[magnus]

I thought the initial testing criteria ideally should have been included a Bayesian standpoint of, what value is added by the test. If someone had a high-risk exposure to a known case, and comes down with typical symptoms in a typical time frame, the probability of Covid-19 infection is sufficiently high that a positive test does not change that probability much (or treatment, or isolation)--so why waste that test when they are scarce.

I think your reasoning is the way to explain the CDC's guidelines...but it points to the fact that we've been behind the curve in all these areas forcing us to take shortcuts in guidelines to cover for our deficiencies.  =/

[magnus]

I thought the initial testing criteria ideally should have been included a Bayesian standpoint of, what value is added by the test. If someone had a high-risk exposure to a known case, and comes down with typical symptoms in a typical time frame, the probability of Covid-19 infection is sufficiently high that a positive test does not change that probability much (or treatment, or isolation)--so why waste that test when they are scarce.

I think your reasoning is the way to explain the CDC's guidelines...but it points to the fact that we've been behind the curve in all these areas forcing us to take shortcuts in guidelines to cover for our deficiencies.  =/