Little easier way to see the testing positivity data.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/144f0/144f02b0f06c8de989bce7ddb2ea09bb141a010d" alt=""
Which begs the question - are the tests not being reported? ... or is the data being misreported?EBrazosAg said:
Positive test/ total test numbers could be off by factors of 1.5-3 or 4 from what I hear about testing numbers around the area. IMHO ... they just need to report numbers and not have the presser. They are loosing credibility as those who are in a place to know realize the absurdity of some of the numbers.
Quote:
Link
The ten worst counties by total number of deaths. These data are smoothed in a nine day running a
average.
Quote:
Link
Here is the REST of Texas... (the other 244 counties)
I slapped a bell on it.... not too rigorously; just because it looked Gaussian.
Yeah, the wild infection in Texas is done. It just has several hot spots to clean up. Texas is a big place!
I don't mind it so much that these data are by reported date instead of date of death, since the epidemic is essentially over.
But for the top ten counties... deaths by date of death would be very helpful for appraising the situation. Too bad the state doesn't provide this info.
Well, Lubbock seems to be up to the challenge ... similar population and case count. Their investigations take a few days to report each case by infection source .... 'Exposure' (known infection source) or 'Community' (unknown infection source). Very important information if the goal is to control the spread.EBrazosAg said:
Contact tracing not happening to a significant degree at this point. They are overwhelmed, and to be fair when spread is community and not cluster it doesn't really work and isn't practical. We are definitely in community spread mode.
panduh bear said:
Maybe not surprisingly, most of the people I see waiting are college aged. I think this is going to get worse from a number of positive cases perspective as we see more students moving back to town in anticipation of the upcoming school year.
Quote:
This group of people is largely unaffected. Why does it really matter if every 20 year old in town gets the virus if effectively none of them get sick and stress the hospital system?
Without a vaccine, everyone's going to eventually get it. The goal is to keep hospitals in good shape. College age kids don't really threaten that.
EBrazosAg said:
The important data now ispositive test, number of sick,number in hospital, number on ventilators, and number deceased. Everything else is just interesting or for articles. The asymptomatic rate in each community varies, and we have no clue what it is here. Unless we screen a representative portion of the population we won't know. That would be useful - perhaps - in modeling the near to intermediate future. But all in all, it's about hospital beds and deaths when it comes to immediate, actionable data.
empirical evidence does not support this outcome. The only ones "hunkered down" are the truly vulnerable (who should be) and the hysterical.FlyRod said:
Unfortunately the economic argument cuts several ways. One very real possibility locally is, assuming no govt shutdowns (as Abbott stated) will happen, more and more people will hunker down and stop patronizing local businesses, out of concern for spiking and spreading infections. Maybe there's enough disposable income in the 20-30 something demographic here to keep the local economy afloat...I'm doubtful.
A&M is another matter. Wildfire spread among students means older staff and faculty get sick, scared parents pull their kids out, A&M takes its own hits and results in another blow to the local economy.
Just possibilities are this point, that still can be avoided.