# Slovakia mass testing entire population



## odyssey06 (2 Nov 2020)

TWO-THIRDS OF Slovakia’s population of 5.4 million people were tested for coronavirus over the weekend as part of a controversial nationwide...
Antigen tests were carried out on 3.625 million people — of whom 38,359 people, or 1.06 percent, were found to be positive.

Antigen tests give far quicker results than PCR tests, which involve nasal swabs that have to be sent to a laboratory, but they are less reliable.
Another round of tests has been scheduled for this coming weekend.
Participation is not mandatory but anyone who is not able to produce a negative test certificate if stopped by police could get a heavy fine.
Anyone who tests positive has to go immediately into quarantine for 10 days.









						Two-thirds of entire Slovakian population tested for Covid-19
					

A total of 61,829 people have been infected by the virus.




					www.thejournal.ie


----------



## Purple (3 Nov 2020)

Great idea.


----------



## john luc (3 Nov 2020)

A blanket testing of the entire population is the only way to identify who has it and who has not. Make it easier to stop this in its tracks and end this rumbling on off lockdowns


----------



## Leo (3 Nov 2020)

john luc said:


> A blanket testing of the entire population is the only way to identify who has it and who has not. Make it easier to stop this in its tracks and end this rumbling on off lockdowns



Anitgen tests like they are using will certainly weed out a lot of extra cases, they're a lot quicker and cheaper than the testing we're currently using, but with that you have to accept up to a 50% false-negative rate. So it's not the silver bullet to ending lockdowns, but certainly could still have a role in a more effective proactive model.


----------



## odyssey06 (3 Nov 2020)

Leo said:


> Anitgen tests like they are using will certainly weed out a lot of extra cases, they're a lot quicker and cheaper than the testing we're currently using, but with that you have to accept up to a 50% false-negative rate. So it's not the silver bullet to ending lockdowns, but certainly could still have a role in a more effective proactive model.



That's a very poor false-negative rate. A poor false positive rate would be preferable - people isolating who don't need to.
Whereas with a high false negative rate you have people out and about who should not be.


----------



## Leo (3 Nov 2020)

odyssey06 said:


> Whereas with a high false negative rate you have people out and about who should not be.



Exactly, that's why it can't be used as a solution in place of restricted movement. The false-positive rates are low at least, I think people might be more resistant to taking these tests if there was a significant chance of a false positive meaning they'd have to self-isolate for two weeks. 

Used as an additional tool to identify extra cases in regions where we have high rates might speed up the time it takes to bring the numbers down.


----------



## Purple (3 Nov 2020)

odyssey06 said:


> That's a very poor false-negative rate. A poor false positive rate would be preferable - people isolating who don't need to.
> Whereas with a high false negative rate you have people out and about who should not be.


It would probably be useful to give a broad overview, if only to back up the trends we see from the more accurate but localised testing.


----------



## jackswift (14 Nov 2020)

Purple said:


> Great idea.


Even though the inventor of the test said that it shouldn’t be used to test for viruses.


----------



## jackswift (14 Nov 2020)

john luc said:


> A blanket testing of the entire population is the only way to identify who has it and who has not. Make it easier to stop this in its tracks and end this rumbling on off lockdowns


But you can test negative today and positive tomorrow. Some famous fella can’t think of his name but he got 4 tests close together and two came back positive and two negative.


----------



## Purple (16 Nov 2020)

jackswift said:


> Even though the inventor of the test said that it shouldn’t be used to test for viruses.


Have you a link to what they said specifically?


----------



## EmmDee (16 Nov 2020)

jackswift said:


> Some famous fella can’t think of his name but he got 4 tests close together and two came back positive and two negative.



Elon Musk - wouldn't be the first time he's said stupid stuff on Twitter. He obviously didn't understand the nature of the test


----------



## Leo (16 Nov 2020)

EmmDee said:


> Elon Musk - wouldn't be the first time he's said stupid stuff on Twitter.



Yep, the guy who ordered staff to ignore restrictions so he could hit production targets!


----------

