OT: Everything COVID19 - PART 5

Status
Not open for further replies.

Micklebot

Moderator
Apr 27, 2010
53,940
31,145
There is limited capacity to staff assessment centres and even if they begin doing swabs in pharmacies there is only so much lab capacity to process.
Doing swabs at pharmacies seems like a bad idea... you're asking people who suspect they are infected to go to a place where there is a mix of presumably healthy people going about their business.

Ideal world they get the spit test some Ottawa company developed to the point where it can be done from the home. Apparently they were testing it at the Brewers testing center; so you'd get the normal swab done, but then they'd ask you to do the spit test too so that they could compare the results and see how it stood up.
 

Micklebot

Moderator
Apr 27, 2010
53,940
31,145
What we need to do is get people to stop going for a test when they have no reason to do so

That's what Vera Etches said today
It's really odd to me that some people are going in to get tested without any reason. I get going without symptoms if you have presumed exposure to an infected person, and even though they are recommending against it, I get wanting a test if someone in your household has been exposed even if you have not, but the people getting tested purely because they are going to attend some social event is bizarre to me. It's not exactly a pleasant process, and you could very well get infected between getting the test and going to whatever event you wanted to be tested because of.

Anyways, on the subject of testing bottlenecks, they are apparently looking to expand testing from 2000 a day to 3500 a day in Ottawa by means of expanding the hours of operation, and adding a mobile testing center that can be sent to schools and stuff.

I think this might just be a bit of a temporary thing with back to school more people are wanting to get tested, and they didn't anticipate it. Cost benefit probably isn't there to test people who are low risk (no symptoms, no known or presumed exposure)
 

FormentonTheFuture

Registered User
Sep 29, 2017
7,761
3,732
It's really odd to me that some people are going in to get tested without any reason. I get going without symptoms if you have presumed exposure to an infected person, and even though they are recommending against it, I get wanting a test if someone in your household has been exposed even if you have not, but the people getting tested purely because they are going to attend some social event is bizarre to me. It's not exactly a pleasant process, and you could very well get infected between getting the test and going to whatever event you wanted to be tested because of.

Anyways, on the subject of testing bottlenecks, they are apparently looking to expand testing from 2000 a day to 3500 a day in Ottawa by means of expanding the hours of operation, and adding a mobile testing center that can be sent to schools and stuff.

I think this might just be a bit of a temporary thing with back to school more people are wanting to get tested, and they didn't anticipate it. Cost benefit probably isn't there to test people who are low risk (no symptoms, no known or presumed exposure)
they told people to go even if you have no reason. A few months ago.
 

harrisb

Registered User
Oct 6, 2009
2,217
952
Who the hell thinks getting a q-tip shoved down their throat the stuck up both their nostrils is something to do just for kicks?

Those entire families may have had close prolonged exposure to a known case, their kids may require a test prior to returning to daycare because they exibited symptoms while there, who knows. Have had to go get tested myself, i can't imagine anyone actually opts to do so just for kicks.

I get that you were frustrated, but just because you can't visually identify their reason for themselves being willing to wait around in a line that doesn't appear to be moving does not mean they don't have one and are doing so for the lol's...

It's really odd to me that some people are going in to get tested without any reason. I get going without symptoms if you have presumed exposure to an infected person, and even though they are recommending against it, I get wanting a test if someone in your household has been exposed even if you have not, but the people getting tested purely because they are going to attend some social event is bizarre to me. It's not exactly a pleasant process, and you could very well get infected between getting the test and going to whatever event you wanted to be tested because of.

Anyways, on the subject of testing bottlenecks, they are apparently looking to expand testing from 2000 a day to 3500 a day in Ottawa by means of expanding the hours of operation, and adding a mobile testing center that can be sent to schools and stuff.

I think this might just be a bit of a temporary thing with back to school more people are wanting to get tested, and they didn't anticipate it. Cost benefit probably isn't there to test people who are low risk (no symptoms, no known or presumed exposure)

Hmm, it appears I was at the beginning of this spike and our public health officials agree with me and not Mick. Looks like people are voluntarily getting swabbed and just going for the lol's using Mick's description.

 

Sens

Registered User
Jan 7, 2016
6,086
2,550
they told people to go even if you have no reason. A few months ago.

Ford still encouraged people to get tested today at his press conference even if she’s showed no symtoms

sounds like shoppers drug mart is going to become a testing site Across the province
 

bicboi64

Registered User
Aug 13, 2020
4,476
2,812
Brampton
I live in Peel region, its a bit of a mess because we're the trucking centre of Ontario and schools opening is going to be the tipping point for the 2nd wave. Really hope they just make school online
 

RealSpartan

Registered User
Nov 2, 2016
133
137
They've drilled the concept of "asymptomatic" carrying/spreading into us since the very beginning and they're now expressing surprise that people with no symptoms/no known exposure are getting tests to the point of dissuading them?

I'd like to believe the vast majority of such test seekers aren't doing it for "fun". They're probably doing it out of an abundance of caution prior to engaging in certain activities (e.g. going to visit grandma/grandpa) or upon feeling the slightest of anomaly in their health (e.g. seasonal allergy symptoms being mistaken for illness).
 

GCK

Registered User
Oct 15, 2018
15,776
10,002
Right but it's been six months since the start of this and it has been several months capped at 30,000.

I guess I don't understand why we stopped expanding capacity at labs and stopped looking into ways to streamline assessment centers, etc...
There are only so many labs capable of running the tests and the assessment centres have been staffed by hospital workers who still need to work at the hospitals. The pharmacist idea is great but the labs will become a bottleneck. If Health Canada certifies the rapid test it will mean they can start doing swan tests to confirm only positives.
 

Knave

Registered User
Mar 6, 2007
21,649
2,238
Ottawa
There are only so many labs capable of running the tests and the assessment centres have been staffed by hospital workers who still need to work at the hospitals. The pharmacist idea is great but the labs will become a bottleneck. If Health Canada certifies the rapid test it will mean they can start doing swan tests to confirm only positives.

It's a PCR test. We could have been consolidating lab resources, identifying the machinery and operators. There are loads of PCR machines that probably aren't being used to run tests.

Hell, we could have sourced more machinery instead of stockpiling 10,000 ventilators as if we have the people needed to set-up and monitor that many ventilators.

We did nothing. We got to 30K and it was like "mission accomplished".

I'm not saying this would have been easy but it feels like we missed the mark again. There is additional lab capacity in a non-traditional sense where many, many labs have PCR machines and technicians (all of whom are qualified but some of whom have PhDs. These are trained, educated folks).

There was time if the government wanted to expand capacity internally and not use outside resources. We could have looked into buying more PCR machines among a list of other things.

I look across the border and New York State was running over 70,000 tests a day at certain points. I'm aware we don't have nearly that problem but it would be nice to have similar capacity relative to our population.

I get the solution would be more people self isolating and not getting tested and maybe 30,000 is enough in an ideal world... but that's not the situation we face. People are going out to get tested and some are being turned away, others get fed up with the wait and go home. Saying "just isolate" or "stop doing what you're doing" achieves nothing. Increasing capacity would catch more actual positive tests and help prevent spread.
 
Last edited:

GCK

Registered User
Oct 15, 2018
15,776
10,002
It's a PCR test. We could have been consolidating lab resources, identifying the machinery and operators. There are loads of PCR machines that probably aren't being used to run tests.

Hell, we could have sourced more machinery instead of stockpiling 10,000 ventilators as if we have the people needed to set-up and monitor that many ventilators.

We did nothing. We got to 30K and it was like "mission accomplished".

I'm not saying this would have been easy but it feels like we missed the mark again. There is additional lab capacity in a non-traditional sense where many, many labs have PCR machines and technicians (all of whom are qualified but some of whom have PhDs. These are trained, educated folks).

There was time if the government wanted to expand capacity internally and not use outside resources. We could have looked into buying more PCR machines among a list of other things.
The PCR tests are analyzed by technologists, technicians are not allowed to run tests. There is a shortage of technologists as it is, if you want to pull them out of other specialties then you will have serious problems elsewhere. Just because someone has a PhD doesn’t make them qualified. There is board certification required by CMLTO.
 

Billy Bridges

Registered User
Sep 20, 2011
412
617
Doing swabs at pharmacies seems like a bad idea... you're asking people who suspect they are infected to go to a place where there is a mix of presumably healthy people going about their business.

The idea is to offload the individuals who need asymptomatic testing to the most accessible health care professionals. Not ideal, but better than nothing.
 

Micklebot

Moderator
Apr 27, 2010
53,940
31,145
The idea is to offload the individuals who need asymptomatic testing to the most accessible health care professionals. Not ideal, but better than nothing.
I get what the idea is, i just am skeptical that you could enforce asymptotic only testing. People not wanting to wait in the longer assesment center lines might lie and just go to a pharmacy. Maybe I've just lost faith in people by reading too much twitter...

I guess other countries have already been doing it for a while now so my fear is probably not warranted, and by relieving the bottleneck at testing centers by removing most of the asymptomatic people from the line, maybe there will be far less incentive for someone to lie about symptoms
 

Micklebot

Moderator
Apr 27, 2010
53,940
31,145
Hmm, it appears I was at the beginning of this spike and our public health officials agree with me and not Mick. Looks like people are voluntarily getting swabbed and just going for the lol's using Mick's description.


My position was that when there is capacity to test everyone there is no need to triage just to move certain people through the line quicker. Public health is responding to a lack of capacity to test everyone and prioritizing those at highest risk to ensure rapid contact tracing.

If capacity had been overun at the time you went, thats one thing. If not, then there was no need to bumb symptomatic people to the front of the line.

I will take a loss on there apparently being people taking tests just because, as they are reporting part of the backlog has been created by people wanting a clean test result before going to some social event.
 

Sens of Anarchy

Registered User
Jul 9, 2013
65,421
50,131
I get what the idea is, i just am skeptical that you could enforce asymptotic only testing. People not wanting to wait in the longer assesment center lines might lie and just go to a pharmacy. Maybe I've just lost faith in people by reading too much twitter...

I guess other countries have already been doing it for a while now so my fear is probably not warranted, and by relieving the bottleneck at testing centers by removing most of the asymptomatic people from the line, maybe there will be far less incentive for someone to lie about symptoms
that would be the not ideal part
 

Billy Bridges

Registered User
Sep 20, 2011
412
617
I get what the idea is, i just am skeptical that you could enforce asymptotic only testing. People not wanting to wait in the longer assesment center lines might lie and just go to a pharmacy. Maybe I've just lost faith in people by reading too much twitter...

I guess other countries have already been doing it for a while now so my fear is probably not warranted, and by relieving the bottleneck at testing centers by removing most of the asymptomatic people from the line, maybe there will be far less incentive for someone to lie about symptoms

You're right to be skeptical.

My hope is that there is a limit on stupid in the general population, so someone cruel enough to lie about not having symptoms are the same fools who refuse to abide by public health guidelines, so they won't feel testing is necessary to begin with.
 

benjiv1

Registered User
Mar 8, 2010
5,230
3,369
Ottawa
Right but it's been six months since the start of this and it has been several months capped at 30,000.

I guess I don't understand why we stopped expanding capacity at labs and stopped looking into ways to streamline assessment centers, etc...

Lab Capacity, and lack of available staff to actually staff Brewer.

For the labs, there’s already a shortage in Techs, and it takes years to certify, so there isn’t a quick way to hire additional resources.

All the labs end up stealing from each other, so outside of forcing OT, there is a limit to how many hours you can actually get scheduled. (Same with use of the lab equipment, and working space)

For Brewer, numbers were actually so low at certain points of the summer, that staff were being sent home. The problem right now is that through the summer, TOH still had slowdowns, so they could supplement staff to fill the positions. Now that service has ramped up, units need their staff returned to them, leaving Brewer tight for additional staff.

There are only so many grads that can be hired per year, and everyone is hiring from the same pool. (Including for usual turnover like retirement, etc)
 

DrEasy

Out rumptackling
Oct 3, 2010
11,020
6,712
Stützville
Stupid question: aren't the asymptomatic people exactly those we want to test? People with symptoms (or presumed symptoms) should avoid going out and spreading the virus further, and if they are sick they should go to the hospital, not a testing centre. It's asymptomatic people who should get tested so that they self-isolate if they test positive.

I don't understand telling asymptomatic people not to get tested. I understand we lack the capacity to test everyone, but then the first people who we should NOT test is people with symptoms, as we have a fairly good idea what the test will say, and we know what they need to do.
 

Micklebot

Moderator
Apr 27, 2010
53,940
31,145
Stupid question: aren't the asymptomatic people exactly those we want to test? People with symptoms (or presumed symptoms) should avoid going out and spreading the virus further, and if they are sick they should go to the hospital, not a testing centre. It's asymptomatic people who should get tested so that they self-isolate if they test positive.

I don't understand telling asymptomatic people not to get tested. I understand we lack the capacity to test everyone, but then the first people who we should NOT test is people with symptoms, as we have a fairly good idea what the test will say, and we know what they need to do.

You test symptomatic people so that you can innitiate contact tracing if they are positive. Next you test asymptomatic who had close contact so that they don't unwittingly start infecting people by going about their lives. Testing asymptomatic people without some sort of trigger for testing is more of a luxery if you have the capacity

Contact tracing is the important part to stopping spread
 
  • Like
Reactions: DrEasy

DrEasy

Out rumptackling
Oct 3, 2010
11,020
6,712
Stützville
You test symptomatic people so that you can innitiate contact tracing if they are positive. Next you test asymptomatic who had close contact so that they don't unwittingly start infecting people by going about their lives. Testing asymptomatic people without some sort of trigger for testing is more of a luxery if you have the capacity

Contact tracing is the important part to stopping spread
Makes sense, thanks!
 

HSF

Registered User
Sep 3, 2008
26,084
7,613
I know lots of ppl that got tested due to caution before seeing certain ppl or going to cottages

tbh that’s exactly what was asked of by the government now that is it getting busier it’s fine to say only get tested when you have symptoms though more money needs to be put into expanded rating
 

Micklebot

Moderator
Apr 27, 2010
53,940
31,145
I know lots of ppl that got tested due to caution before seeing certain ppl or going to cottages

tbh that’s exactly what was asked of by the government now that is it getting busier it’s fine to say only get tested when you have symptoms though more money needs to be put into expanded rating
Thinking about it, i seem to recal when long term care opened up to visitors they required a negative test first.

When you have the capacity to do so, its a good idea,
 
  • Like
Reactions: DrEasy

JD1

Registered User
Sep 12, 2005
16,130
9,701
I think what they're telling people is to only get tested when you have cause for concern, symptoms or not
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad