As Omicron begins its aggressive surge, I think we all can use some practical info. I have been tested a couple of times for COVID but I’ve never used an OTC antigen test. I bought a couple (at an insane price) because we plan to visit some people and since this thing is so virulent I wanted to be sure we weren’t positive. The following twitter thread explains when you should use it to determine that.
It also discusses this endless whining about having to use some mitigation strategies and claiming those who do are mindless hysterics. I’ve never gotten that. The economy is open, we can do pretty much anything we ever could. The only thing that’s being asked of us is to be sure we aren’t spreading the disease and using common sense to protect ourselves and our loved ones.
It’s just not that big a deal.
This is from Zeynep Tufekci:
Also note. The third one is positive. The line may be the faint but it’s there. It means he has high enough viral load, signaling becoming infectious. Next morning is even higher—darker line . Use rapid tests *right before* meeting. That’s their purpose.
To the mention-folk claiming this is anxiety. Do you stop at red lights? Do you slow down around corners? YES COST IS A BARRIER. But if I can take sixty seconds to avoid infecting especially someone vulnerable, why wouldn’t I? It’s the opposite of anxiety. It’s calm and carry-on.
I think there’s an invisible demographic of people, especially among those whose work conditions are more privileged, who have been taking reasonable precautions but really are just carrying on with life, just with extra steps especially to avoid transmission to more vulnerable.
Yes, I personally write a lot about COVID but it’s because this should not be the bastion of the privileged, or those with money, or information—to be able to take reasonable precautions and carry on with life and adjust if something changes. This isn’t anxiety, it’s privilege.
Me: “Sure, I slow down around corners, even more so if children are playing around! I get to my destination 60 seconds later than otherwise.”
You, a realist: “You must be a ball of anxiety, life is full of risks just accept and move on!”Perfect. It’s very similar to staying home when you’re sick if you’re able to do so. This disease spreads most *right before* you develop symptoms and just then, so this test is equivalent of a cough and a fever warning you that you’re likely to infect others. Calm and carry on.
And finally, the original person I quoted lives in a country where the cost to him is… zero. I simply wanted to highlight the meaning of the faint line. No, I wouldn’t test four times a day unless I suspected exposure or was just trying it out, but the point is obvious.
Therapeutics are great for people who need them—some people don’t respond to vaccines, some people are high-risk. The potential side effects of any infection *and* those of *every* therapeutic we have greatly exceed any risk we see from the vaccines.
I’m thrilled about Pfizer’s antiviral being available to people, for example, who are immunocompromised or elderly or high-risk even from breakthroughs, for example. One of its components comes with a black box warning, though. Drugs are almost always much riskier than vaccines.
Main reason people can think this is that the generations before us worked so hard at “disease mitigation”—from sanitation to antibiotics to drugs to vaccines—so that we don’t realize what it means. Here’s an under five mortality chart over two centuries.
Amazing how many think it’s brave or realistic to whine about doing something so minor to avoid transmitting. You guys aren’t storming Omaha Beach on D-Day, you know? Early 2020—when we had no vaccines, drugs, or even PPE—nurses went to work wearing garbage bags. That’s bravery.
Yes, pretty much the same logic and the same amount of time commitment. By the way it took a lot of work and effort to get people, including medical doctors of the 19th century, to accept washing hands between patients was necessary for disease mitigation.
From the epidemiologist I quoted in the first tweet above, who did a great public service by testing frequently enough to demonstrate temporal the emergence of the line visually. Thank you!
Originally tweeted by zeynep tufekci (@zeynep) on December 16, 2021.
It’s Happy Hollandaise time here at Hullabaloo. If you’d like to contribute, you can hit one of the buttons below or use the address on the sidebar: