the virus and are not having symptoms.

    Spending 300.00 per test is a business decision, good on you, but spending that 300.00 to help your 4 employees whom I assume are good employees pay some of the child expenses may be a better decision, do not get me wrong,

     not telling you how to run your business but it is a 2 way street. Me I personally believe people should live their lives how they want free of government interference.

  • BankwalkerBankwalker Posts: 5,348 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    Confounding that signatures hold up so many things. A buddy was supposed to be going to Nevada for about a month to the AF base out there. His trip was delayed because he was waiting on the 3 star general on base to sign off on it. Why in the heck a command general needs to sign for one person to leave town is beyond me. I can’t imagine the paperwork for what you’re doing.

  • YaleDawgYaleDawg Posts: 7,162 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate
  • NomadDawgNomadDawg Posts: 436 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    Wait till you find out about pregnancy tests and condoms

    Kidding, just trying to lighten the mood

  • BankwalkerBankwalker Posts: 5,348 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate

    He’s a civilian, so he can go wherever he wants. In his case, I suspect his security clearance is probably the reason. He works on weapons systems.

  • dgdawgdgdawg Posts: 242 ✭✭✭✭ Senior

    If he need access to the base he needs permission from the base commander. I work at Eglin and they are doing the same thing.

  • Casanova_FlatulenceCasanova_Flatulence Posts: 3,126 ✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate
    edited July 2020

    To show a fair and balanced approach to this topic I give you this not so optimistic article.

    This is certainly not what I wanted to hear:

    "A study released last month by the Scripps Research Institute concluded that the strains of the virus spreading so quickly in Europe and the U.S. have a mutated S “spike” protein that makes them about ten times as infectious as the strain that was initially identified in Asia. If it seems like the United States is having a tougher time controlling the spread of the coronavirus than Asian countries did in winter and early spring, that’s partially because this version of the virus is tougher to stop from spreading."

    On the positive side, we have this...

    "A vaccine is coming as fast as anyone could hope for, but still probably won’t arrive until late 2020 or early 2021.

    We continue to hear good news from the hunt for a vaccine. The University of Oxford vaccine candidate might be done with human trials by September, and “AstraZeneca has agreed to sell the vaccine on a not-for-profit basis during the crisis if it proves effective and has lined up deals with multiple manufacturers to produce more than 2 billion doses.” A candidate vaccine developed by the federal government and Moderna appears to be safe and to trigger an immune response, and is entering the final stage of testing trials. The Food and Drug Administration has also fast-tracked two experimental vaccines jointly developed by German biotech firm BioNTech and Pfizer, according to CNBC.

    Once the world is on its way to recovery, one final problem will remain: figuring out how to prevent a similar crisis from happening in the future. We must be aware that the conditions that facilitated the virus’s migration from a bat to the still-unidentified Patient Zero in Wuhan will be almost entirely unchanged when the pandemic ends. We don’t know exactly how that migration happened, but illegal animal poaching and smuggling will continue around the globe, the so-called wet markets in China will remain open, and we will still have to take it on faith that most countries conduct their biological research into contagious diseases safely."

This discussion has been closed.