Tag: Testing

Contributor Post Created with Sketch. Recommended by Ricochet Members Created with Sketch. Testing Doesn’t Catch Everything

 

We put things to the test, to discover their limits and minimize human error in their design. Yet sometimes the test itself is imperfect. Like the product it tests, it’s more prone than we’d like to admit to human error and inexperience.

One supremely stressful testing ground is preparing for war. Ricochet member Percival, who has good reason to know about these things, said in a recent thread, “When you test a new weapons system, you generally do it against a target that you have absolute control over. You don’t do it in or near populated areas. You set up a lot of cameras at different angles so you can record everything that happens”. Engineers know from generations of hard experience that tests don’t always catch everything, though, and the reasons are sometimes only obvious in retrospect.

Join host Joe Selvaggi as he talks with Hannah Mamuszka, expert in diagnostic science, about the state of COVID-19 testing technology and its implications for a safer return to school and work in the fall.

Hannah Mamuszka is Founder & CEO of ALVA10, a healthcare technology firm. Hannah has spent her 20+ year career in diagnostics – both in pharma and at diagnostics companies, in the lab and on the business side. She believes that the challenges of diagnostic technology fully impacting patient care are more commercial than technical, and conceived of ALVA10 to create a mechanism to pull technology into healthcare by aligning incentives through data. She regularly speaks on issues regarding advancement of technology in healthcare, is on the Board of Directors for two diagnostic companies and writes a column on the value of diagnostics for the Journal of Precision Medicine.

Join host Joe Selvaggi and Pioneer’s Bill Smith in a conversation with Hannah Mamuszka, expert in diagnostic medicine, on why the U.S. lacked adequate early testing, what current testing looks like in the Commonwealth, and where testing technology needs to be to support public gatherings in the future.

Hannah Mamuszka is Founder & CEO of ALVA10, a healthcare technology firm. Hannah has spent her 20+ year career in diagnostics – both in pharma and at diagnostics companies, in the lab and on the business side. She believes that the challenges of diagnostic technology fully impacting patient care are more commercial than technical, and conceived of ALVA10 to create a mechanism to pull technology into healthcare by aligning incentives through data. She regularly speaks on issues regarding advancement of technology in healthcare, is on the Board of Directors for two diagnostic companies and writes a column on the value of diagnostics for the Journal of Precision Medicine.

Join Jim and Greg as they cheer good news on coronavirus immunity, testing, and treatment. They also break down German intelligence accusing China and the World Health Organization of hiding human-to-human transmission for weeks. And they groan as Dr. Fauci says the close contact required in football would make the sport a prime activity for spreading the virus.

This week, Charlotte explains to kids how testing for the coronavirus will work! She also answers questions from kids all over America!

Contributor Post Created with Sketch. Recommended by Ricochet Members Created with Sketch. Testing… Testing…

 

If I were a certain sort of woman, I’d blame it on The Patriarchy. If I were another sort, I’d blame it on A Culture Insufficiently Supportive of Life. (And, if I were a very specific sort, I’d do both.) Instead, it was the understandable result of The Powers That Be in our neighborhood hospital system not having leeway to make more fine-grained distinctions in a crisis. Which is how pregnant women, who aren’t permitted to receive any in-person prenatal care right now if they have the least little sniffle but no negative lab result for Covid-19, must go through a lengthy, frustrating, and high-exposure screening process to see if they qualify for Covid-19 testing, while the nonpregnant may simply waltz – or rather drive – through safer, low-exposure Covid-19 testing in about 15 minutes.

If you’re pregnant, though, the screening process might take hours, during which you hear, at each step along the way, that you may be ineligible for the lab anyhow – and that’s just your time spent at the walk-in screening center. It doesn’t count the hours (days) you may have spent trying to find a walk-in screening center that hasn’t run out of swabs for the day, and finding out whether you’re even eligible to visit it.

Contributor Post Created with Sketch. Member Post

 

Is this thing on? Ok. I have a serious question that I didn’t want to bury in someone else’s thread. For all those folks who are talking about Singapore or South Korea or whatever their preferred model on battling COVID-19, when you say “testing, testing, testing” exactly what does that mean? Preview Open

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

Recommended by Ricochet Members Created with Sketch. Education Spending and Results: An Idaho Story

 

So does spending more per student improve outcomes in Idaho? In a word, no.

I have a graduate-level background in statistics. I was asked by a local conservative think tank to see whether increased spending on secondary education on Idaho has a meaningful effect on student outcomes. Idaho periodically administers its own ISAT achievement tests to elementary and secondary students. The 10th grade science test from 2014 was the latest set of results that I could obtain with a broad sampling of students with the longest exposure to public schooling. Public schools in Idaho also submit their annual budgetary information on a standardized set of accounts, 2013 was the latest available. I extracted the operating portion of districts’ budgets (educational and overhead expenses) and scaled that by the average daily attendance (ADA) in each district, showing how much was being spent per student.

Gina McCarthy

Contributor Post Created with Sketch. EPA Tested Deadly Pollutants on Humans

 

To help justify more stringent air regulations, Obama’s Environmental Protection Agency has conducted numerous dangerous experiments on humans. The Daily Caller has more:

The agency conducted tests on people with health issues and the elderly, exposing them to high levels of potentially lethal pollutants, without disclosing the risks of cancer and death, according to a newly released government report.