David wrote:Am I the only one having a hard time grasping how testing for antibodies at this point (unless they are really wrong on how long this has been out there - as some have suggested) really moves the needle anytime soon?
Even if there are, say, like 10x(!!) as many cases in the US as they say, that'd be 2.5 million cases out of 327 million people - or 0.7% of the population.
So that leaves the other 99%+ still without immunity and still in this limbo of anxiety we're currently in.
I just don't understand, unless they are several orders of magnitude (did i use that right? lol) off in terms of how many people have had it, how this makes a big difference to us anytime soon, in a practical sense. i get how it's really useful for understanding spread better and there's always a chance that there are many more people in the community who have had it and recovered than we know.
EDIT - reading back on the thread i realize it looks tone deaf right after rob's post (and hell almost like a direct response)...to clarify, i had not read your post. i totally get why an antibody test would be useful for plenty of people, yourself included. i just meant in the manner that people are speaking like it would a big step in allowing us to go back to normal in the short term.
There are probably additional reasons, but for me three things immediately come to mind:
1. Peace of mind for people better knowing the best way to handle their specific personal circumstances
2. We can run studies and better estimate how many people in the US do have it. Because there's an argument that with the lack of testing we really are off from the real numbers by several orders of magnitude:
3. If this comes back again like many people expect, enough people knowing their status means we don't have to go quite as far shutting *everything* down again the second time