CDC cuts estimate for omicron prevalence by 50% for the week ending December 18th

2,633 Views | 11 Replies | Last: 2 yr ago by Diet Cokehead
SBISA Victim
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
https://www.npr.org/2021/12/28/1068643344/cdc-omicron-covid-19-delta-revise-estimates


Quote:

Alarms that the hyper-contagious omicron variant accounted for the vast majority of new COVID-19 infections over the past couple of weeks were significantly overestimated, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
New data released on Tuesday shows that while omicron remains the dominant variant, delta which is the more severe strain is still a worrisome driving force behind the current surge.
The CDC had previously reported that as of Dec. 18, 73% of new cases were linked to omicron. But on Tuesday, the agency revised those figures, slashing that estimate to 23% a 50-point drop, suggesting that while the new variant was on the rise, it was not infecting people at the rate the CDC had projected.
Tom Cardy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG


Houston says differently based on local testing
GAC06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
23% is the threshold for "dominant variant"?
shalackin
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
How can anyone trust anything they say after so many guesses and errors. Dropping 50 percentage points on this just shows how clueless they are. Disappointing.
cone
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
that would make sense given that Houston was long past its Delta wave
buffalo chip
How long do you want to ignore this user?
S
Gross drop of 50%...

Actually revised the number down by around 68%! Not really a revision...
Get Off My Lawn
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cone said:

that would make sense given that Houston was long past its Delta wave
Now if folks would stop conflating Delta hospitalization with Omicron, that would be really nice.

I don't expect Omicron to be completely harmless, but the preliminary indications are that it's a variant that's benign enough to usher in a long overdue return to the old normal and that those pushing Omicron fear are doing so artificially.
bigtruckguy3500
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Romello said:

Gross incompetence.

Data is data. Is basic arithmetic not required anymore for these diversity hires?
I take it you don't understand how medical surveillance modeling works. A very tiny minority of COVID tests actually get sequenced to figure out what variant it is. The fewer tests that are sequenced, the worse the modeling will be. Not all of those that sequence tests report at the same rate to the CDC. For example, Harris county may report data daily, Bell county may report data weekly, and another every two weeks. This why data is frequently revised and you'll see death counts from 2+ weeks ago go up.

The first case of omicron was detected in the US about a month ago. 1 month. How is this gross incompetence.

I know most people here aren't in a scientific field, much less a medical field, but for 2 years the medical and scientific community has been grinding through this.
Beat40
How long do you want to ignore this user?
bigtruckguy3500 said:

Romello said:

Gross incompetence.

Data is data. Is basic arithmetic not required anymore for these diversity hires?
I take it you don't understand how medical surveillance modeling works. A very tiny minority of COVID tests actually get sequenced to figure out what variant it is. The fewer tests that are sequenced, the worse the modeling will be. Not all of those that sequence tests report at the same rate to the CDC. For example, Harris county may report data daily, Bell county may report data weekly, and another every two weeks. This why data is frequently revised and you'll see death counts from 2+ weeks ago go up.

The first case of omicron was detected in the US about a month ago. 1 month. How is this gross incompetence.

I know most people here aren't in a scientific field, much less a medical field, but for 2 years the medical and scientific community has been grinding through this.


But a 50 point reduction?

I get what your saying, but at what point when you're reducing publicly released numbers by 50 points do you question the methodology?

Or maybe it's not a question of the modeling methodology, maybe it's questioning the reason for releasing the 73% number is it was that far off.

I know this stuff is hard, but If a company missed heir estimate by that much, it would get crushed. I think the questions are fair.
DannyDuberstein
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Logic would have me questioning my data if the 1st case was found less than a month ago and weeks later I am calculating 80% prevalence, so I'd be rechecking my data before publishing. But hey, I am just a finance guy that makes his living on data and logic.
PJYoung
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Diet Cokehead
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The CDC has lost all credibility through this pandemic that they will likely never recover from.
Refresh
Page 1 of 1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.