#3281  
Old 11-14-2020, 11:14 AM
DG_player DG_player is offline
Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 765
Niced 399 Times in 220 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidSauls View Post
Positive tests, as a ratio of population, are 4.5%.
Your county sucks btw. My county is at 1.5% and we're mostly urban!
Sponsored Links

Niced: (1)
Reply With Quote
  #3282  
Old 11-14-2020, 11:15 AM
dysmike's Avatar
dysmike dysmike is online now
Double Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Aridzona, epicenter of stupidity
Courses Played: 17
Posts: 1,160
Niced 489 Times in 267 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DG_player View Post
If you're saying 4.5% of your population has tested positive to date, then yes if the 10x estimate is correct 45% are or have been infected in the past. If it's 5x then only 22.5%. I'm guessing it's pretty varied across the country though depending on when the cases happened and the accessibility of tests. The ratio was probably much high early on than it is now just given the availability of testing.
That would be infection rate, not positivity rate. Because of our rather bad testing policies we don't know infection rate.
Reply With Quote
  #3283  
Old 11-14-2020, 11:18 AM
DG_player DG_player is offline
Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 765
Niced 399 Times in 220 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dysmike View Post
That would be infection rate, not positivity rate. Because of our rather bad testing policies we don't know infection rate.
I read it as ( confirmed cases to date) / ( total population), not positivity rate, maybe he can clarify.
Reply With Quote
  #3284  
Old 11-14-2020, 11:19 AM
dysmike's Avatar
dysmike dysmike is online now
Double Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Aridzona, epicenter of stupidity
Courses Played: 17
Posts: 1,160
Niced 489 Times in 267 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DG_player View Post
I read it as ( confirmed cases ) / ( total population), not positivity rate, maybe he can clarify.
Unless they're doing 100% testing, that is testing the ENTIRE population.. it's positivity.
Reply With Quote
  #3285  
Old 11-14-2020, 11:20 AM
Monocacy's Avatar
Monocacy Monocacy is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Maryland
Years Playing: 20.7
Courses Played: 187
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 2,272
Niced 1,722 Times in 666 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidSauls View Post
Positive tests, as a ratio of population, are 4.5%. If the true rate is 10x that, does it mean that almost half the county population has been infected?
The 10x estimate is based on number of cases, not the percent positive tests. So if your county has 1,000 active cases identified by testing, the 10x estimate would be that there are 10,000 active cases (1,000 identified by testing, and 9,000 infected but not tested).

When the positivity rate is low, say in the 2-3% range, 5x cases might be a better estimate than 10x cases. Might being the operative word, of course.

Presumably most of the non-tested cases are either asymptomatic, have mild symptoms, or perhaps lack access to testing.
Reply With Quote
  #3286  
Old 11-14-2020, 11:23 AM
dysmike's Avatar
dysmike dysmike is online now
Double Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Aridzona, epicenter of stupidity
Courses Played: 17
Posts: 1,160
Niced 489 Times in 267 Posts
Default

BTW, all of this is why having to have symptoms to get tested is a bad idea. It creates huge amounts of confusion in analysis.
Reply With Quote
  #3287  
Old 11-14-2020, 11:25 AM
Jay Dub's Avatar
Jay Dub Jay Dub is online now
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: SW Ohio
Years Playing: 40.8
Courses Played: 96
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 6,138
Niced 2,810 Times in 1,073 Posts
Send a message via Yahoo to Jay Dub
Default

Yesterday we (Ohio people) were told our rates are 2.5X the national rate. I'm pretty sure that's based on reported numbers. I also have no idea what's wrong with us that makes it this way.
Reply With Quote
  #3288  
Old 11-14-2020, 11:26 AM
Monocacy's Avatar
Monocacy Monocacy is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Maryland
Years Playing: 20.7
Courses Played: 187
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 2,272
Niced 1,722 Times in 666 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DiscFifty View Post
I tend to agree there could be 5-10x the number of actual active cases reported. Still a bit confused if that would be a good or bad thing. The death rate would be much lower for instance.
The CDC is using the following best estimates for infection fatality ratio, by age range:

0-19 years: 0.00003
20-49 years: 0.0002
50-69 years: 0.005
70+ years: 0.054

Note that those are ratios, not percentages.

Edit: Keep in mind that there are 80 million people in the U.S. aged 50-69, so an 0.5% infection fatality rate and 70% infections is still 280,000 dead middle-aged people.

COVID-19 Pandemic Planning Scenarios | CDC

Last edited by Monocacy; 11-14-2020 at 11:30 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #3289  
Old 11-14-2020, 11:27 AM
dysmike's Avatar
dysmike dysmike is online now
Double Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Aridzona, epicenter of stupidity
Courses Played: 17
Posts: 1,160
Niced 489 Times in 267 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Monocacy View Post
The CDC is using the following best estimates for infection fatality ratio, by age range:

0-19 years: 0.00003
20-49 years: 0.0002
50-69 years: 0.005
70+ years: 0.054

Note that those are ratios, not percentages.

COVID-19 Pandemic Planning Scenarios | CDC
It'd be interesting to know what the untreated fatality rate is. But not enough to actually measure it. (mostly because, for example, we know the treated and untreated fatality rates for bubonic plague, and many other historic plagues)
Reply With Quote
 

  #3290  
Old 11-14-2020, 11:33 AM
Monocacy's Avatar
Monocacy Monocacy is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Maryland
Years Playing: 20.7
Courses Played: 187
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 2,272
Niced 1,722 Times in 666 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dysmike View Post
It'd be interesting to know what the untreated fatality rate is. But not enough to actually measure it. (mostly because, for example, we know the treated and untreated fatality rates for bubonic plague, and many other historic plagues)
Best estimate for somewhat-untreated fatality rate would probably be from early days in Wuhan. I'm sure someone has crunched those numbers but I'm not volunteering to look it up.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Am I taking this too serious? craftsman General Disc Golf Chat 47 12-04-2020 08:44 PM
Taking at trip to CT discdad Vacations & Road Trips 11 05-05-2020 10:27 PM
If you were a touring pro, would you stop or keep going? COVID-19 holly7845 General Disc Golf Chat 69 03-23-2020 03:36 PM
Taking breaks KRATC Technique & Strategy 26 09-09-2012 07:47 PM
Taking DG TOO seriously??? tomjulio General Disc Golf Chat 29 07-28-2009 08:37 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:35 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.