There is, actually, antibody test. They are quite costly however.
Im my country, getting infected count as the 1rst dose (yes, i know, natural immunity is better with "real" infections, but rememeber that Covid sometime start an auto-immune disease, it's hard to test for this, so its less costly to just vaccinate people (the jab cost 12E)).
No scientific response. This is mostly pragmatic, and probably politic too. Its easier to just jab everyone you can while you can.
I know it's a bit hearthless, and i can't ask doctors to start triaging, but i'd really like that once everyone have had the possibility to get the double dose, we just stop everything covid related (maybe not the reduced maximum capacity and mask in public transport for the adults during peak hours: those restrictions should have been implemented way before covid).
Well, yes, $42 * 10M is expensive. Not that $15210M is not. And i'm pretty sure half the people who said "i got covid" last year did not have it (and i'm kind). So let's say we had tested half the population, and that half of this half have to get vaccinated anyway, since the test was negative. For France, that's one billion euros used for nothing.
I'm to tired to make sense, but you understand my point (if not, i'll have to explain the reasoning better).
Imagine half the uk population wanted to get tested before getting the vaccine, the cost for the NIH would be way higher than just vaccinating everybody. You can't tell people `if the antibody test is positive, you don't have to get vaccinated`, at least not until the vast majority is already vaccinated. And even then, it's mostly lost money.
You could have told people "pay for your own test", but in this case, the fabrication and distribution of those test would slow down the vaccination. And you have to make sure that the test are not faked, so a doctor should verify that the test was yours. I know some doctors who faked smallpox vaccine, so you can imagine how much of a good idea this is.
Also, even if the individual cost is not that high, telling people to `pay not to get vaccinated` (because it would've been spin like this, I've read UK newspapers) is not the best idea want the biggest issues for most western government is lack of trust.
So: it is more pragmatic to jab everybody. Easier to orchestrate, you don't expose your leadership too much. Overall, best solution for the governments. Is it the best solution for the population? Debatable. I'd say its the most cost-effective, the one with the less headaches, so yes?
You've been posting a ton of flamebait and unsubstantive comments. That's destructive of what this site is for and we ban accounts that do it. In fact - you've done almost nothing but post like that. I had to scroll back a long way in your comment history to see something that wasn't unsubstantive.
If you keep doing it, we will ban you. If you don't want to be banned on HN, please stop all of that now and review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and start using the site as intended. Here's the basic idea: if you have a substantive point, make it thoughtfully; if not, please don't comment until you do.
Its probably not worth your time, but I'd like to know which of my comments you consider unsubstantive. I'd say most my comments are terse and I don't care to provide references unless requested. My terseness has a point and I try to rely on big picture details that we can all agree on and are readily available to be provided if someone was curious to ask or look themselves (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/burd...). When so many people are vocally willing to set a dangerous new precedent in a state of emergency I think a biting tone may become appropriate. Although I understand that this isn't necessarily a forum meant for discussing such politically charged happenings and you have precedents to worry about yourselves as moderators of this forum.
Comments like that aren't worth it to have on HN because the negative effect they have on the threads, and on the culture of the site, dominates any value they're adding.
It seems obvious, reading through your comment history, that you have an agenda about this topic. There's nothing wrong with having a view, of course, but an agenda is something different—that's when you're using the site to wage a battle in favor of your view. At that point curiosity has left the building, and curiosity is supposed to be the animating value here.
Definitely I've behaved selfishly and with an agenda. However it is not with a particular outcome in mind except to see a discussion happen among an excellent group of people under excellent moderation. I'm deeply concerned that I have wrong information and am begging to be skewered with the truth. I do think others wanted to see the discussion had as well, so while its selfish on my part its not without broader appeal. This forum is amazing and I thank you so much for your patient moderation.
Im my country, getting infected count as the 1rst dose (yes, i know, natural immunity is better with "real" infections, but rememeber that Covid sometime start an auto-immune disease, it's hard to test for this, so its less costly to just vaccinate people (the jab cost 12E)).
No scientific response. This is mostly pragmatic, and probably politic too. Its easier to just jab everyone you can while you can.
I know it's a bit hearthless, and i can't ask doctors to start triaging, but i'd really like that once everyone have had the possibility to get the double dose, we just stop everything covid related (maybe not the reduced maximum capacity and mask in public transport for the adults during peak hours: those restrictions should have been implemented way before covid).