Safety Emporium eyewashes
Safety Emporium eyewashes

Interactive Learning Paradigms, Incorporated

DCHAS-L Discussion List Archive

About This Archive  |   DCHAS-L 2020 Index   |   DCHAS-L Yearly Index   |   DCHAS-L Home Page

About This Archive

DCHAS-L 2020 Index

DCHAS-L Yearly Index

DCHAS-L Home Page


Previous by Date

Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] Ask Dr. Safety: Recovery and Contingency - A Virtual Symposium Wednesday Evening April 15th

Date: Apr 10, 2020 20:53 UTC

Author: NEAL LANGERMAN <neal**At_Symbol_Here**CHEMICAL-SAFETY.COM>

Next by Date

Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] Distance Undergraduate Lab Classes

Date: Apr 10, 2020 22:25 UTC

Author: Mel -SmithCharlton <melissafcsmith**At_Symbol_Here**GMAIL.COM>

Thread context

From: Monona Rossol <0000030664c37427-dmarc-request**At_Symbol_Here**LISTS.PRINCETON.EDU>

Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] Ask Dr. Safety: Recovery and Contingency - A Virtual Symposium Wednesday Evening April 15th

Date: Apr 10, 2020 21:51 UTC

Reply-To: Monona Rossol

In-Reply-To: Re: [DCHAS-L] Ask Dr. Safety: Recovery and Contingency - A Virtual Symposium Wednesday Evening April 15th

Demystify: 

It's not the number of tests, it is the per capita numbers that count. And we wasted all kinds of time developing a new test and slamming other tests that actually worked well enough.  Then we introduced ours which failed big time and was produced in amounts so small it was all but useless for prevention.  Now it was too late to control the pandemic.

Next, we turned it over to the private sector so we now have a bunch of tests, some that take 15 minutes to read, others that take hours to days depending, and NONE of the tests in the quantities needed.  Back at the start, we either needed to get the existing tests or the rights to manufacture them here, or we needed a kind of Manhattan project to put all our resources into a single effort.  Competition in this instance is a bunch of expensive and redundant wasted efforts.

And we are also likely to lose the vaccine race to Oz with our short-sightedness and ego.   I wish California well, but Oz is doing some very interesting things to shorten the linear strategy for vaccine development.

If we intelligently approached the economic challenges here, we would see that the most economically advantageous strategy would have been to get control of the epidemic quickly by testing widely and then get into production of a good vaccine for worldwide production.  Isn't the first thing they teach economics students is to find ways to take advantage of the situation in which you find yourself instead of wasting effort to get the economy back to what it was first when that place that wasn't all that much to start with?   Pillars of salt come to mind.

Monona




-----Original Message-----
From: Zack Mansdorf <mansdorfz**At_Symbol_Here**BELLSOUTH.NET>
To: DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**PRINCETON.EDU
Sent: Fri, Apr 10, 2020 4:25 pm
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] Ask Dr. Safety: Recovery and Contingency - A Virtual Symposium Wednesday Evening April 15th

Monna:
 
First, we actually have tested more people than any other country in the world.  Some of the testing in some countries (such as China) had poor reliability.  Antibodies normally indicate that you are over the infection if you are walking around versus being treated and I am not aware of any test for "shedding"..  Tests for having the infection would not make sense if you have no symptoms (it is not practical to test 320 million people).  Having a negative test on Tuesday, means you do not have the virus on Tuesday.  Maybe you get it Wednesday.
 
Zack
 
From: ACS Division of Chemical Health and Safety <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**PRINCETON.EDU> On Behalf Of Monona Rossol
Sent: Friday, April 10, 2020 2:38 PM
To: DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**PRINCETON.EDU
Subject: Re: [DCHAS-L] Ask Dr. Safety: Recovery and Contingency - A Virtual Symposium Wednesday Evening April 15th