gougler08 said:

---

htxag09 said:

---

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

Why are people getting tested if they show no symptoms or don't have a potential exposure?

Whats the point? You can test clean and pick up the vorus at the 7-11 getting gas on the way home?

Seriously what good is random testing?

---

This has been discussed multiple times. There are lots of possible reasons.

Maybe they're going to see family or friends but want to confirm they aren't asymptomatic.

Negative test required for work.

Negative test required for travel.

Negative test required for surgeries/test required to be admitted to hospital.

---

If positivity rate is really what our dumbass leaders are going to measure things by, then I'm all for a bunch of folks that aren't sick going to get tested, helps the metric

---

chjoak said:

---

Sly & Lina may be trying so hard to keep up the appearance of things being bad so they can raise property taxes without our approval

---

cone said:

---

so how do you do sentinel surveillance?

because most all testing right now is voluntary and either as a one off work-related deal or is in response to some form of symptoms or maybe a self-motivated follow up based on close contact with a positive

which means as the outbreak abates and paranoia falls testing volume will likely decrease significantly

in short, how do you get people to voluntarily get a potentially painful diagnostic, maybe multiple times over the course of time? and who's paying for it?

increase testing is a nice slogan but it takes two to tango in a non-authoritarian state

---

Ocean Of Funk said:

---

cone said:

---

so how do you do sentinel surveillance?

---

in my house this is how we do sentinel surveillance.

---

XpressAg09 said:

---

Ag_07 said:

---

Why are all the news outlets reporting a positive rate at just under 15%?

I thought we were in single digits already?

---

Because they're using a 14 day rolling average, instead of seven, which is a metric that literally no one has used until today.

Technically, they're correct, but they're selectively picking datasets that fit the narrative.

---

cone said:

---

i can't imagine why voluntary testing numbers are decreasing on the backside of the epidemic curve

maybe the local officials can come up with a better way to get testing volume up outside of twitter nudges

c'mon on, Sly/Lina. this is your moment.

---

Quote:

---

If one was randomly sampling the population using rigorous standards, tracking dates, denominators, and demographics meticulously, then it would have some value. But that's not at all what we are doing, so it's trash.

---

chimpanzee said:

---

Dr. Doctor said:

---

If you increase testing, then more people who have the virus but no symptoms will hopefully stay home.

This lowers the R0 which makes the virus go away.

You want to know why south Korea and every other country caused their numbers to go down and away? Test everyone and then those positive stay home.

Yes it will help pressure the politicians in charge to let up on things so we can go back to a normal life.

~egon

---

I'll see your South Korea and raise you Peru, Australia, Hawaii and maybe now New Zealand.

I want to know why places where everyone was forced to stay home didn't cause their numbers to go down and away while those right next to them that remained open had nearly identical and sometimes better stats. See also Copenhagen and Malmo. There is no correlation between suppression of transmission and lockdowns.

But if you assent to a politician's non-disprovable position that makes them the hero, they may let you go back to your life once the last metric that they can no longer fudge via duplicate counting, forward dating, time horizon changing and moving modelling assumptions finally hits zero. Right.

Look at the Kansas masking graph and get back to me on how much you trust politicians to respond reasonably.

---

htxag09 said:

---

XpressAg09 said:

---

Today's fun fact:

August has seen one death in Harris County, per their own dashboard.

---

You know this is worthless to follow. It takes 2 weeks to 3 months to categorize deaths. The data we are using to make decisions is complete and utter crap.

---

cone said:

---

i can't imagine why voluntary testing numbers are decreasing on the backside of the epidemic curve

maybe the local officials can come up with a better way to get testing volume up outside of twitter nudges

c'mon on, Sly/Lina. this is your moment.

---