D&D and the rising pandemic

[Umbran]

Also
italy is slowing down the spread. We aren’t yet

We don't test enough to know if we are slowing down the spread or not, and where we are slowing the spread. That's a major issue with the numbers - as we ramp up testing, we will see growth in the number of cases, even if there are no new cases at all. So, the number of tested cases doesn't currently tell us about spread of disease - it tells us about spread of testing.

 

[FrogReaver]

Yeah, some people are concentrated in large cities, which could be compared with small countries, and other people are spread out more.

So people here wanting to make something of the US numbers should really look at it state by state, with special consideration for the metro areas.

For example, the latest numbers for my state of Virginia is 219 positive test results and 3 deaths, or 1.35% death rate so far. And most of our numbers are concentrated up by DC, which is not a surprise. But without looking up the numbers, I am sure some parts of the US are far worse, like that mess in the Seattle-area nursing homes, where the health care workers took the virus from place to place as they were doing their jobs.

@FrogReaver I think you said you are on the VA-TN border? There are now two cases in Lee county, which is where the VA part of Bristol is located.

Yep Bristol is nearby - but Bristol is more Washington county than Lee county ( it's technically independent) With Lee county seeing cases though, I think it's pretty safe to conclude it's probably all over this area as that's quite a bit more remote (measuring distance from interstates) than the Bristol, Kingsport or Johnson City area I live in. I hadn't heard about those cases till you mentioned them. Thanks.

Also, I think you may have explained the spread in the U.S. The cases are spread all over which likely means many of those areas haven't had cases for 14 days+ yet. Means many areas haven't caught up to the curve in terms of what deaths will likely look like. Great point!

 

[FrogReaver]

We don't test enough to know if we are slowing down the spread or not, and where we are slowing the spread. That's a major issue with the numbers - as we ramp up testing, we will see growth in the number of cases, even if there are no new cases at all. So, the number of tested cases doesn't currently tell us about spread of disease - it tells us about spread of testing.

I mean there will be a week lag or so between that happening - but we will start seeing the slow down in cases if it's happening eventually even with more testing.

 

[Zardnaar]

Testing rate probably doesn't matter now. Count the body bags in a few weeks.

 

[FrogReaver]

Testing rate probably doesn't matter now. Count the body bags and a few weeks.

Well - it might matter in terms of how they classify the deaths as from coronavirus or not?

 

[Zardnaar]

Well - it might matter in terms of how they classify the deaths as from coronavirus or not?

That's just book keeping at that point. Just use the symptoms, doesn't have to be that exact.

 

[FrogReaver]

I mean there will be a week lag or so between that happening - but we will start seeing the slow down in cases if it's happening eventually even with more testing.

My bigger concern with testing rate is that some places are already starting to say don't test unless it will make a difference in treatment - which is artificially lowering the numbers by lowering the amount of tests.

I think shifting to death count will probably yield a better picture for when we actually start slowing this thing down.

 

[Zardnaar]

Might help someone if you get sick.

Seems in most cases you're fine and it's over in a few days.

Stuff

i.stuff.co.nz

 

[Umbran]

I mean there will be a week lag or so between that happening - but we will start seeing the slow down in cases if it's happening eventually even with more testing.

It could take more than a week.

You find the true rate of infection in the population if you take representative samples of the population. The is specifically not what we are doing in the USA. We don't have the testing capability to do it, and doing so would not directly help the mitigation efforts.

We are specifically testing people who we have reason to believe are infected - they are showing symptoms, and have had contact with a known case, or have been to places where there's community transmission. If you only test in that population, and your rate or testing is rising, the number of cases you find can continue to rise for several weeks, even if the actual rate of infection in the population is dropping.

Note: I am not saying the rate of infection in the population is dropping. I'm saying that the testing regimen we have does not, and is not designed or intended to, track the rate of infection in the population. So, we shouldn't use it for that.

 

[FrogReaver]

It could take more than a week.

You find the true rate of infection in the population if you take representative samples of the population. The is specifically not what we are doing in the USA. We don't have the testing capability to do it, and doing so would not directly help the mitigation efforts.

We are specifically testing people who we have reason to believe are infected - they are showing symptoms, and have had contact with a known case, or have been to places where there's community transmission. If you only test in that population, and your rate or testing is rising, the number of cases you find can continue to rise for several weeks, even if the actual rate of infection in the population is dropping.

Note: I am not saying the rate of infection in the population is dropping. I'm saying that the testing regimen we have does not, and is not designed or intended to, track the rate of infection in the population. So, we shouldn't use it for that.

we are in agreement there then