cavscout96 said:keep living, going to work, going to school, playing sports, spending money locally (in general).Esteban du Plantier said:
What didn't we do in March?
"We," instead, went into hiding, cried the sky is falling, informed on our neighbors, and, in the process, obediently wrecked our economy.
agreed, but at least the "message" is consistent. After 14 days you are dead or recovered, so doing the arithmetic, we at least have "probable" recoveries... I mean, why not, we have probable infections, so..... anyway.... the bottom line, there are fewer actively infected folks running around, and fewer, and fewer, etc.Nosmo said:
Just an FYI, "ACTIVE" cases are now simply the number of cases "total" for the last 14 days.
Initially "active" was apparently part of an actual attempt to track recovered. Sometime in June, it was mostly the total of the last 14 days of cases.
And since the last of July, it pretty much is always exactly the total of the last 14 days of cases.
Maybe this was communicated to the public, and I just missed it.
Anyway, it's just a rough estimate now, and assumes everybody that is reported as a "case" takes 14 days to recover or die.
I can see where it is something to consider, but it's not accurate. It's totally an estimate.cavscout96 said:agreed, but at least the "message" is consistent. After 14 days you are dead or recovered, so doing the arithmetic, we at least have "probable" recoveries... I mean, why not, we have probable infections, so..... anyway.... the bottom line, there are fewer actively infected folks running around, and fewer, and fewer, etc.Nosmo said:
Just an FYI, "ACTIVE" cases are now simply the number of cases "total" for the last 14 days.
Initially "active" was apparently part of an actual attempt to track recovered. Sometime in June, it was mostly the total of the last 14 days of cases.
And since the last of July, it pretty much is always exactly the total of the last 14 days of cases.
Maybe this was communicated to the public, and I just missed it.
Anyway, it's just a rough estimate now, and assumes everybody that is reported as a "case" takes 14 days to recover or die.
coupled with ill or undefined terms.Quote:
trying to interpret more sketchy information.
Abbott's order has no expiration.Tailgate88 said:
At what point will masks be optional? I am having a hard time keeping track of which government official is oppressing me in which way.
KidDoc said:Abbott's order has no expiration.Tailgate88 said:
At what point will masks be optional? I am having a hard time keeping track of which government official is oppressing me in which way.
And when the masks finally go away you can replace it with a binky.FlyRod said:
Good. I enjoy being able to go out and not have people trying to murder me by coughing and breathing on me.
Also don't miss y'all's stanky breath at all.
cavscout96 said:KidDoc said:Abbott's order has no expiration.Tailgate88 said:
At what point will masks be optional? I am having a hard time keeping track of which government official is oppressing me in which way.
Unfortunately
Since we have so few Covid cases, there are other issues that can be discussed.theNetSmith said:
Staff, this mask debate is derailing the thread, and it bothers me so much that I have to complain about it.
How about some consistent moderation?
theNetSmith said:
Staff, this mask debate is derailing the thread, and it bothers me so much that I have to complain about it.
How about some consistent moderation?
Except that discussing how COVID has affected you personally is not allowed on this thread. So there is that...cavscout96 said:Except that the mask order is, or should be, linked to the numbers / data. So there is that.....theNetSmith said:
Staff, this mask debate is derailing the thread, and it bothers me so much that I have to complain about it.
How about some consistent moderation?
Yeah, as long people aren't devolving into personal attacks, I don't see the need for high moderation. Look at the posts on here since March. This has been somewhat of a discussion thread in addition to daily updates.theNetSmith said:Except that discussing how COVID has affected you personally is not allowed on this thread. So there is that...cavscout96 said:Except that the mask order is, or should be, linked to the numbers / data. So there is that.....theNetSmith said:
Staff, this mask debate is derailing the thread, and it bothers me so much that I have to complain about it.
How about some consistent moderation?
Free testing was closed yesterday but according to a co-worker it is back open even though today it is actually raining. /shrugscd88 said:
Pretty rapid drop in new cases.
yeah, not sure why that whole thing got removed...theNetSmith said:Except that discussing how COVID has affected you personally is not allowed on this thread. So there is that...cavscout96 said:Except that the mask order is, or should be, linked to the numbers / data. So there is that.....theNetSmith said:
Staff, this mask debate is derailing the thread, and it bothers me so much that I have to complain about it.
How about some consistent moderation?
Quote:
A MESSAGE FROM TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY
September 22, 2020
Results from Round Two of the Random Testing Program at Texas A&M University demonstrated a drop in the overall positivity rate from 3.2 percent to 1.6 percent. The program will continue throughout the semester to help identify transmission hotspots for containing the spread of the virus that causes COVID-19.
Results from the second round of the Random Testing Program are below:Among eligible students who completed the COVID-19 test procedure:
- 9,782 students were invited by email to participate in the Random Testing Program
- 6,902 (71 percent) responded to the invitation email and visited the pre-screening questionnaire
- 5,498 (80 percent of respondents) were considered eligible through the pre-screening process
- 3,436 (62 percent of eligible students) completed the testing program process, i.e. both the questionnaire and the COVID-19 test (laboratory results are available on 3,315 of these students)
- 53 students (1.6 percent) with available results who took a COVID-19 test as part of this program tested positive
- 0.9 percent of students living in campus housing tested positive
- 2.0 percent of students living off-campus tested positive
- 2.2 percent of students attending all courses remotely tested positive
- 1.4 percent of students attending courses using a combination of remote and in-person interactions tested positive
Results for all testing, including the Random Testing Program, will be posted on the Texas A&M COVID-19 Dashboard.
Key Findings To Highlight
- SARS-CoV-2 was detected in a smaller fraction of the student population in Round Two compared to Round One.
- There was a dramatic decrease across the board in positivity among younger students.
- Positivity is not higher among students attending in-person classes.
Other Findings From Our Survey
The overall goal of this kind of strategy is to understand population level factors and dynamics of COVID-19 in the community to inform opportunities for broad-scale public health education and other activities. It also serves to provide information about other COVID-19-related factors:
- 81 percent of students attend classes by a combination of remote and in-person learning, while only 19 percent are attending remote lectures only.
- 93 percent of students report they always use face coverings when interacting outside of their homes.
Although this program focuses on testing students who did not seek clinical testing (i.e. students who are asymptomatic or experience only mild symptoms), the research probed students regarding specific COVID-related symptoms. We found that headache (6 percent), sore or scratchy throat (3 percent), runny nose (3 percent), and nasal or sinus congestion (4 percent) were the most frequent. These symptoms were more common among individuals who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, suggesting that, even if mild, students with these symptoms might benefit from COVID-19 testing in order to understand their infection status.
An added benefit of the program is to identify and inform students who are infected but who may not know it, and all students who test positive are notified of their results and provided clinical and community resources. Students who test positive are moved into isolation, and close contacts are notified through contact tracing efforts at the Texas A&M COVID Operations Center, which provides information and guidance on testing and quarantine.
Random And Adaptive Testing Process
The second iteration of the testing program was conducted the week of Sept. 7. The adaptive strategy of Round Two was informed by the data obtained through the first round of testing, making it possible to strategically test students who might have the highest risk of SARS-CoV-2 exposure. Again, students residing in university-owned housing, as well as those living off-campus and in private residences, were asked to participate, but undergraduate students were the focus of Round 2.
The adaptive approach means that results from each round of testing will inform subsequent testing strategies. Round 3 of the testing program is underway now. In this round, a total of 9,782 students were invited for testing Sept. 22-25.
The testing program will continue in this fashion as we continue to track and monitor SARS-CoV-2 among our community. Because a negative test today does not ensure that future exposures will not occur, students will receive multiple invitations to participate in this testing program.
President Michael K. Young offered the following:
"We are very proud of where we are six weeks into the semester. These results demonstrate the importance of the hard work and selfless service by our researchers, faculty, staff and especially our students," Young said. "We will remain vigilant in our strategies to combat COVID-19 and to give our students the best college experience possible."
I guess now we know who parties more!Quote:
Among eligible students who completed the COVID-19 test procedure:
- 53 students (1.6 percent) with available results who took a COVID-19 test as part of this program tested positive
- 0.9 percent of students living in campus housing tested positive
- 2.0 percent of students living off-campus tested positive
- 2.2 percent of students attending all courses remotely tested positive
- 1.4 percent of students attending courses using a combination of remote and in-person interactions tested positive
Key takeaway from this:dubi said:Quote:
Among eligible students who completed the COVID-19 test procedure:
- 53 students (1.6 percent) with available results who took a COVID-19 test as part of this program tested positive
- 0.9 percent of students living in campus housing tested positive
- 2.0 percent of students living off-campus tested positive
- 2.2 percent of students attending all courses remotely tested positive
- 1.4 percent of students attending courses using a combination of remote and in-person interactions tested positive
They are sending random emails to the student body asking them to come in for testing.FlyRod said:
I'm sure I missed this, but how was a student considered to be "eligible" to be tested?
Quote:
They are sending random emails to the student body asking them to come in for testing.
