Houston
Sponsored by

Tine Coronavirus thread

2,475,334 Views | 20959 Replies | Last: 1 mo ago by Ciboag96
TXTransplant
How long do you want to ignore this user?
XpressAg09 said:

What's the source of all this?


TX DSHS publishes the raw data.

Go to https://www.dshs.state.tx.us/coronavirus/

Scroll down to just under the red box and click on the link that says Accessible version (Excel).

You'll download a spreadsheet that has all the numbers. Scroll through the tabs to see the data organized by different criteria. However, the numbers in that spreadsheet are organized a little different.

For example, if you scroll to "Fatalities by Age Group", it says there are 2 deaths for <1 year, 5 deaths for 1-9 years, and 10 deaths for 10-19 years (but the numbers add up to what's in that graph on the previous page).

Supposedly DSHS is vetting all of this data by investigation, so sometimes the numbers lag behind other reports.

If you go to the CDC website, the numbers are slightly different.

The data for sets under 1 year, 1-4 years, and 5-14 years in Texas are blank, which I believe means there are too few for the CDC to report because of privacy concerns.

There are 13 deaths for 15-24 years in Texas.

Totals for the entire country are
< 1 year: 16
1-4 years: 10
5-14 years: 23
15-24 years: 242

This is the data as of 8/8.

https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/Provisional-COVID-19-Death-Counts-by-Sex-Age-and-S/9bhg-hcku
XpressAg09
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Blue star for sources.
jetch17
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
aTm2004
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

There are 13 deaths for 15-24 years in Texas.

Totals for the country are
< 1 year: 16
1-4 years: 10
5-14 years: 23
15-24 years: 242

This is the data as of 8/8.
So, out of the millions of students enrolled in schools in the state, we're keeping things shut down for 265 deaths? For the 2019-2020 school year, there were 5.4mm kids in schools (not counting colleges). That's a death rate of 0.004%!

We beat it. Straight up. Open. Open the schools and colleges the **** up! [/Teddy KGB voice]
Fitch
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
https://dshs.texas.gov/coronavirus/additionaldata/

https://public.tableau.com/profile/tina.macias#!/vizhome/CoronaCasesLight/CoronavirusGreaterHouston?publish=yes
chimpanzee
How long do you want to ignore this user?
aTm2004 said:

Quote:

There are 13 deaths for 15-24 years in Texas.

Totals for the country are
< 1 year: 16
1-4 years: 10
5-14 years: 23
15-24 years: 242

This is the data as of 8/8.
So, out of the millions of students enrolled in schools in the state, we're keeping things shut down for 265 deaths? For the 2019-2020 school year, there were 5.4mm kids in schools (not counting colleges). That's a death rate of 0.004%!

We beat it. Straight up. Open. Open the schools and colleges the **** up! [/Teddy KGB voice]
The worst of it is, the comparison to school age impacts of regular flu and pneumonia. There's a crossover in the 15-24 age bracket where C19 gets worse than flu, but not by a lot. Add in pneumonia and across all possible school age brackets through college, and it could not be clearer that talking about school kids being in danger is complete emotional garbage curated to elicit a fear response. Even teachers and staff in places where they didn't close schools come of no worse than the general adult population.

We don't react this way to things that are well understood, normal and recurring features of living in a society (that are, in fact, riskier). It's like a whole chunk of the world just realized that there is a risk of death and believe that some technocratic elite has the answers to make that risk vanish.
TXTransplant
How long do you want to ignore this user?
aTm2004 said:

Quote:

There are 13 deaths for 15-24 years in Texas.

Totals for the country are
< 1 year: 16
1-4 years: 10
5-14 years: 23
15-24 years: 242

This is the data as of 8/8.
So, out of the millions of students enrolled in schools in the state, we're keeping things shut down for 265 deaths? For the 2019-2020 school year, there were 5.4mm kids in schools (not counting colleges). That's a death rate of 0.004%!

We beat it. Straight up. Open. Open the schools and colleges the **** up! [/Teddy KGB voice]


Actually, the death rate is much lower than that. The 265 deaths (ages 5-24) are in the entire COUNTRY, not just TX. Your 5.4 million number is only school kids in Texas.

Google tells me there are about 56.4 million elem-high school aged kids in the US. So that's a death rate of no more than 0.0004%.
gougler08
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
This thread makes me laugh at the stupidity of all this, but then also cry because the end isn't in sight
aTm2004
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Missed the country part. Holy crap. This is a bunch of bullchit.
aTm2004
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
November 4th.
XpressAg09
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
You would think Sylvester and Lina would not want folks to be getting tested. As testing increased, positivity dropped...now that testing is way down, positivity is up. Coincidentally, Turner has not tweeted about testing since August 9th.

Also appears that 100 hospitalizations per day is going to be the norm for a while.





More interesting is the number of cases reported yesterday plummeted.

CFTXAG10
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Well, if you didn't think any of this was political before, Hidalgo was in the opening package of the DNC on CNN last night....
Bondag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
XpressAg09 said:

You would think Sylvester and Lina would not want folks to be getting tested. As testing increased, positivity dropped...now that testing is way down, positivity is up. Coincidentally, Turner has not tweeted about testing since August 9th.

Also appears that 100 hospitalizations per day is going to be the norm for a while.





More interesting is the number of cases reported yesterday plummeted.


So you test 2/3 of the previous week and the positivity shoots up. I wonder why?
BohunkAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Been saying it all along.......
FHKChE07
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
But if you test a lot then you catch a bunch of asymptomatic cases and the absolute numbers go up extending the quarantine because cases are spiking.
rhoswen
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The problem with the data on children is that the narrative is now "but what about the teachers who get it" or "what about the long term effects of having covid". This is based on the comments from my pro-shutdown friends on Facebook.

I'm not sure what exactly they want to have happen in order to feel comfortable opening up schools. Maybe it's 0 new cases over x amount of time. Which the rest of us realize is impossible.
BohunkAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
FHKChE07 said:

But if you test a lot then you catch a bunch of asymptomatic cases and the absolute numbers go up extending the quarantine because cases are spiking.
That's not what the data bears out. When testing capability is reduced you are only testing the sickest and those with the most symptoms. Thus, the higher positives....when you test more people, you are going to catch a wider sample size, and thus a true indication of how much of the population has COVID. Do you really think 20% of the population has COVID?
TarponChaser
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BohunkAg said:

FHKChE07 said:

But if you test a lot then you catch a bunch of asymptomatic cases and the absolute numbers go up extending the quarantine because cases are spiking.
That's not what the data bears out. When testing capability is reduced you are only testing the sickest and those with the most symptoms. Thus, the higher positives....when you test more people, you are going to catch a wider sample size, and thus a true indication of how much of the population has COVID. Do you really think 20% of the population has COVID?

I haven't seen much on it lately but what about the studies out of Stanford, USCal, and Harvard (IIRC) which put the actual infections at somewhere around 45x (on average) the actual positive tests?
BohunkAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TarponChaser said:

BohunkAg said:

FHKChE07 said:

But if you test a lot then you catch a bunch of asymptomatic cases and the absolute numbers go up extending the quarantine because cases are spiking.
That's not what the data bears out. When testing capability is reduced you are only testing the sickest and those with the most symptoms. Thus, the higher positives....when you test more people, you are going to catch a wider sample size, and thus a true indication of how much of the population has COVID. Do you really think 20% of the population has COVID?

I haven't seen much on it lately but what about the studies out of Stanford, USCal, and Harvard (IIRC) which put the actual infections at somewhere around 45x (on average) the actual positive tests?
based on what?
SirLurksALot
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TarponChaser said:

BohunkAg said:

FHKChE07 said:

But if you test a lot then you catch a bunch of asymptomatic cases and the absolute numbers go up extending the quarantine because cases are spiking.
That's not what the data bears out. When testing capability is reduced you are only testing the sickest and those with the most symptoms. Thus, the higher positives....when you test more people, you are going to catch a wider sample size, and thus a true indication of how much of the population has COVID. Do you really think 20% of the population has COVID?

I haven't seen much on it lately but what about the studies out of Stanford, USCal, and Harvard (IIRC) which put the actual infections at somewhere around 45x (on average) the actual positive tests?


That was early on when testing was still low. The CDC estimates that the real number is between 6x to 24x the confirmed case count.

https://www.statnews.com/2020/07/21/cdc-study-actual-covid-19-cases/

That would mean between 10% to 40% of the country has already been infected.
rhoswen
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
If you think about it, it makes sense. You have symptoms but you write them off as allergies or a head cold, treat the symptoms yourself, and recover, never bothering to see a doc/get tested. Flu numbers are probably much higher for the same reasons.

eta: or caught it & never had symptoms at all. I'm convinced I've caught it, as a teacher in school in a "hot bed" in March, or the traveling I've done, or at grocery store or post office or pharmacy....
TarponChaser
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BohunkAg said:

TarponChaser said:

BohunkAg said:

FHKChE07 said:

But if you test a lot then you catch a bunch of asymptomatic cases and the absolute numbers go up extending the quarantine because cases are spiking.
That's not what the data bears out. When testing capability is reduced you are only testing the sickest and those with the most symptoms. Thus, the higher positives....when you test more people, you are going to catch a wider sample size, and thus a true indication of how much of the population has COVID. Do you really think 20% of the population has COVID?

I haven't seen much on it lately but what about the studies out of Stanford, USCal, and Harvard (IIRC) which put the actual infections at somewhere around 45x (on average) the actual positive tests?
based on what?
I forget how they determined it but IIRC, it had to do with presence of antibodies in people who never exhibited symptoms or got tested.

Regardless of how it was determined, these weren't crack-pot, InfoWars-type sources. These were serious, peer-reviewed studies from medical schools/researchers at elite institutions.
Agz_2003
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
rhoswen said:

The problem with the data on children is that the narrative is now "but what about the teachers who get it" or "what about the long term effects of having covid". This is based on the comments from my pro-shutdown friends on Facebook.

I'm not sure what exactly they want to have happen in order to feel comfortable opening up schools. Maybe it's 0 new cases over x amount of time. Which the rest of us realize is impossible.
Sounds like they need to find a new profession if that is a concern. It's almost like they believe they are the only profession taking this risk...

They probably have a better chance of contracting it at a 50% capacity Chili's during their weekly happy hour.
FHKChE07
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
If you test more people you are going to catch more positives and the people are right. Estimates are anywhere from 10x to 60x for actual positive tests to likely actual cases. Many people don't get tested because what does it do to help you. Or they don't even realize that they have it.
Texan_Aggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
rhoswen said:

If you think about it, it makes sense. You have symptoms but you write them off as allergies or a head cold, treat the symptoms yourself, and recover, never bothering to see a doc/get tested. Flu numbers are probably much higher for the same reasons.

eta: or caught it & never had symptoms at all. I'm convinced I've caught it, as a teacher in school in a "hot bed" in March, or the traveling I've done, or at grocery store or post office or pharmacy....
This was me the past week and a half. Getting tested takes time away from work and would put childcare at risk (i.e. would they make child stay home or shut down if parent is infected). I am fairly sure what I had was a sinus infection/cold brought home from daycare, but you never know.
BohunkAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
FHKChE07 said:

If you test more people you are going to catch more positives and the people are right. Estimates are anywhere from 10x to 60x for actual positive tests to likely actual cases. Many people don't get tested because what does it do to help you. Or they don't even realize that they have it.
I'm not talking out of my ass here. But carry on.
chimpanzee
How long do you want to ignore this user?
FHKChE07 said:

If you test more people you are going to catch more positives and the people are right. Estimates are anywhere from 10x to 60x for actual positive tests to likely actual cases. Many people don't get tested because what does it do to help you. Or they don't even realize that they have it.

I haven't seen anything on the false positive rate either, but I doubt it's zero.

Test enough and you can keep cases above your arbitrary threshold, even if you are testing a flock of geese.
rhoswen
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I absolutely, unequivocally agree with you.
Ag_07
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I talked with a buddy who's wife is a teacher in one the suburban school districts.

He was telling me she's in a Facebook group of district teachers and she had to quit it because people were posting that if they were going back to teach they needed to get the wills updated and get their affairs in order. Said they were throwing around attorney recommendations.

Pure insanity
jenn96
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Lol yeah one of my best friends is a former teacher who is now a nurse, and has been working in a hospital all this time. She is...unsympathetic.
BohunkAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
There couldn't really be much more of a perfect inverse relationship

FHKChE07
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/23/nyregion/coronavirus-antibodies-test-ny.html?auth=link-dismiss-google1tap

Quote:

But he did suggest, based on the survey, that if as many as 2.7 million New Yorkers had the virus,
Quote:

More than 263,000 have tested positive for infection.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/04/antibody-surveys-suggesting-vast-undercount-coronavirus-infections-may-be-unreliable

Quote:

But after adjusting the statistics to better reflect the county's demographics, the researchers concluded that between 2.49% and 4.16% of the county's residents had likely been infected. That suggests, they say, that the real number of infections was as many as 80,000. That's more than 50 times as many as viral gene tests had confirmed and implies a low fatality ratea reason to consider whether strict lockdowns are worthwhile, argue Bendavid and co-author John Ioannidis, who studies public health at Stanford.

Because people don't have a real reason to get tested, or don't even know they have it, the number of people that as businesses require everyone to get tested or people going in for procedures in the hospital or people going on vacation get tested, we are going to be finding more asymptomatic people so the raw number of cases in the "case count" goes up even if the positivity rate goes down. It is a double edged sword that you think as you test more people the positivity rate goes down but you are still going to have more gross cases.
rhoswen
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Yep. I had to leave the AFT pages. On the neighborhood page a lady was asking for old sheets so she can put them on her car seat to & from work. There are people asking for permission to wear scrubs to school so they can leave them there & wear "clean" clothes to & from work.
Diggity
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
so as long as we can start testing 40K+ per day, maybe we'll get below Lina's 5% threshold
FHKChE07
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Except that because she also is basing her color scheme on having less than 400 absolute cases per day that doesn't help either.
First Page Last Page
Page 246 of 599
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.