I love the_donald, but lately people seem to be self-contradicting. Simultaneously saying widespread testing is pointless, and also acting as if we know the results of widespread testing.
You can say testing is pointless and we are doing enough, but that requires accepting that not knowing how widespread it is is acceptable. That's a legitimate opinion.
You can also say we need to know the spread of the virus, but in that case you have to agree US hasn't done enough testing to have that. Also a legitimate opinion.
Neither opinion is wrong. However your post, acting as if we DO know the spread, is wrong.
By the way, my opinion? Closer to the first. Knowing the spread would be nice, but if that takes resources from more important things then no big deal. I trust the Trump administration to make the right call. Trump seems happy with the current rate of testing, so I accept that.
I'm not sure where to find the numbers but the experts usually have some sort of 'formula/guess' and so they can usually get a pretty good idea of how many people probably have it.
As far as I can ever recall they are usually about right though I think they overestimated some like MERS and maybe SARS too but the point is that they have some good idea.
Nobody is saying we DO KNOW like objectively as if we have GPS on Corona 'Hosts' bodies but yes there is 'know' as in they have very good reasons, tried and tested, to know something that is probably about correct in any meaningful ways.
We don't know the rates.
I love the_donald, but lately people seem to be self-contradicting. Simultaneously saying widespread testing is pointless, and also acting as if we know the results of widespread testing.
You can say testing is pointless and we are doing enough, but that requires accepting that not knowing how widespread it is is acceptable. That's a legitimate opinion.
You can also say we need to know the spread of the virus, but in that case you have to agree US hasn't done enough testing to have that. Also a legitimate opinion.
Neither opinion is wrong. However your post, acting as if we DO know the spread, is wrong.
By the way, my opinion? Closer to the first. Knowing the spread would be nice, but if that takes resources from more important things then no big deal. I trust the Trump administration to make the right call. Trump seems happy with the current rate of testing, so I accept that.
I'm not sure where to find the numbers but the experts usually have some sort of 'formula/guess' and so they can usually get a pretty good idea of how many people probably have it.
As far as I can ever recall they are usually about right though I think they overestimated some like MERS and maybe SARS too but the point is that they have some good idea.
Nobody is saying we DO KNOW like objectively as if we have GPS on Corona 'Hosts' bodies but yes there is 'know' as in they have very good reasons, tried and tested, to know something that is probably about correct in any meaningful ways.