检测的重要性

This is Scientific American's 60-second Science, I'm Steve Mirsky. "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."

The logic is unassailable. As writer Quinn Cummings tweeted almost immediately after the President's remarks,

"Remember kids: You don't want a baby? Stay away from pregnancy tests!" But think about what this no-testing idea could really mean.

Have you had a colonoscopy? I have. Have you had a mammogram? I have not, but I hear they're pretty rough. So think about what we could do to cut colon and breast cancer cases by simply doing away with those tests.

And think of all the poor children who are tested for various conditions, especially the newborns and their genetic tests. Why put the little tykes through it?

And have you considered the impact on sports? I mean, without testing for performance enhancing drugs, if baseball is ever played again the records could just be demolished.

And what kind of an Olympics could we have without testing for drugs. Swimming records, track and field records-these would just be absolutely decimated.

It would be a wonder to behold. But anything wind-aided would still be disqualified. Because, hey, rules are rules. And obviously if we stop testing for the levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere,

there won't be any noticeable increase in the levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. And need I even mention the annoying interruptions to our television programming with the emergency broadcast test.