Prophetess Greta ... changed her expertise

As a rule, I'm not nearly as interested in (or concerned by) the opinions of private citizens such as Ms. Thunberg, however publicly distributed their views or in- or out of line theirs are with mine, as I am with the opinions of public officials such as Donald Trump, the president of the United States, who yesterday said this about his country's COVID-19 testing regimen:

“So we have the best testing in the world. It could be the testing’s, frankly, overrated? Maybe it is overrated.... And don’t forget, we have more cases than anybody in the world. But why? Because we do more testing. When you test, you have a case. When you test, you find something is wrong with people. If we didn’t do any testing, we would have very few cases.”

To my understanding of them, Mr. Trump's words have only two possible interpretations:

1. He believes testing causes COVID-19.
2. He believes the U.S. would be in a better place today were there not so many tests being conducted because the number of confirmed COVID-19 cases would be lower.

Both of those interpretations of Mr Trump's remarks testify to a moronic and, because he's a public official and the leader of the country in which I live, therefore unnerving level of intelligence/stupidity.

Bottom line: Ride 'em, Greta... and take us with you.

Cite and link to ANY established epidemiological authority - in your words, someone who has "qualifications and credentials" - who believes as you do, that increased testing "does not in fact keep anyone safer or save lives."

Literally EVERY epidemiological expert I've heard or read during this pandemic has stated unequivocally that the more testing a state or nation conducts, the more knowledge that state or nation has as to where the contagion is, and hence, where to intensify, maintain, and back off of its mitigation efforts. EVERY expert I've read says that decisions about re-opening states and areas within states are wiser and likely more successful the more testing that informs them. In addition, testing and follow-up contact tracing is a critical element of every recognized mitigation strategy. The more testing, then, the more comprehensive and effective the contact tracing.

You clearly disagree. Demonstrate the failure(s) of my analysis and cite for us ANY established epidemiological authority who agrees with you.

I should not have phrased my request the way I did. YES, one can find medical professionals who don't believe more testing saves lives and ultimately make more people safer. I take the point. HOWEVER, the overwhelming consensus among epidemiologists and other medical people skilled in the applied fields says that the more you test, the better you know where the virus is, who needs to quarantine, and whom to pursue in contact tracing. It's common sense - no medical acumen required- to say that the more we know about the extent and spread of a pandemic, the more targeted can be our mitigation efforts.

I watched one of the interviews included in your most recent collection of COVID-19 "data." The doctor's prescription for the U.S. is dubious, to be kind. But that's for another time.

Given that asymptomatic spread occurs with COVID-19, the idea of holding people "guilty" for infections is not very useful. If I contract the virus from an asymptomatic person, neither one of us is to "blame" for my disease; it just happened. On the other hand, the subject of THIS REPORT, a woman claimed to be COVID-19 positive who spit in the face of a nurse, deserves to punished for her action.

Perhaps where you live such litigiousness is on the rise, but I don't hear much of it in the U.S.

The resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave in Washington, DC appears to want to "reign supreme in far too many places." Launch your insanity eradication efforts with him, please.

Yeah the "overwhelming consensus" is also that Global Warming is manmade and a thing and evolution (macro) actually happens. I don't have much use for scientific consensus on things that logically don't make sense.