Keegan99 said:
Still curious if that's being "supported" by transfers from other areas of the state.
Bert315 said:Keegan99 said:
Still curious if that's being "supported" by transfers from other areas of the state.
I know some transfers are fairly common at most TMC facilities right now. This is normal even without Covid bc of how our facilities are better prepared to deal with serious illnesses.
webgem08 said:
The used to do both. I could get daily death in one report and daily positives in another.
I still think Dallas County pocketed positive tests in late June so they could increase counts in July when schools were trying to make plans. These two graphs are just too different.
oglaw said:Bert315 said:Keegan99 said:
Still curious if that's being "supported" by transfers from other areas of the state.
I know some transfers are fairly common at most TMC facilities right now. This is normal even without Covid bc of how our facilities are better prepared to deal with serious illnesses.
Bert, is your hospital still seeing a decline in hospitalizations?
webgem08 said:
The used to do both. I could get daily death in one report and daily positives in another.
I still think Dallas County pocketed positive tests in late June so they could increase counts in July when schools were trying to make plans. These two graphs are just too different.
That article confuses a few things.culdeus said:webgem08 said:
The used to do both. I could get daily death in one report and daily positives in another.
I still think Dallas County pocketed positive tests in late June so they could increase counts in July when schools were trying to make plans. These two graphs are just too different.
They stopped reporting rapid testing it sounds like. Because this required results to be faxed, or something. Fun
https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/investigations/article/Thousands-of-Texans-are-getting-rapid-result-15452709.php
While true, this is more a gish gallop, the question was towards why the data looks different, whether the reason for this is good or bad is really not relevant.BiochemAg97 said:That article confuses a few things.culdeus said:webgem08 said:
The used to do both. I could get daily death in one report and daily positives in another.
I still think Dallas County pocketed positive tests in late June so they could increase counts in July when schools were trying to make plans. These two graphs are just too different.
They stopped reporting rapid testing it sounds like. Because this required results to be faxed, or something. Fun
https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/investigations/article/Thousands-of-Texans-are-getting-rapid-result-15452709.php
It refers to not counting rapid tests, implying all rapid tests. It then finally mentions it is referring to antigen tests which is actually only a subset of rapid tests. For example, Abbott has a rapid Isothermal PCR test that takes 5-15 minutes that has been on the market far longer than the antigen tests. And yes, Texas changes the numbers in San Antonio because they moved the antigen positive tests from confirmed to probable.
The reference to faxing reports is about a general issue with data collection and failure to modernize, not something specifically And exclusively required for antigen tests.
I did like the inflammatory "Texas unlike 27 other states". Simple math would tell us that 23 states including a Texas don't count antigen tests as a confirmed positive.
The real question that should be asked is why antigen tests are not counted as confirmed positives. But no one seems to want to ask that question. Much easier to just complain that they aren't counted because understanding the answer to that question may be difficult.
Nothing would surprise me with that little statist Clay Jenkins. I don't trust a single statistic coming out of Dallas county.webgem08 said:
The used to do both. I could get daily death in one report and daily positives in another.
I still think Dallas County pocketed positive tests in late June so they could increase counts in July when schools were trying to make plans. These two graphs are just too different.
Now replace mask with eliminating all social interaction and you have the next phase in treatment.JP_Losman said:
Given that masks slow down the spread of respiratory illness in general, we should ALWAYS wear them.
Masks are the new normal and the human race will always wear them in public hence forth.
"You have to consider a lot of factors"Keegan99 said:
Bunk unless you account for testing volume, population density, and a host of other factors.
LA County has had masks mandatory since May? Cases rise.
Hawaii? Mandatory masks and strict lockdown. Cases rise.
Japan? Masks are cultural. Cases rise.
Philippines? Incredibly high mask usage. Cases rise.
This seems like a heck of a confounding factor.
Uh, no. Sorry.JP_Losman said:
Given that masks slow down the spread of respiratory illness in general, we should ALWAYS wear them.
Masks are the new normal and the human race will always wear them in public hence forth.
I believe he is being sarcastic.beerad12man said:Uh, no. Sorry.JP_Losman said:
Given that masks slow down the spread of respiratory illness in general, we should ALWAYS wear them.
Masks are the new normal and the human race will always wear them in public hence forth.
Complete Idiot said:
Still hate tweets being used to argue some point, maybe more than ever after this one.
Fitch said:
No. Just...no.
What were the counties?
Something tells me no argument is going to change your opinion on this topicfullback44 said:
So really we shouldn't be wearing a mask.. mask raise your chances according to,that study
RandyAg98 said:
Just goes to show you can make statistics look however you want if you are creative.
