*** OFFICIAL *** COVID-19 CoronaVirus Thread. Fresh epidemic fears as child pneumonia cases surge in Europe after China outbreak. NOW in USA (7 Viewers)

[Doug B]

The STAT News article is brief and lays out the important stuff.

Well the part about "depending on location" is important. If it's not of the total number then the range of "6 to 24x" is not saying much.

Yeah, that's how the revelations about COVID-19 are going to be for the foreseeable future. Never will the curtains be thrown completely back all at once and the entirety of the disease laid bare. It'll always be limited glimpses ... a town here, a cohort there, a hospital somewhere else. There will be a lot of inconsistency, and we'll often ask "If X is true, how can Y also be true?" Some number of earnest studies executed with impeccable methods will nevertheless fail to confirm the prevailing consensus at the time (whatever it may be).

So go the vagaries of the scientific method.

 

[AAABatteries]

But isn't it an important number to evaluate precisely for the reason you stated? 

If the positivity rate is really high, we probably aren't doing enough testing and our number of actually infected people is much higher than reported. That's the case in AZ - we have a 25% positivity rate. That means our actual case count is probably much higher than is being reported.

And FYI, in AZ, the state with the highest positivity rate, anyone can get a test, symptomatic or not. It just takes a LONG time for the results (I got tested 10 days ago still with no results).

Is it really 25%?  Wow - maybe I looked at Worldometer wrong but didn't think you guys were that high.  The waiting 6-10 days is ridiculous.  I'm on day 5 myself.

 

[shadyridr]

Does anybody has a link for state by state and whether you have to have symptoms to get tested?  Most drive up test places don't seem to require it.  Any of those in Texas?

And 10% rate (roughly what Texas has) isn't that "scary".  At a very quick glance it seems like Florida leads the way around 15%.  Most seem to hover between 6-10%.  And Texas has a very low death rate.

Georgia's death #s despite the rise in cases also appear very low. 

 

[skol asylum]

https://vm.tiktok.com/JFSWT5r/

 

[matuski]

But isn't it an important number to evaluate precisely for the reason you stated? 

If the positivity rate is really high, we probably aren't doing enough testing and our number of actually infected people is much higher than reported. That's the case in AZ - we have a 25% positivity rate. That means our actual case count is probably much higher than is being reported.

And FYI, in AZ, the state with the highest positivity rate, anyone can get a test, symptomatic or not. It just takes a LONG time for the results (I got tested 10 days ago still with no results).

It would be an important number if you are testing everyone.

Only testing those with symptoms makes it utterly meaningless.

And even in your state, many asymptomatic people aren't going to get tested regardless... again making the number pointless.

 

[shadyridr]

From my perspective, the problem is we are still half-pregnant.  We aren't fully opened really and we haven't gotten the cases and deaths under control.  Someone else said it best - we managed to thread the needle of doing the absolute worst job when looking at deaths + job loss + illnesses + economic impacts.  And why deaths going up is concerning is that it indicates to me we won't be fixing anything any time soon.

But what is the solution? NYC HAS gotten the cases and deaths under control and still have not opened anything indoors including malls, gyms, bars, and restaurants. We are currently in phase 4. There is no phase 5.

So you have an example of FL that opened way too early with tons of cases and not everything opened. And an example of NYC that opened the right way and STILL not everything is opened. Obviously I would rather be in NYC right now but I don't see how we can ever be fully reopened without a vaccine because in NYC we DID get deaths and cases under control.

 

[matuski]

Is it really 25%?  Wow - maybe I looked at Worldometer wrong but didn't think you guys were that high.  The waiting 6-10 days is ridiculous.  I'm on day 5 myself.

This number is about as useless as the fact that those who aren't tested have a 0% positivity rate.

 

[kutta]

Is it really 25%?  Wow - maybe I looked at Worldometer wrong but didn't think you guys were that high.  The waiting 6-10 days is ridiculous.  I'm on day 5 myself.

I think since the beginning it's lower than that, but that's where we are now. We were over 30% at one point. Here's a graph:

https://covidactnow.org/us/az/?s=745126

 

[shader]

Georgia's death #s despite the rise in cases also appear very low. 

They just reported 78 deaths today.  Not sure about your "very low" statement.

 

[AAABatteries]

But what is the solution? NYC HAS gotten the cases and deaths under control and still have not opened anything indoors including malls, gyms, bars, and restaurants. We are currently in phase 4. There is no phase 5.

So you have an example of FL that opened way too early with tons of cases and not everything opened. And an example of NYC that opened the right way and STILL not everything is opened. Obviously I would rather be in NYC right now but I don't see how we can ever be fully reopened without a vaccine because in NYC we DID get deaths and cases under control.

At this point nobody has an appetite for what probably should happen (more lockdowns).  There's no reason to believe that if Connecticut can do as well as they have that the rest of us couldn't follow suit.  I think the #1 problem we have is that our lockdowns were not coordinated well and in some places they were probably overkill doing it as early as they did and in several others they didn't go on long enough. 

I mean the solution is still what it was weeks ago.  Lockdown for period of times then social distance plus mask plus contact tracing.  We just aren't doing any of it.  Not sure what else to say. 

 

[shader]

But what is the solution? NYC HAS gotten the cases and deaths under control and still have not opened anything indoors including malls, gyms, bars, and restaurants. We are currently in phase 4. There is no phase 5.

So you have an example of FL that opened way too early with tons of cases and not everything opened. And an example of NYC that opened the right way and STILL not everything is opened. Obviously I would rather be in NYC right now but I don't see how we can ever be fully reopened without a vaccine because in NYC we DID get deaths and cases under control.

This is a good question and is one that requires leadership.  New York is a huge state and only reported 721 cases today.  From anecdotal reports, it seems like NY does a great job of wearing masks.  That's GREAT.  That means that NY should be able to do contact tracing in a way that the South can only dream of.

The downside for NYC is that you guys have issues that the rest of us don't have.  Your city relies on the subway and that's a nightmare for the spread of this virus.  When can that open back up?  How do you contact trace with the density of NYC and the subway system?  There are certainly challenges there.

 

[Doug B]

This number is about as useless as the fact that those who aren't tested have a 0% positivity rate.

it's hard to buy that there's only two options: (A) Test darn near everyone, or else (B) you've got nothing.

Testing anyone is not realistic in the country the size of the U.S. So what are you suggesting? Surely not groping around in the dark blindly?

 

[Doug B]

The downside for NYC is that you guys have issues that the rest of us don't have.  Your city relies on the subway and that's a nightmare for the spread of this virus.  When can that open back up?  How do you contact trace with the density of NYC and the subway system?  There are certainly challenges there.

Is the thought that even 100% face-covering** compliance on the subways wouldn't be sufficient to significantly curtail transmissions?

** Think 'loads of fabric masks and drugstore surgical masks', and 'few N95s/KN95s'.

 

[The Commish]

I will use my wife.  She has now been in contact with 3 different people who tested positive... they won't test her because she is asymptomatic.

Want to pump up "positivity rates" up for scary headlines?  Only test symptomatic people.

eta - it is a win win for fear mongering - test more and number of infected go up, test fewer (symptomatic) and the positive % goes up.  Pick and choose the headline!

Well, unless you're Florida where anyone can get tested who can get an appointment...they can get tested every day of the week if they choose...positivity rates continue to rise here.  I'm on record saying we won't really know anything meaningful around "rates" for a year or two, but we can't pretend that those "rates" mean the same thing all over the country and are reported the same way.  It would do us all some good to remember that OUR situation isn't going to be everyone else's situation.

 

[matuski]

it's hard to buy that there's only two options: (A) Test darn near everyone, or else (B) you've got nothing.

Testing anyone is not realistic in the country the size of the U.S. So what are you suggesting? Surely not groping around in the dark blindly?

Is that harder to buy than what is happening?

C) only test symptomatic people, get ridiculously high postive test %.  Coin new phrase "positivity rate".

 

[shader]

Is the thought that even 100% face-covering** compliance on the subways wouldn't be sufficient to significantly curtail transmissions?

** Think 'loads of fabric masks and drugstore surgical masks', and 'few N95s/KN95s'.

I think we are all hopeful that universal face mask usage is going to significantly help. But it doesn't appear any state is taking the gamble of just fully opening up their state, while having heavily enforced mask usage.  I think we are definitely starting to see evidence that case counts are starting to slow their growth.  My guess is that people in outbreak states are scared, and mask usage is growing.  So a leveling off is happening.  But to really know if masks will solve the issue, we'll need to see case counts start to fall.  It's anyone's guess whether that happens or not.

 

[matuski]

Yes, of course it is - you are literally the only person I’ve heard suggest this.

I am not trolling at all.

In any data set.. what use is a cherry picked segment?  

The answer is obvious.

 

[matuski]

Yes, of course it is - you are literally the only person I’ve heard suggest this.

The echo chamber is strong here, I agree.

 

[matuski]

Another fun one - using cumulative numbers so everyday can be a new record.

 

[matuski]

This whole thread would crap themselves if CNN used the same spin on recoveries.

NEW SURGE IN RECOVERIES!

RECOVERIES REACH AN ALL TIME HIGH!

RECOVERIES SPIKE IN 50 STATES!

 

[Blick]

Another fun one - using cumulative numbers so everyday can be a new record.

Flat graphs aren’t eye catching. 

 

[The Commish]

I can't attest to what matuski is saying is happening...is it true and if so to what extent?  Like, is it local  or are all the other places, besides Florida only testing symptomatic people still?

 

[matuski]

Hey @matuski - why bother to get your wife tested if testing is worthless unless we test everyone? 

Where did you get the idea that testing is useless from?  Not from me.

Testing DATA is useless when done this way.  This "positivity rate" is a useless spin game.  Because you are restricting the data in a way that obviously skews the results.

 

[AAABatteries]

I can't attest to what matuski is saying is happening...is it true and if so to what extent?  Like, is it local  or are all the other places, besides Florida only testing symptomatic people still?

Yep and many of us agree that’s a problem - by now we should test anyone who needs it.  I’m assuming you wouldn’t follow it up by implying we may as well not be testing anyone.

 

[Blick]

Where did you get the idea that testing is useless from?  Not from me.

Testing DATA is useless when done this way.  This "positivity rate" is a useless spin game.  Because you are restricting the data in a way that obviously skews the results.

I’m my opinion, hospitalizations are the only thing that matters.  

Testing only helps individuals deal with being sick. 

 

[matuski]

Yep and many of us agree that’s a problem - by now we should test anyone who needs it.  I’m assuming you wouldn’t follow it up by implying we may as well not be testing anyone.

Nor did I.

 

[matuski]

I’m my opinion, hospitalizations are the only thing that matters. 

If you are going to test a representative population, I am all for using that data for the headlines.

 

[matuski]

Maybe you should read your reply to Doug.

I have, perhaps you should try again.

 

[matuski]

@AAABatteries

You are conflating two things here:

1) My wife was exposed and should be tested.

2) Our governments and media using skewed data.

#1 and #2 are not mutually exclusive.

After my wife being denied #1, #2 becomes grossly evident.

 

[matuski]

Doug asked a fairly specific thing - you can pretend to walk back your answer or maybe you can say you misspoke or you’re trolling.  Honestly, I don’t give a #### - if I wasn’t on mobile I’d have you on ignore by now.

If there is something in particular you want me to rehash, I can.

Reading back I haven't budged from here.  Maybe I haven't put it in a way that works for you.  Seems you couldn't follow.

And holy moly, no need to get personal or upset..... wtf?

 

[shadyridr]

This is a good question and is one that requires leadership.  New York is a huge state and only reported 721 cases today.  From anecdotal reports, it seems like NY does a great job of wearing masks.  That's GREAT.  That means that NY should be able to do contact tracing in a way that the South can only dream of.

The downside for NYC is that you guys have issues that the rest of us don't have.  Your city relies on the subway and that's a nightmare for the spread of this virus.  When can that open back up?  How do you contact trace with the density of NYC and the subway system?  There are certainly challenges there.

The subway has always been open and never closed down. Ridership is down severely. Normally 5m riders a day. I think last I heard they are under 2m because less people commute into city now. However, I think this is anecdotal evidence that masks work since masks are required on the subway and ridership has increased and cases haven't. Also, yes NYC is doing a great job of wearing masks INDOORS but almost nobody is wearing them outdoors on beaches, in parks, at little league, outdoor dining, etc (I am sure Manhattan they are wearing outdoors more than outer boroughs).

 

[matuski]

I hid my post - I didn’t get personal, this has been your MO throughout the thread.  I have no interest in your games or if you are 100% sincere then I have no interest in reading your posts - they aren’t adding any value.  I wish you well with your entertainment.

Again, about me.  You telling me what I am saying.  Not addressing what was posted.

Seems personal.  Good luck as well.

 

[AAABatteries]

Sorry guys - I think I got all those hidden - probably be best for the readers if the rest were hidden if he’s interested.

 

[AAABatteries]

I’m my opinion, hospitalizations are the only thing that matters.  

Testing only helps individuals deal with being sick. 

I think there’s too many people that either won’t or can’t quarantine when sick unless they test positive.  

 

[shadyridr]

https://nypost.com/2020/07/21/ny-yanks-liquor-licenses-from-nyc-bars-over-social-distance-violations/

 

[AAABatteries]

https://nypost.com/2020/07/21/ny-yanks-liquor-licenses-from-nyc-bars-over-social-distance-violations/

I thought this had to do with baseball starting  

 

[Blick]

I think there’s too many people that either won’t or can’t quarantine when sick unless they test positive.  

I agree with this. I’d like to see ability for anyone to get a test when either symptomatic, when in contact with an infected person, or other higher than normal risk situation. But politicizing number of cases or positivity makes no sense as it adds only limited value. 

 

[renesauz]

CDC data shows 6 to 24 times more people have had COVID-19 than what's showing up in official numbers. That's a huge variance. 

That would be 24M to 96M - wow. 

It would also be VERY GOOD news if true

 

[AAABatteries]

I agree with this. I’d like to see ability for anyone to get a test when either symptomatic, when in contact with an infected person, or other higher than normal risk situation. But politicizing number of cases or positivity makes no sense as it adds only limited value. 

Many of us ignore the news - forget about politicizing, do you think the number of cases and positivity rate are valuable numbers?  I don’t care what stupid cable news or politicians say about the numbers.  

 

[Doug B]

Is that harder to buy than what is happening?

C) only test symptomatic people, get ridiculously high postive test %.  Coin new phrase "positivity rate".

Even if symptomatic people are the only ones getting tested (which I don't think is as absolute as it was in March) ... finding a significant number of cases is still a meaningful proxy for what's going on in the wider community.

 

[Biff84]

Is it really 25%?  Wow - maybe I looked at Worldometer wrong but didn't think you guys were that high.  The waiting 6-10 days is ridiculous.  I'm on day 5 myself.

The percentage is flawed in AZ because they also include the positive antibody tests so it’s (PCR Positive + Antibody Positive)/PCR Total. So the 25% is always going to be artificially high. How much is tough to say but likely not hugely significant. Yesterday there were about 14,000 PCR tests and 1000 Antibody tests. If half the antibody tests were positive (not realistic), it would still be 21%.

Flawed and better for looking at trends in AZ than comparing to other states. It had dipped down closer to 20% but now it’s trending back up.

Testing is horrible, specifically getting the results back. Looking at raw case number trends is pointless because they’ve been stuck 15k tests per day and have been decreasing despite 35k per day being the governor’s goal by the end of the month.

Far from all negative coming from AZ. Hospital numbers have been trending down for about a week. Could be a sign of getting past the worse.

Deaths have been going up and likely will continue for awhile. The question is how long. Downward hospital trends suggest an earlier decline but the age group with the highest case growth rate was 65+, which is troubling if it continues.

 

[shadyridr]

New cases above 40 for first time in weeks on Staten Island. we have been in the 20s.

Not surprising 

 

[Blick]

Many of us ignore the news - forget about politicizing, do you think the number of cases and positivity rate are valuable numbers?  I don’t care what stupid cable news or politicians say about the numbers.  

As I said above, I don’t think their very valuable. They’re too dependent on testing protocols and number of tests. The only value I can see is they can be used as a somewhat inaccurate leading indicator of the much more important hospitalization numbers. 

 

[Doug B]

Another fun one - using cumulative numbers so everyday can be a new record.

I do agree that I wish recovered cases and active cases were tracked assiduously. Maybe there's something that makes it difficult to do so, I don't know.

 

[Doug B]

I’m my opinion, hospitalizations are the only thing that matters.  

Testing only helps individuals deal with being sick. 

... it doesn't do anything for the people in contact with positive cases? I mean, it's meaningful if someone I've been in contact with recently tests positive. It's meaningful if my local grocery closes because a dozen employees test positive -- I shop there twice a week.

 

[beer 30]

Whew, haven't had a good pissing match in here since yesterday. Was beginning to worry we were losing our edge 

 

[renesauz]

I can't attest to what matuski is saying is happening...is it true and if so to what extent?  Like, is it local  or are all the other places, besides Florida only testing symptomatic people still?

matuski is twisting it a little IMO. As others have said, positivity rate is one way to judge how adequate the testing is....but he's also correct in his basic premise that scattered/varied rates make all the data less reliable.

I think we could argue that the sub 1% rate in one state means they shuld be just a hair more judgemental in who they test...and should be sending half of those test kits to places that are obviously lacking the ability to test...a 25% positivity rate certainly indicates a dramatic lack of adequate testing. Again...a massive failure of leadership and coordination at the federal level

 

[Blick]

... it doesn't do anything for the people in contact with positive cases? I mean, it's meaningful if someone I've been in contact with recently tests positive. It's meaningful if my local grocery closes because a dozen employees test positive -- I shop there twice a week.

I should have been more clear. By dealing with being sick, I meant contact tracing, isolation, and all other protocols. 

Testing is important. Testing data is not. 

 

[AAABatteries]

As I said above, I don’t think their very valuable. They’re too dependent on testing protocols and number of tests. The only value I can see is they can be used as a somewhat inaccurate leading indicator of the much more important hospitalization numbers. 

I value them more highly as I think we get some info about how contagious it is plus is useful for quarantining like I said but I get your point.

 

[jamny]

In Idaho, due to the limited supply of tests, they've requested that only those that show symptoms request a test.