Re: the tiny amount of testing done in the U.S.:
That being said, even if this is only half right, the US should be ashamed.
I'm a U.S. citizen, but I haven't done anything that delayed the testing of cases in the U.S.; so I presume you don't think
I should be ashamed about something.
("The US" is a bit broad for my tastes since, hey, that's me, though not only me. But I'll accept blame if I did something to deserve it!)
I think someone, or some groups of someones, could have done
something better. But who and
what, precisely?
We're seemingly about a month behind everyone else (in the first world that is) at getting...
(a.) the test kits built; and/or,
(b.) the processing-capacity spun up.
We were further delayed by the fact that an early set of tests didn't work properly, but set that aside. What
was the delay, that put us behind the 8-ball? Was it kits or processing or both?
If kits, was it because we manufacture everything in China and, at the time, they were closed for business? (If so, the lesson is: Don't put all your eggs in one basket.)
If processing, was it because we lack competent personnel, or machines, or did nobody bother to train and schedule them quickly enough?
Or was it something else?
I don't know the answers to those questions. I've read every article I can find on the pandemic, but nobody seems to be talking about
that particular topic. So I'm in the dark.
NOTE, however, that certain responses can be ruled out, since they don't make sense:
- It can't be that there was an existing stockpile, in every country other than the U.S., of tests for this virus. It's a new virus; the ramp-up time would have to start in November or December when the truth about it finally got past the Chinese state-media blackout.
- It can't be that the failure of one early set of tests set everyone back. The whole benefit of a (quasi-) free market is to diversify providers and leverage competition through price-signals. Presumably if one manufacturer's test turned out to be bogus, we could turn to one of the alternate manufacturers.
- I keep hearing this poorly-explained, vague story that there was some regulation in place which prevented health-workers from using any test other than the bad one, until someone complained to HHS and the administration responded by removing that regulation. But I don't know any details. That might have hampered testing, to be sure. But it doesn't seem like that, alone, could have prevented other firms from spinning up their manufacturing of competing tests, in anticipation of the reg being removed.
