26251 replies to this topic

[Mike K.]

This is the sort of thing that erodes the credibility of the press, when we see one figure but not the other, as though they don’t want the general public to make the connection that the more you test the more you’re likely to find.

[m3m]

I haven’t really seen any data that shows daily testing numbers and shows how/if it is increasing over time which might be part of the problem. I’ve only seen data for total number of tests which makes it difficult to extrapolate useful info. Is anybody aware of any published data for daily testing numbers?

[Greg]

Why is this data always absent of the volume of tests performed?

 

 

Agreed, a graph for # of tests is important now...  1,000,000 tests will find more infected than 10,000....  its likely there have always been numerous infections undetected, even more than the numbers the US is finding now...  

 

 

This is the sort of thing that erodes the credibility of the press, when we see one figure but not the other, as though they don’t want the general public to make the connection that the more you test the more you’re likely to find.

 

My data typically comes from here and all of the testing numbers are available:

 

https://www.worldome...irus/#countries

 

Of course increased testing will account for some of the increase in cases, but it's being overstated as a contributor to the rise. Despite Trump's false claims there are still many countries with higher per capita testing than the US. Some things to keep in mind for the sake of comparison.

 

The US is testing at a rate that is 1.4 times higher than Canada. Yesterday the US had 161 times as many new cases, and 30 times as many deaths. So testing is a small contributor in that comparison.

 

Furthermore, you need to compare where the tests are happening to where the cases are exploding. Testing in Florida, Texas, and Arizona are all below the US average.

 

Texas has a population equal to about 77% of Canada. Texas had 8,000 new cases and 59 deaths yesterday. Texas is testing at a lower rate than Canada. Here is the Texas new case chart. To be clear, this isn't being caused by high rates of testing in Texas. It's reasonable to see this as a cause of concern based on the data.

 

[Mike K.]

I can’t say I have much faith in that website’s testing data.

[Greg]

I can’t say I have much faith in that website’s testing data.

 

Too many footnotes for you? I mean every single data point on the site has a source listed. The Texas numbers, for instance, are clearly attributed to the official Texas Health and Human Services page. 

 

https://txdshs.maps....b01e8b9cafc8b83

 

Kind of seems like you are just dismissing numbers that don't fit your narrative, with no actual explanation.

Edited by Greg, 01 July 2020 - 09:31 AM.

[SimonH]

Ron From Seattle will be along shortly to diss these findings.

[Victoria Watcher]

the problem with testing data is also that some people are being tested more often than necessary. when a public health official or politician demands more testing sometimes the result is the testing people grabbing anyone and everyone and often just to make quota and please the bosses.

I have been tested once. I came back with an 5.77 reading.

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 01 July 2020 - 10:08 AM.

[Mike K.]

Too many footnotes for you? I mean every single data point on the site has a source listed. The Texas numbers, for instance, are clearly attributed to the official Texas Health and Human Services page.

https://txdshs.maps....b01e8b9cafc8b83

Kind of seems like you are just dismissing numbers that don't fit your narrative, with no actual explanation.

I shouldn’t have to explain to a medical professional why the data is lacking in substance.

How many people were tested multiple times? We don’t know.

How many false negatives were reported? We don’t know.

How many false positives were reported? We don’t know.

And nobody seems to want to present that information, because it’s hard to track so all we have are daily positives, which brings us right back to the very beginning of this discussion when everyone was going bananas over an issue for which we had insufficient information but drew a myriad of unquestionable conclusions from.

[Greg]

None of those things mitigates the explosion of cases that Texas is seeing. You can't just handwave those away. As will unfortunately become even more clear over the next couple of weeks.

[Mike K.]

I’m not talking about Texas, I’m talking about incomplete data being held up as robust statistically valid information.

Until we know across the board the precise ratio of testing to illness it's impossible to compare jurisdictions, be it state to state or country to country. Yeah, you can make inferences, but they’re just opinions, and so far the whole COVID thing has been a disastrous journey through I Think Land.

[spanky123]

^ Even with testing, there are so many people wo are asymptomatic that we will never know the real numbers. Even in the US with increased testing the best guess is that there are at least 10x as many people infected as reported.

 

Greg has a valid point in that deaths may very well start to head up sharply in the US and we need to watch that. From what I am reading the average age of infection has gone way down which generally means that fewer people will experience serious illness. We should know in another week or two but there is so much political gamesmanship at stake that we may not.

[Victoria Watcher]

what self respecting 70 year old is STILL putting herself in harms way of the virus?

same for any other unhealthy younger people. it’s 100% avoidable.

[Greg]

I shouldn’t have to explain to a medical professional why the data is lacking in substance.

How many people were tested multiple times? We don’t know.

How many false negatives were reported? We don’t know.

How many false positives were reported? We don’t know.

And nobody seems to want to present that information, because it’s hard to track so all we have are daily positives, which brings us right back to the very beginning of this discussion when everyone was going bananas over an issue for which we had insufficient information but drew a myriad of unquestionable conclusions from.

 

By the way, some of these concerns regarding the data aren't really justified. Take for example false negatives and false positives. Those are a big deal if you are talking about the results of one individual test. But they are not significant when comparing two large aggregated data sets, because the false results would be expected to be randomly distributed. When comparing Canada and Texas for example, there is literally no chance that all the false negatives are in Canada, and all the false positives in Texas. So despite the existence of false readings, the aggregate data is highly reliable (at least in that regard), because of statistical oversampling.

 

Your idea that imperfect data renders the data as nothing more than an opinion is incorrect. We make decisions based on imperfect data essentially all the time. Even the data from controlled clinical trials is not without potential problems. It's worthwhile to understand the limitation of the data. But to decide that because the data is imperfect, we are better of relying on the gut instincts of some guy on an internet forum is an irrational position. 

 

 

I’m not talking about Texas, I’m talking about incomplete data being held up as robust statistically valid information.

Until we know across the board the precise ratio of testing to illness it's impossible to compare jurisdictions, be it state to state or country to country. Yeah, you can make inferences, but they’re just opinions, and so far the whole COVID thing has been a disastrous journey through I Think Land.

 

We have the ratio of testing to population, which is very useful. We have the rates of tests coming back positive. These are very important data points for understanding the situation. Texas is testing at about the same rate as Canada. They have 40 times more new cases. That's enough data to conclude that there is likely a problem in Texas. Reducing that statement to "just an opinion" is disingenuous. 

 

One of the primary reasons that COVID-19 has been a disastrous journey, especially in the US, is that too many people think there ill-informed opinions are equally valid to data and expertise. 

Edited by Greg, 01 July 2020 - 11:17 AM.

[Greg]

what self respecting 70 year old is STILL putting herself in harms way of the virus?

same for any other unhealthy younger people. it’s 100% avoidable.

 

If you think these comments are adding to the conversation, I believe you are mistaken.

 

/now that is an opinion

Edited by Greg, 01 July 2020 - 11:19 AM.

[Victoria Watcher]

can’t we debate that? why do people at risk need to come into contact with the virus? at all.

if they need to shop or recreate or whatever we need to pay to make that 100% safe for them.

[Mike K.]

By the way, some of these concerns regarding the data aren't really justified. Take for example false negatives and false positives. Those are a big deal if you are talking about the results of one individual test. But they are not significant when comparing two large aggregated data sets, because the false results would be expected to be randomly distributed. When comparing Canada and Texas for example, there is literally no chance that all the false negatives are in Canada, and all the false positives in Texas. So despite the existence of false readings, the aggregate data is highly reliable (at least in that regard), because of statistical oversampling.

Your idea that imperfect data renders the data as nothing more than an opinion is incorrect. We make decisions based on imperfect data essentially all the time. Even the data from controlled clinical trials is not without potential problems. It's worthwhile to understand the limitation of the data. But to decide that because the data is imperfect, we are better of relying on the gut instincts of some guy on an internet forum is an irrational position.



We have the ratio of testing to population, which is very useful. We have the rates of tests coming back positive. These are very important data points for understanding the situation. Texas is testing at about the same rate as Canada. They have 40 times more new cases. That's enough data to conclude that there is likely a problem in Texas. Reducing that statement to "just an opinion" is disingenuous.

One of the primary reasons that COVID-19 has been a disastrous journey, especially in the US, is that too many people think there ill-informed opinions are equally valid to data and expertise.

I never said rely on gut instinct, I just said the data is not comparable district to district.

We also have the issue of the tests themselves. Some might eventually be considered less reliable than others.

Another aspect to the testing is we don’t seem to have data on how individuals got sick. In some jurisdictions the question can’t even be posed if the individuals participated in protest activity.

[GabriolaGirl]

New positive case identified from woodgrove mall

https://nanaimonewsn...odgrove-centre/

 

Mistaken identity, not Woodgrove in Nanaimo, Willowbrook in Langley.

[On the Level]

I agree that the testing isn't very clear.  Even in Canada we tend not to test unless someone is really sick.  I don't trust the numbers coming from places like China and Russia.  It's too political.

 

A better metric using Texas as an example is hospital beds and deaths.  There has been no large spike in covid deaths but there is a large spike in hospitalizations.  They have ~7,000 in hospital with Covid and only ~12,000 beds left available state wide.  I am presuming they can buy some time by cancelling elective surgeries etc so hopefully they can switch gears if things are not looking good.

 

Here is where I found the data......we can check back to see how they progress:

 

https://txdshs.maps....cb11b9eaef6101f

[LJ]

Apparently the US government bought up the world supply of Remdesivir from Gilead.

[spanky123]

Apparently the US government bought up the world supply of Remdesivir from Gilead.

 

And the left is going ape over it. Bear in mind that anyone else could have purchased the drug and didn't.