[gmdealerguy]

Originally Posted by Stylo

He probably caught it at home, or with friends.

Most likely. He seems to think possibly from handling cash from the customers he delivers to. I am not sure if there is any proof to touch spread though. We have been trying to make all transactions cashless.....you would be surprised how many people still want to use cash. I have not used cash since March.

[GeoffD]

Originally Posted by Stylo

The percent positive is lower than July.

That’s because such a large percentage of tests is colleges testing weekly so they can keep their doors open. And senior housing to keep it out of there. The general public typically only gets tested when they’re sick to see if it’s COVID-19.

[dazzleman]

Originally Posted by GeoffD

That’s because such a large percentage of tests is colleges testing weekly so they can keep their doors open. And senior housing to keep it out of there. The general public typically only gets tested when they’re sick to see if it’s COVID-19.

That would actually have the opposite effect, since restricting the denominator would make the percentage higher. It's hard to know what to make of percent positive statistics because it all depends on how broad testing is. The broader the testing, the lower the percentage that will be positive.

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by dazzleman

That would actually have the opposite effect, since restricting the denominator would make the percentage higher. It's hard to know what to make of percent positive statistics because it all depends on how broad testing is. The broader the testing, the lower the percentage that will be positive.

The percent positive means nothing really. That is because the people getting tested is not a random or large number. Usually people go for the test if they have shown any symptoms. But those symptoms could be for other things like a cold or flu. Since we are not testing everyone or taking a broad random sampling, it has no meaning. Jay,

[dazzleman]

Originally Posted by JayCT

The percent positive means nothing really. That is because the people getting tested is not a random or large number. Usually people go for the test if they have shown any symptoms. But those symptoms could be for other things like a cold or flu. Since we are not testing everyone or taking a broad random sampling, it has no meaning. Jay,

I agree. The percentage could be manipulated in either direction by conducting fewer or more tests, and by altering the circumstances in which testing is ordered. You could get a really low percentage if you randomly tested large numbers of people out on the street, but what would that mean?

[mdovell]

There's no evidence that paper currency transmits. It was plastic but the US doesn't use that.

[7 Wishes]

Originally Posted by JayCT

The percent positive means nothing really. That is because the people getting tested is not a random or large number. Usually people go for the test if they have shown any symptoms. But those symptoms could be for other things like a cold or flu. Since we are not testing everyone or taking a broad random sampling, it has no meaning. Jay,

Good point, but then what would be the best measurement of this improving or not? Hospitalizations?

[mdovell]

Huh? I know many people that get tested by their employer regardless of symptoms because they are concerned of asymptomatic spread. I've felt fine for the past seven months but I've been tested five times. Some places now want negative tests as part of doing anything now. I'm at the office and wear a mask all the time. Everyone at work is. We have sanitzer all over the place and a basic security guard now that prevents anyone from coming in unless they really have an appointment. Otherwise email, call or send a letter..period. We can't take a risk and have an exposure that means the whole office closes again like in the spring.


https://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/n...test-work.html

My girlfriend teaches in CT. An exposure means you have to isolate and stay at home for two weeks and get tested...period. She had no symptoms at all.

So you can't say "usually" in this case. Employers don't want to take the chance of someone catching or spreading. A few cases in a school can shut the school down for weeks. That's what we're dealing with now.

The best measurement would be if the R value changes. We have three significant variables here
Those that have it, those that go into hospital that have it, those that actually die from it.

We all know those with preexisting conditions are more apt to go to a hospital and possibly die from this. Basically the idea is we try to protect those people and buy time for a vaccine. Otherwise those preexisting overload the system and people that do need things like heart surgeries and knee replacements don't have to wait. I have family that's had to put off cancer treatments due to this crap.

Students are spreaders. Face the facts folks in the northeast things were kinda fine until September and we saw how much the south reopened and then it surged there. Kids get sick, especially younger ones.

[Stepfordct]

What matters most are the fatalities from CV, next is hospitalizations. Death rate is around 1%
At what point does the death rate need to drop too???

Here in the US everyone dies of ( insert cause here).
Overseas it's often just old age.....why medical costs are so high here.

[Mike 75]

Originally Posted by mdovell

Huh? I know many people that get tested by their employer regardless of symptoms because they are concerned of asymptomatic spread. I've felt fine for the past seven months but I've been tested five times. Some places now want negative tests as part of doing anything now. I'm at the office and wear a mask all the time. Everyone at work is. We have sanitzer all over the place and a basic security guard now that prevents anyone from coming in unless they really have an appointment. Otherwise email, call or send a letter..period. We can't take a risk and have an exposure that means the whole office closes again like in the spring.


https://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/n...test-work.html

My girlfriend teaches in CT. An exposure means you have to isolate and stay at home for two weeks and get tested...period. She had no symptoms at all.

So you can't say "usually" in this case. Employers don't want to take the chance of someone catching or spreading. A few cases in a school can shut the school down for weeks. That's what we're dealing with now.

The best measurement would be if the R value changes. We have three significant variables here
Those that have it, those that go into hospital that have it, those that actually die from it.

We all know those with preexisting conditions are more apt to go to a hospital and possibly die from this. Basically the idea is we try to protect those people and buy time for a vaccine. Otherwise those preexisting overload the system and people that do need things like heart surgeries and knee replacements don't have to wait. I have family that's had to put off cancer treatments due to this crap.

Students are spreaders. Face the facts folks in the northeast things were kinda fine until September and we saw how much the south reopened and then it surged there. Kids get sick, especially younger ones.

That is not born out in the data.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/ar...eaders/616669/
And it makes sense when you think about it. Kids (and faculty) in school are forced to wear masks, socially distance and wash their hands. So the likelihood of spread in the schools is low as a result. If only the rest of the population would take note.

On a separate note, if the latest outbreaks are due to small gatherings of family and friends, I'm not sure how lockdowns and closures are going to be effective. Obviously you could say people can't leave their houses for a period of time, but that's draconian and unenforceable. Its more about education, and making people aware that they should be wearing masks when they are indoors anyplace that is not their home.