Well done Michael Mina for battling on to argue the case for cheap frequent rapid testing. I was jumping up and down about your ideas in July /Aug 2020!! But no one listened nor responded then. UK were busy developing other options ( albeit without verification - just trust ). ‘Test to stay’ is such a practical approach.
38:41 >> Michael Mina "These tests are NOT medical devices... We evaluate them and we charge for them as though they are. But when the primary beneficiary, of a test, are the people around the person who's using the test, then by definition, it is a Public Health tool. It is a tool that is benefiting the Public, not the test user.."
I cannot believe that covid detection dogs - are not being trained up in droves... they are quicker than lateral flow tests, 98pc accurate - not to mention 2000pc cute! : ) edited to add: and they biodegrade more quickly......
Regarding the probability of variants - I would think that every viral replication event is an opportunity for a mutation. So the probability of variants is proportional to the number of viral replications. The fewer replications the fewer opportunities for mutation. So then, what is the strategy to prevent viral replication? Vaccinate more people more quickly? Natural infection? The current situation is a little bit of both. The mutations themselves occur with replication and are independent of the vaccines. What the vaccines achieve is fewer replications. Always on the sidelines though is that Covid also infects other animals so there will be an active reservoir of Covid to mutate.
Because infants and toddlers will rarely be symptomatic, but will continue to have GI and respiratory symptoms, they will be able to keep this virus going. Their parents and caregivers will become infected due to the close contact in feeding, bathing, and diapering, and spread it outward. I am leaving pediatrics to enjoy retirement, and just in time.
@@Asptuber : babies and toddlers routinely have loose stool and a runny nose. From other viruses, allergies, reactions to new foods etc. These are ALSO often the only symptoms for COVID-19 in very young children. I have already had 2 positive patients older than this with only GI symptoms. Positive and typically-ill children will be indistinguishable to parents and daycare providers, unless they do at-home testing all the time, which is absurd. Therefore, children will contract the virus at daycare or home, spread it at daycare or bring it home, and spread it to adults by close-contact daily care such as being diapered, fed, and embraced. I hope this is clearer.
@@Cathy-xi8cb Ah, now I see what you mean. Yes, how much to test in children is a quandary. I think the latest edition of my local guidance (Finland) takes into account whether there are unvaccinated adults in the household/daycare or not. Whether that is smart or not is hard to say.
It’s a failure of our public health system that rapid testing was not instituted last year when Dr Mina was pleading for us to do it. Glad it’s FINALLY catching on. Could’ve avoided business closures, unmitigated spread and severe outcomes.
Love Michael Mina & TWiV But too often their great key insights & nuances just get lost in the mix. Last summer 2020 Michael Mina needed a Jen Psaki on his team and 12 great slides to sell the rapid test idea loud 🔊 quick straight and clear 💡🎯 I tried to tell so many people and linking them to Mina interviews But it was too long winded And illustrations/graphs on his web site looked like toys not serious enough alas. Onwards..
What exactly did he show you? Did this gobbledygook show you how your CD8 line is screwing up after vaccination?! Did he show you the GB data from the weekly report 39 concerning nucleopcapsid response after smurfing?! 25% down compared to nat. immune response? Did he explain to you why just from week to week more vaccinated than unvaccinated die?! Did he tell you how many old people bit the dust last year due to remdesivir and premature respiration! That his entire data is based only on fraud?! (I can tell you all the TITLES of the Papers on this....Unfortunately UA-cam eats the direct links.)
@@mhutflash5512 what does "after smurfing" mean? And why would a vaccinated person have NP antibodies ? UK Health, vaccine surveillance Week 39 report? looks good. 65-95% effective at preventing severe disease/hospitalization/deaths (stratified for age and vaccine type). You ask why as vaccination cover increases (and restrictions are lifted) rates also increase in the vaccinated population- because (obviously) they are an increasing proportion of the total population. Dr Turner discussed viral evolution, not UK data. Looks like you copied obscure topics from an antivax guide sheet to paste in comments sections without knowing what you are talking about. No? Tell us about the CTLs then...
I often wish the opposite, that most of my favorite podcasts would post on UA-cam. Sometimes there are certain topics that would benefit from visuals (slides, etc) that add a helpful layer to the discussion.
It is interesting to look at the example at 50:00. A PCR test would be a better test when there is quarantine. Everyone arriving to Thailand, for example, must get a PCR test on arrival but they also have to go to isolation in a quarantine hotel until they get their PCR results.
Does it? I doubt it very much. I suspect you may have misunderstood. Simple +/- tests dont have the info as to which variant is involved so they can not tell you. You would need to run genomic sequencing. That is usually done on random samples for surveillance or specific cases of interest.
Bc in our legal structure around testing, fda considers giving someone information on their variant to require a test that has an EUA to do that. But the companies have no incentive to spend the money Andy time to get an EUA specifically to give individuals their variant results. So, as it stands, that data is not allowed to go back to the individual from whom the swab originated.
Watching this video in 3 months after it initially aired has shown how just how accurate and informative the two speakers were. The shame is that most policy makers would not have connected the dots appropriately back in October (pre-Omnicron) to improve the handling of the Omnicron out-break. But, WOW was the discussion on variants and the proper use of rapid test on the money!
Dr Mina's slide indicated that a rapid antigen test will be positive before or as symptoms develop. I know two vaccinated people who who were sick with covid delta and didn't test positive on a rapid antigen test until the 3rd day of symptoms. These two are from a very small sample of people I know who got sick. His interpretation can lead to a misuse of rapid tests.
If the initial tests were done correctly, it’s likely that they were not (very) infectious. For someone who is symptomatic and tests negative, it’s still a good idea to stay home and wear a mask if they leave the house and will be around others.
@@BlakeSuperior_Beats the problem is most people will believe they are negative after the first test. This assumption would seem reasonable according to Dr Mina's slide.
@@2chicos Agree, most people will carry on with life after testing negative and that's probably ok if they have low levels of viral shedding and they're wearing a mask. If they were shedding lots of virus then the test would have been positive. Hopefully people have become more mindful in general of not going to work, school, etc when sick or at least wearing a mask when they suspect they might be coming down with symptoms that could be allergies or a cold, but they aren't sure. It used to be considered "good work ethic" when people powered through their day while sick, but now it just seems reckless!
@@BlakeSuperior_Beats they tested positive on the 3rd day and for 5 consecutive days. Some people would assume they are negative then go on to infect other people.
If body thermometers were to introduced today the FDA would classify it as a medical device and we would be having the same silly discussion instead of just keeping the child at home or we as adults just work remotely.
Correction: Placing public health in the hands of industries more motivated toward profit, especially short-term profit over public health, has always been a costly mistake. We're all expendable. That's their attitude. Check the news stories about more robots getting rolled out to replace this mysteriously absent workforce they've sidelined, outsourced and austeritied to death.
I've purchased many kits for $14 for two tests. We allow only vaccinated people in our house and they must get tested to stay in our house without a mask. Love these tests!
@@user-mj3vr4cd2v "Testing is limited to laboratories..." Clearly not! And the HHS ordered millions for schools. Obviously not laboratories. I'm quite surprised at the wording. Certainly will not prevent my using the tests. Thanks for pointing it out. Very interesting!
You do realize vaccinated people can still carry and get the disease…right? My daughter’s vaccinated friend just exposed all of them when she was ill and of course thought it couldn’t be Covid, because she was vaccinated 😞
The future depends more on how everyone deals with their own mortality and frailty, and how much of other ppls rights (biological, economical, political) they are willing to sacrifice, than on science.
I would have liked to hear some push back when Michael said that vaccination status is not important for whether you spread the virus. From what I've seen when there is a "breakthrough" case with MRNA vaccines the infectiousness window is small. I don't know that he actually modeled it out, or whether he's just doing some estimate based on the infectiousness of delta vs. wuhan and naively assuming that the infectiousness window is unaltered by vaccination status. Because there was no push back there I don't know what to think.
@@alireid5874 My understanding is that PEAK viral load is roughly the same, but vaccinated people clear the virus much faster. Also there's the issues that even that "viral load" is actually just RNA fragments which could be dead virus.
@@firefoxbrowser342 dead viral fragment particles are usually found at high cycle thresholds (>30), but studies found that both groups were detecting at much lower thresholds, which were likely infectious
The evolutionary biologist was great! Now that's one evolutionary biologist I can get behind! Cough, ahem, cough. Michael Mina made a distinction between public health and individual health that was phenomenally brilliant! Thank you. Agree with others, though, who wanted more follow up and push back on the vaccine / contagiousness thing. I would disagree with him there, and there's science to back me up.
59:00 if everyone gets infected, but nobody gets sick what does it matter? for a maybe 1-3days of spread potential cripple sociaety forever? not a gr8 plan. (leaving masks well alone.)
Thank you finally a clear path forward with clear explanations very well-reasoned and I now have a clear understanding of my own path forwards thank you thank you thank you sorry to sound repetitive I will share this when I can
Giving it some consideration I think to self test once or twice a week prior to a gathering and an appropriate time after a gathering thankfully in Australia we don't get price gouging because we have government oversight and probably even subsidy
A preprint showing infants, born to unvaccinated mothers, contacting SARS CoV-2 are developing kidney damage, leads me to ask, who is looking at changes in children post Covid-19?
Smart watches can also be used to detect infection very early on by measuring elevated heart rate overnight. Not perfectly accurate but useful. Then you could do rapid testing whenever your heart rate appears to be suggesting possible infection.
Nope. Why? But lots of test trace isolate would have stopped spread of this new disease. Now it's out everywhere quick testing for people entering an event or venue would reduce risk until everyone has the chance to get vaccinated.
Like Mina said, it's context dependent. Purposes need to be defined. If the purpose is to keep kids in school as much as possible, rapid testing makes this possible in a way that it's not now. If a parent gets Covid, then the kids will need to be quarantined as a close contact. If there were rapid tests then tests could be submitted to show the absence of transmissible antigen, so that normal life can continue. Testing can be adapted to whether or not there's a need for it. Testing can limit transmissibility with minimal social dislocation and economic cost. Mina was all about giving up the usual shot gun approach that's taken to everything and being clear about what the intentions of testing are. If the goal is to limit transmission and someone who has no symptoms plans to be together indoors with another person or people who are in high risk of infection people, then they can test before going to the occasion. The test will give evidence of transmissible infection or of absence of it. So last year there would have been no need for people to stay home from family holidays or from visiting a loved one who lives in a nursing home. if they can test first and confirm that they are not carrying a virus that's a danger to that person. It would not be necessary to shut down all "nonessential" businesses if people can test before spending time in indoor settings, along with wearing masks . This was done in other countries, where economies were spared the destruction that occurred in the US.
The test guy has problems he does not see - 1. It is not just the test costs but administration as well, who will pay for all the people doing all the testing? 2. If you leave it to people to test themselves how you will be able to monitor - are you really this naive to think that they would report positive tests and do that honestly? We see now that parents send infected children routinely to schools regardless whether they show minor symptoms or not. Younger people will not stop going to work or lectures just because they have some positive test result if they feel just fine. All this "effective sensitivity stuff" is a hogwash. You need to have independent person doing the test and you need to pay for that person's work.
Don't make the perfect the enemy of the good you don't need 100% compliance to get a benefit. That said, it's a little late in the game for anything to matter.
He answered that. There’s a seevice called Emed, and another he mentioned, that offer online monitored/proctored tests that are then verifiable, saving the cost of nurses Etc to administer.
Singapore study showed that viral load decreases faster in vaccinated. But there’s still a small window of “opportunity” to spread the virus nonetheless where the rapid tests could be helpful.
So in this scenario, evolution is like the House Rules in a Casino game that has probabilistic degrees of success and failure, except vastly more trials of combining spikes and variations is in multiple bands of convergences, as you should expect in AM-FM logarithmic condensation of resonance bonding proportioning probability. This is why wave-packaging QM-TIME Completeness cause-effect Timing-spacing coordination Communication is self-defining description of the Multiverse format of real-time re-evolution circularity quantization cause-effect, a standing wave modulation of elemental e-Pi-i sync-duration connectivity. Zero-infinity scaling in continuous creation connection continuum, ie WYSIWYG Time.
Well done Michael Mina for battling on to argue the case for cheap frequent rapid testing. I was jumping up and down about your ideas in July /Aug 2020!! But no one listened nor responded then. UK were busy developing other options ( albeit without verification - just trust ). ‘Test to stay’ is such a practical approach.
38:41 >> Michael Mina
"These tests are NOT medical devices...
We evaluate them and we charge for them as though they are.
But when the primary beneficiary, of a test, are the people around the person who's using the test, then by definition, it is a Public Health tool.
It is a tool that is benefiting the Public, not the test user.."
I cannot believe that covid detection dogs - are not being trained up in droves... they are quicker than lateral flow tests, 98pc accurate - not to mention 2000pc cute! : ) edited to add: and they biodegrade more quickly......
Get a Kickstarter going! I'm sure there would be a ton of support. I'm in before it even begins.
@@steveaustin5344 👍😊😊
Dr. Mina, first listened to you on Lex's podcast. You are always GREAT and a voice for sound reason.
Regarding the probability of variants - I would think that every viral replication event is an opportunity for a mutation. So the probability of variants is proportional to the number of viral replications. The fewer replications the fewer opportunities for mutation. So then, what is the strategy to prevent viral replication? Vaccinate more people more quickly? Natural infection? The current situation is a little bit of both. The mutations themselves occur with replication and are independent of the vaccines. What the vaccines achieve is fewer replications. Always on the sidelines though is that Covid also infects other animals so there will be an active reservoir of Covid to mutate.
Because infants and toddlers will rarely be symptomatic, but will continue to have GI and respiratory symptoms, they will be able to keep this virus going. Their parents and caregivers will become infected due to the close contact in feeding, bathing, and diapering, and spread it outward. I am leaving pediatrics to enjoy retirement, and just in time.
Uh, aren’t their parents and caretakers vaxxed yet?
"will rarely be symptomatic, but will continue to have GI and respiratory symptoms" - huh?
What are you trying to say here?
@@Asptuber : babies and toddlers routinely have loose stool and a runny nose. From other viruses, allergies, reactions to new foods etc. These are ALSO often the only symptoms for COVID-19 in very young children. I have already had 2 positive patients older than this with only GI symptoms. Positive and typically-ill children will be indistinguishable to parents and daycare providers, unless they do at-home testing all the time, which is absurd. Therefore, children will contract the virus at daycare or home, spread it at daycare or bring it home, and spread it to adults by close-contact daily care such as being diapered, fed, and embraced. I hope this is clearer.
@@Cathy-xi8cb Ah, now I see what you mean.
Yes, how much to test in children is a quandary. I think the latest edition of my local guidance (Finland) takes into account whether there are unvaccinated adults in the household/daycare or not. Whether that is smart or not is hard to say.
It’s a failure of our public health system that rapid testing was not instituted last year when Dr Mina was pleading for us to do it. Glad it’s FINALLY catching on.
Could’ve avoided business closures, unmitigated spread and severe outcomes.
Love Michael Mina & TWiV
But too often their great key insights & nuances just get lost in the mix.
Last summer 2020 Michael Mina needed a Jen Psaki on his team and 12 great slides to sell the rapid test idea loud 🔊 quick straight and clear 💡🎯
I tried to tell so many people and linking them to Mina interviews
But it was too long winded
And illustrations/graphs on his web site looked like toys not serious enough alas.
Onwards..
No instructions for CME were recorded at end of presentation. Please post. Thank you !
Wow. Bring Dr. Turner back for more evolutionary biology talks!
What exactly did he show you?
Did this gobbledygook show you how your CD8 line is screwing up after vaccination?!
Did he show you the GB data from the weekly report 39 concerning nucleopcapsid response after smurfing?! 25% down compared to nat. immune response?
Did he explain to you why just from week to week more vaccinated than unvaccinated die?!
Did he tell you how many old people bit the dust last year due to remdesivir and premature respiration! That his entire data is based only on fraud?!
(I can tell you all the TITLES of the Papers on this....Unfortunately UA-cam eats the direct links.)
Turner did a fabulous job. Super clear.
@@mhutflash5512 😆 where do get this stuff? You make it up???
@@mail4lana
See comment. Linked everything to rethink.
@@mhutflash5512 what does "after smurfing" mean? And why would a vaccinated person have NP antibodies ?
UK Health, vaccine surveillance Week 39 report? looks good. 65-95% effective at preventing severe disease/hospitalization/deaths (stratified for age and vaccine type).
You ask why as vaccination cover increases (and restrictions are lifted) rates also increase in the vaccinated population- because (obviously) they are an increasing proportion of the total population.
Dr Turner discussed viral evolution, not UK data. Looks like you copied obscure topics from an antivax guide sheet to paste in comments sections without knowing what you are talking about. No?
Tell us about the CTLs then...
very informative. would you consider putting this on podcasts?
I often wish the opposite, that most of my favorite podcasts would post on UA-cam. Sometimes there are certain topics that would benefit from visuals (slides, etc) that add a helpful layer to the discussion.
First heard Dr Mina on MedCram at early stages of COVID. Still hope his Rapid Testing takes off now, finally. Highly recommend MedCram on UA-cam .
It is interesting to look at the example at 50:00. A PCR test would be a better test when there is quarantine. Everyone arriving to Thailand, for example, must get a PCR test on arrival but they also have to go to isolation in a quarantine hotel until they get their PCR results.
Why does the New York times say its illegal to find out if you tested positive for delta variant or the original version?
Does it? I doubt it very much. I suspect you may have misunderstood. Simple +/- tests dont have the info as to which variant is involved so they can not tell you. You would need to run genomic sequencing. That is usually done on random samples for surveillance or specific cases of interest.
Bc in our legal structure around testing, fda considers giving someone information on their variant to require a test that has an EUA to do that. But the companies have no incentive to spend the money Andy time to get an EUA specifically to give individuals their variant results. So, as it stands, that data is not allowed to go back to the individual from whom the swab originated.
Would not the wide use of prophylactic drug lower the amount of spread in the situation of viral infection before symptoms?
Watching this video in 3 months after it initially aired has shown how just how accurate and informative the two speakers were. The shame is that most policy makers would not have connected the dots appropriately back in October (pre-Omnicron) to improve the handling of the Omnicron out-break. But, WOW was the discussion on variants and the proper use of rapid test on the money!
Dr Mina's slide indicated that a rapid antigen test will be positive before or as symptoms develop. I know two vaccinated people who who were sick with covid delta and didn't test positive on a rapid antigen test until the 3rd day of symptoms. These two are from a very small sample of people I know who got sick. His interpretation can lead to a misuse of rapid tests.
If the initial tests were done correctly, it’s likely that they were not (very) infectious. For someone who is symptomatic and tests negative, it’s still a good idea to stay home and wear a mask if they leave the house and will be around others.
@@BlakeSuperior_Beats the problem is most people will believe they are negative after the first test. This assumption would seem reasonable according to Dr Mina's slide.
@@2chicos Agree, most people will carry on with life after testing negative and that's probably ok if they have low levels of viral shedding and they're wearing a mask. If they were shedding lots of virus then the test would have been positive. Hopefully people have become more mindful in general of not going to work, school, etc when sick or at least wearing a mask when they suspect they might be coming down with symptoms that could be allergies or a cold, but they aren't sure. It used to be considered "good work ethic" when people powered through their day while sick, but now it just seems reckless!
@@BlakeSuperior_Beats they tested positive on the 3rd day and for 5 consecutive days. Some people would assume they are negative then go on to infect other people.
There is solid data behind his claims, it’s not like he is just guessing.
If body thermometers were to introduced today the FDA would classify it as a medical device and we would be having the same silly discussion instead of just keeping the child at home or we as adults just work remotely.
Correction: Placing public health in the hands of industries more motivated toward profit, especially short-term profit over public health, has always been a costly mistake. We're all expendable. That's their attitude. Check the news stories about more robots getting rolled out to replace this mysteriously absent workforce they've sidelined, outsourced and austeritied to death.
I've purchased many kits for $14 for two tests. We allow only vaccinated people in our house and they must get tested to stay in our house without a mask. Love these tests!
Absolutely bonkers
You should read about the emergency use licence that the tests are granted under
That's a great idea. Esp if you have vulnerable people at home.
@@user-mj3vr4cd2v "Testing is limited to laboratories..." Clearly not! And the HHS ordered millions for schools. Obviously not laboratories. I'm quite surprised at the wording. Certainly will not prevent my using the tests. Thanks for pointing it out. Very interesting!
You do realize vaccinated people can still carry and get the disease…right? My daughter’s vaccinated friend just exposed all of them when she was ill and of course thought it couldn’t be Covid, because she was vaccinated 😞
The future depends more on how everyone deals with their own mortality and frailty, and how much of other ppls rights (biological, economical, political) they are willing to sacrifice, than on science.
excellent talk!! exciting to learn now concepts. Wow...
Oh my god I can’t believe that all you people think that this is a one size fits all!
my sense of smell is coming back should I worry and isolate
I would have liked to hear some push back when Michael said that vaccination status is not important for whether you spread the virus. From what I've seen when there is a "breakthrough" case with MRNA vaccines the infectiousness window is small. I don't know that he actually modeled it out, or whether he's just doing some estimate based on the infectiousness of delta vs. wuhan and naively assuming that the infectiousness window is unaltered by vaccination status. Because there was no push back there I don't know what to think.
Me too @FFB.
Viral load is the same, so makes sense to treat the risk of spread the same.
@@alireid5874 My understanding is that PEAK viral load is roughly the same, but vaccinated people clear the virus much faster. Also there's the issues that even that "viral load" is actually just RNA fragments which could be dead virus.
@@firefoxbrowser342 dead viral fragment particles are usually found at high cycle thresholds (>30), but studies found that both groups were detecting at much lower thresholds, which were likely infectious
@@firefoxbrowser342 FFB correct once again.
The quick double question overload at 27min , grrrrr
Great Thanks to Paul Turner!!! Excellent explanation.
The evolutionary biologist was great! Now that's one evolutionary biologist I can get behind! Cough, ahem, cough. Michael Mina made a distinction between public health and individual health that was phenomenally brilliant! Thank you. Agree with others, though, who wanted more follow up and push back on the vaccine / contagiousness thing. I would disagree with him there, and there's science to back me up.
@patricia hoke , you should a provide link to your science.
59:00 if everyone gets infected, but nobody gets sick what does it matter? for a maybe 1-3days of spread potential cripple sociaety forever? not a gr8 plan. (leaving masks well alone.)
Thank you finally a clear path forward with clear explanations very well-reasoned and I now have a clear understanding of my own path forwards thank you thank you thank you sorry to sound repetitive I will share this when I can
Giving it some consideration I
think to self test once or twice a week
prior to a gathering and an appropriate time after a gathering
thankfully in Australia we don't get price gouging because we have government oversight and probably even subsidy
A preprint showing infants, born to unvaccinated mothers, contacting SARS CoV-2 are developing kidney damage, leads me to ask, who is looking at changes in children post Covid-19?
Smart watches can also be used to detect infection very early on by measuring elevated heart rate overnight. Not perfectly accurate but useful. Then you could do rapid testing whenever your heart rate appears to be suggesting possible infection.
Should we all be tested for everything all the time?
Nope. Why?
But lots of test trace isolate would have stopped spread of this new disease.
Now it's out everywhere quick testing for people entering an event or venue would reduce risk until everyone has the chance to get vaccinated.
Like Mina said, it's context dependent. Purposes need to be defined. If the purpose is to keep kids in school as much as possible, rapid testing makes this possible in a way that it's not now. If a parent gets Covid, then the kids will need to be quarantined as a close contact. If there were rapid tests then tests could be submitted to show the absence of transmissible antigen, so that normal life can continue. Testing can be adapted to whether or not there's a need for it. Testing can limit transmissibility with minimal social dislocation and economic cost. Mina was all about giving up the usual shot gun approach that's taken to everything and being clear about what the intentions of testing are. If the goal is to limit transmission and someone who has no symptoms plans to be together indoors with another person or people who are in high risk of infection people, then they can test before going to the occasion. The test will give evidence of transmissible infection or of absence of it. So last year there would have been no need for people to stay home from family holidays or from visiting a loved one who lives in a nursing home. if they can test first and confirm that they are not carrying a virus that's a danger to that person. It would not be necessary to shut down all "nonessential" businesses if people can test before spending time in indoor settings, along with wearing masks . This was done in other countries, where economies were spared the destruction that occurred in the US.
How about focus on CD8 before, after, while expose?
How about focus on N-Answer?
Winner, winner chickendinner! Never forget Marek!
LOOOL! You really comparing an Elch with an piece of RNA?! (NOT ALLIVE?!)?!?!?!?!?!?
are you a crazy person?
The test guy has problems he does not see - 1. It is not just the test costs but administration as well, who will pay for all the people doing all the testing? 2. If you leave it to people to test themselves how you will be able to monitor - are you really this naive to think that they would report positive tests and do that honestly? We see now that parents send infected children routinely to schools regardless whether they show minor symptoms or not. Younger people will not stop going to work or lectures just because they have some positive test result if they feel just fine.
All this "effective sensitivity stuff" is a hogwash. You need to have independent person doing the test and you need to pay for that person's work.
Don't make the perfect the enemy of the good you don't need 100% compliance to get a benefit. That said, it's a little late in the game for anything to matter.
He answered that. There’s a seevice called Emed, and another he mentioned, that offer online monitored/proctored tests that are then verifiable, saving the cost of nurses Etc to administer.
But in vaccinated infectivity lasts less days according to some .
Singapore study showed that viral load decreases faster in vaccinated. But there’s still a small window of “opportunity” to spread the virus nonetheless where the rapid tests could be helpful.
Do not say ivermectin and ivermectin or ivermerktin 3 time or get censored
Then how is it you're not censored one month after saying it thrice? 🤣
32:00 omicron: it just doesnt mean that. start arresting journalists.
So in this scenario, evolution is like the House Rules in a Casino game that has probabilistic degrees of success and failure, except vastly more trials of combining spikes and variations is in multiple bands of convergences, as you should expect in AM-FM logarithmic condensation of resonance bonding proportioning probability.
This is why wave-packaging QM-TIME Completeness cause-effect Timing-spacing coordination Communication is self-defining description of the Multiverse format of real-time re-evolution circularity quantization cause-effect, a standing wave modulation of elemental e-Pi-i sync-duration connectivity. Zero-infinity scaling in continuous creation connection continuum, ie WYSIWYG Time.
mutual avoid gang 😎
Is Delta a "evolutionary" variant or is it a manufactured variant?
This scam would have worked out much better if Theranos wasn't busted......
Delete The Fear
Switch off the T.v
57:30 vaccinated spread more