[DoreenMichele]

Let me try to put that another way:

Tests are information. I think we have enough information to try to err on the side of "Let's just assume everyone is a danger. Let's just globally reduce our cavalier, casual exposure to germs as a matter of course."

To me, it's crazy to insist we need to keep testing and we need to know who has it to protect people.

Social distancing and good hygiene are effective whether the person has been identified or not. I wish we would just go with that and stop acting like "a return to normal" is the goal and just around the corner for most people, if only we can identify the parties guilty of being infected and Target them.

It kind of doesn't matter. Just stop touching your face, among other things.

[mynegation]

Good idea in theory, not so much in practice, especially over longer periods of time. First, people are fallible and many of them who don’t know if they have it or not, may not take it seriously. Having a positive test (even if asymptomatic right now) would put them in a different mindset. The ability of quickly confirm recovery would put the people in critical roles back to their occupation. Medical professionals, police, truck drivers, water treatment plant workers, utility workers are all going to get sick in droves and it is not going to be pretty.

[DoreenMichele]

not so much in practice, especially over longer periods of time.

Everything I've read suggests that older, densely populated cultures pretty universally have adopted bowing over shaking hands, eat spicier foods, etc.

My belief is that over longer periods of time, cultural change is a much more reliable and effective means to combat disease.

"An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure."