Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Nathan R. Jessep

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Nathan R. Jessep last won the day on March 4 2018

Nathan R. Jessep had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

5,462 Excellent

About Nathan R. Jessep

  • Rank
    That Hug Life
  • Birthday 06/15/1977

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Louisiana - Bayou Country
  • Interests
    You don't want the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall, you need me on that wall.

Previous Fields

  • Favorite NFL Team
    New Orleans Saints

Recent Profile Visitors

14,040 profile views
  1. States has a pretty good interface. You can drill down to state level as well for all the metrics.
  2. yep, and despite that big jump including older cases, our total % positive overall still DECREASED. We are now at 11.95% positive (of all tests completed).
  3. I have wondered also. Our state only reports it at the state level (at least publicly reports it, no doubt they have the data internally). And hospital licensed/available bed capacity is already publicly tracked. This goes back to my theory I presented a couple of months ago. IMO, THE metric should be: % of hospitalizations to available hospital space. And some sort of "sliding scale" system that lockdowns/whatever more aggressive containment measurements go into place once the magic threshold has been crossed. Of course that number is going to be different for every area, so I guess it would make sense to do it by region/county.
  4. Just for some perspective on numbers... As of yesterday for Louisiana: -over 269K tests completed -34709 total cases reported (only 12.87% positive of all tests completed... that's a decrease of 7-8% in the last 3-4 weeks) -only ~8400 ACTIVE cases currently
  5. I tend to agree with this. I wouldn't be shocked if it were here (or there) prior to the currently known point, but the other side to this discussion is the fact that the overwhelming majority of people getting tested RIGHT NOW, and throughout the last 2 months, have tested NEGATIVE for CV19. And while some of those can be explained away by front line workers getting mandatory tests, maybe some bad tests/false negatives sprinkled in, multiple tests for those who have been infected and to rule on recovery status, etc., still... we're talking 80-85% negative out of all tests administered to date (basing this % on LA data and other states' data where they show number of tests administered, seems to be similar in percentages). That's still a lot of people who thought that they had CV19 that have, well, something else.
  6. I haven't checked lately, but last I checked (which was several weeks ago), it wasn't very many. Although we have since then, so maybe others have too. Not sure.
  7. Yes, but only for states that are reporting recoveries is that accurate. Last I checked, for the others: Active Cases = Total Cases - Deaths. Which of course, is way overcounting actual active cases. I understand why, because it's hard to define 'recovered' exactly, but still, we are 2-3 months in and "recovered" at this point is a significant number. Just using us (LA) for an example, we just started reporting recoveries here 2 weeks ago. The number of ACTIVE cases was less than half of the TOTAL number of cases. That's significant, IMO.
  8. Thanks cos. I almost started this thread a few times, myself. I'd like to add a good tracker link:
  9. Here's where I am with all of this. YMMV. Honestly, I don't care about case counts any more. UNLESS there is a corresponding number of tests to go along with it to correlate the 'pattern,' it just doesn't mean a whole lot. Especially when you consider that unless recoveries are also being reported, a lot of the numbers being reported are not ACTIVE case numbers, they're TOTAL case numbers. We have to assume right now that testing has increased almost everywhere, so of course case counts have too. What I have been watching locally is the trends of new cases (my lowest indicator, though), trends of hospitalizations over time (which as I understand it is updated daily via our state health department from hospital censuses) and trends of daily death rates. Our percentage of positives has fallen 3-5% over the last month as testing has increased, which makes sense. And we (LA) are among the leaders anywhere in testing per capita. As of today, there are 84% of people here that have tested negative, for whatever reason. That's a lot. Based strictly on my own semi-professional data analysis and tracking of our states' numbers, we are on the decline. Well past the peak. From everything I can find, we are well below hospital capacity (which was the whole point of lockdowns). Yet I hear our state officials talking still about the number of cases. And, tbh, I don't understand why. I may need to go to the state capitol and present my sliding-scale theory.
  10. I'll just be up font about this, to me it still looks like a comic sans the extra space, but I have come around and am now a courier of the new one-space rule.
  11. Thanks for that one too. Don't remember how many clicks it was from that link, but found the original 2.2m (aka The "Imperial College") study:
  12. If you don't get a response in the next few days, please update us. People here want to help our own. We ready. I know we've done it for some others. I don't know how exactly, but I will be glad to spearhead it myself if I need to. And hang in there, GB. :air hug:
  13. not many that I've seen A good number are still in peer-review stages, where unfortunately it's common for them to fall apart. People are just grasping for any news right now, which is understandable, but if the last line of the article (or buried in there somewhere) is "study has not yet been peer-reviewed" then one could still be hopeful, but temper expectations until that review is complete.