California
Florida
Virginia
North Carolina
Tennessee
Wisconsin
Alabama
Mississippi
South Carolina
Nevada
Arkansas
North Dakota
Maine
West Virginia
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/coronavirus-us-cases.html
COVID-19 Pandemic: Transmissions, Deaths, Treatments, Vaccines, Interventions and More...
- Thread starter RU848789
- Start date
- Status
California
Florida
Virginia
North Carolina
Tennessee
Wisconsin
Alabama
Mississippi
South Carolina
Nevada
Arkansas
North Dakota
Maine
West Virginia
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/coronavirus-us-cases.html
Test positivity rate please or it frankly doesn't matter much.
Reuters) - Twenty U.S. states reported an increase in new cases of COVID-19 for the week ended May 24, up from 13 states in the prior week, as the death toll from the novel coronavirus approaches 100,000, according to a Reuters analysis.
The Latest News on the Coronavirus Outbreak ]
South Carolina had the biggest weekly increase at 42%. Alabama's new cases rose 28% from the previous week, Missouri's rose 27% and North Carolina's rose 26%, according to the analysis of data from The COVID Tracking Project, a volunteer-run effort to track the outbreak.
New cases in Georgia, one of the first states to reopen, rose 21% after two weeks of declines. (Open https://tmsnrt.rs/2WTOZDR in an external browser for a Reuters interactive)
https://www.usnews.com/news/us/articles/2020-05-26/where-us-coronavirus-cases-are-on-the-rise
Um...
Yeah, the total number of cases matters quite a bit. 10 years from now when this pandemic is looked back upon there will be two significant values: Number of Cases, Number of Fatalities.
Go back to your Trumpsleep.
Give me a break. From around 140 cases to around 250, on an average of 6k daily cases. That's called NOISE.
Case increase is inconsequential if it is correlated to testing increases. That is so basic. Is the disease spreading faster, or is it spreading at the same rate, or even slower? That is the only question that matters at this point and "new daily cases" doesn't answer that. Positivity rate is more important.
I hope I'm wrong but unfortunately, IMHO, I also believe there will be a second wave. Although a little different from the scenario you described.
I am guessing that the hot summer weather will slow down the transmission to the point where will people will remove all restrictions all together - specifically, the gathering of large groups indoors - sporting events, churches, wedding, etc. Then by fall, we could see another surge - hopefully not.
Hopefully, advancement in treatments and herd immunity blunts any future surge.
The doom and gloom crowd loves to cherry pick meaningless daily data points.
Increased number of cases is increased number of cases. At the end of the day, the total is all that matters.
I know, you want to continue to stroke your idol. It's okay, you can say it: "When you have testing, then you have more cases. If we didn't test, then there wouldn't be any cases."
At least be man enough to admit where you live, that way the rational people here can ignore you.
Your tds has infected your every single post on both boards
Huh? I live in Hunterdon County, border of Somerset. Lost a colleague to Covid in March. Not a Trump voter. Now that we got all of that out of the way, there is absolutely no way to say the total cases is all that matters. Cases alone does not tell you how quickly it is spreading. I really can't believe you're arguing that. It's middle school math, man. You need the denominator to know what a case increase (or decrease, to keep honest) really represents.
Week over week change, positivity rate measured at 2 weeks ago and 1 week ago:
California: +0.1%
Florida: -1.1%
Virginia: -2.2%
North Carolina: -1.9%
Tennessee: +0.9%
Wisconsin: -0.7%
Alabama: -0.1%
Mississippi: -2.2%
South Carolina: +0.9%
Nevada: -0.5%
Arkansas: +3.7%
North Dakota: +.4%
Maine: Data Corrupted - positive rate 2 weeks ago shows as 100%
West Virginia: +2.6%
With a few exceptions, the rate of change isn't really that significant. Throwing out Maine because they're apparently stupid, 7 of the 13 states with increasing case numbers have positivity rate changes <1%, one way or the other.
This is why I'm saying that the actual number of new cases is significant. You look at Alabama, for example, and the 7 day moving average of positive test rates has been steadily increasing for a month. California showed a drop at the end of April but has been fairly flat for the last 3 weeks. North Carolina's numbers are sketchy because they haven't reported anything since Friday. Mississippi, likewise, can't be trusted because they appear to report large numbers of tests on a single day and then report positive results on successive days with no reported tests.
I get what you're trying to do, but you're attempting to rationalize an untrustworthy data set. So, again, I say that the real number to look at is the actual number of cases. That's the number that will ultimately impact the health system, that's the number that will ultimately turn into some number of fatalities and it's also the number that will impact community spread.
I don't agree that an increase in cases signals an incoming impact to the healthcare system. Very likely, there was gross underreporting of cases everywhere over the last 6 weeks. If we couldn't get sufficient testing here in the NYC metro, the effective national ground zero, how could these other places? Simple question Real- do you think that there are more people infected with Covid right now in these 20 states than there were one month ago? For me it's a hard no, we just couldn't identify the sick people then. If you agree with that, and we didn't overwhelm the healthcare system then, we aren't going to do it now during this 'slow burn' phase.
I disagree.
There are no "phantom cases" that impact the healthcare system. Absolutely everyone admitted to, and treated at, a hospital for C-19 represents a positive test result. So if there are vast numbers of unreported or underreported cases, those represent asymptomatic patients who contribute nothing to the overall picture other than to decrease the final infection rates.
What would really give your argument some teeth is the hospitalization rate, over time. Unfortunately most states aren't reporting that data.
Couple of points in this article which support your position.
https://www.trussvilletribune.com/2...974-cases-in-past-2-weeks-deaths-jump-to-580/
"In other news, the number of daily positive tests has substantially risen throughout May. This time in April, there were just two days with more than 300 positive tests per day. As of May 4, there have been 17 days of daily positive tests exceeding 300 in the month. There also have been five days in May with 400 or more positive tests, per BamaTracker.
This comes despite testing numbers stagnated throughout the state. The number of tests per day reached a high of 5,966 on May 1, but has since leveled out with an average of around 3,800 per day. This comes as Gov. Kay Ivey reopened the state despite federal reopening guidelines calling for states to only reopen if there is a downward trajectory of cases within a 14-day period"
"Hospitalizations spiked to an all-time high in Alabama on Monday at 706."
I think increased cases might not paint a correct picture when you don't have enough testing. So the prevalence of the virus might not be what it seems....as if it's growing when it's really just that you're testing more.
But after a point when you do have enough testing (I think the threshold used to measure that is if percent positive is below 10%) then number of cases probably is showing you clearer picture of what might be happening.
But after a point when you do have enough testing (I think the threshold used to measure that is if percent positive is below 10%) then number of cases probably is showing you clearer picture of what might be happening.
Case rates are meaningful if states are testing enough, but can be misleading otherwise, although still useful for general trends. Completely agree on hospitalizations being the best indicator of whether virus transmission is increasing/decreasing, although hospitalizations do lag infections by a week or so, typically. And yes, finding solid hospitalization data is not easy.
The CDC used to be the preeminent public health organization in the world, looking back at their amazing work during H1N1, Ebola, and many others. Not anymore after being eviscerated and sidelined by this Administration.Funny stuff. The CDC says you are wrong. Feel free to root for the higher number, but the data doesn't support it.
This time around they completely bungled test development and distribution and were weeks late on strongly endorsing wearing masks (although that effort has been fairly quiet and ineffective with lack of leadership from Trump on down, as seen in every public appearance) and now they're issuing what most experts think are underestimates of the potential impact from the virus. So forgive me if I chuckle when you say I and most experts will be wrong because we disagree with the CDC.
Huh? Nevada? That is news to the state itself. It has a total of 90 people in the ICU with confirmed or suspected COVID right now in the entire state, the lowest since March. It is performing a record amount of testing, with about 3% coming back positive.
This is exactly why NYT reads as a legal brief submitted by an advocate and not as factual.
Last edited:
@RU4Real another fly in the ointment... how do we know what kind of positives hose numbers represent? Is it uniform across states whether or not a positive antibody test should be counted in that number? If any state is including antibody results that creates a positive case result for someone who might be been sick two months ago and isn't currently symptomatic or contagious.
And when the rate is already very low, there won't be a big "change." Going from 4% to 3.5% certainly doesn't signal "increase." It signals decrease if hospitalizations are down and testing has increased four fold.
Here's the official data source on Nevada for yesterday. There is literally not a single piece of data that points to an "increase." As shown on page 5, the rate of positive tests has fallen off a cliff.
https://nvhealthresponse.nv.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/05.26.20-Daily-SitRep-Final-2.pdf
Assuming NJ is showing there are ~156k confirmed cases of covid, what is the estimate of active cases right now in nj?
The numbers are for one week. The trends are what matters.
If you are one of the 110 who died, you or your family would not call it noise.
Sadly, you have joined TK to politicize a global pandemic. Let's revisit the numbers at the end of December and see who was the group that had it right and who had it wrong.
And for the record, only a person who sees this pandemic in political terms would have the temerity to accuse anyone of rooting for the numbers to go up or for the US economy to stay closed. This is what is called projection.
For the record, I would gladly vote for a vaccine tomorrow and four more years of Trump if it meant we could stop the deaths and suffering. This has zero to do with politics.
How do you think the state with far-and-away the most cases and deaths flattened the curve? If you take NYS out of the weekly numbers, the deaths are going up. How was this accomplished? By telling everyone to screw the masks and party in enclosed venues w/o a mask.
For the record, I would gladly vote for a vaccine tomorrow and four more years of Trump if it meant we could stop the deaths and suffering. This has zero to do with politics.
How do you think the state with far-and-away the most cases and deaths flattened the curve? If you take NYS out of the weekly numbers, the deaths are going up. How was this accomplished? By telling everyone to screw the masks and party in enclosed venues w/o a mask.
Just for the record, the data in the link you posted show that the number of cases in Nevada have increased since the beginning of the month. If you look at the rolling 7-day average (which is a good way to view trends where you have day-to-day variation, especially over weekends), you see a clear upward trend.
On May 7, the 7-day average of new cases from May 1 to May 7 was 93.9. On May 25 (the last day reported in your link), the 7-day average was 135.9, a 45% increase.
Here is the trend:
May 7 - 93.9
May 11 - 102.4
May 14 - 104.4
May 18 - 105.1
May 21 - 112.4
May 25 - 135.9
But the 7 day average for testing is increase also on 5/7 they conducted 1836 average prior of 1706.71 tests and it has increased most days ending in 9325 tests on 5/25 with a seven day average of 5577.14
During that first week of May, the state reported about 12k test results for the whole week. Yesterday alone, 9300 test results were reported. The past seven days, more than 37k test results have been reported.
So this "increase" is meaningless which begs the question why it is even being posted in the first place. It is meaningless.
Yesterday, 9325 test results were reported. Only 120 of those were positive.
We should be applauding this type of progress (tons of testing and a very low positive rate and declining hospital census) instead of putting the state on a list where Covid is "increasing."
Here's another statistic for you. The unemployment rate in Nevada is over 30%. The economy of the state is going to be crushed for the foreseeable future. Keeping a lockdown in place in a state that has 1/3 the population of NJ but has under 100 people in the ICU would be moronic (the Democrat governor agrees).
Wolv, I agree with you, but I don't see how you bring their economy back as I'm sure much of those unemployed come from the gaming industry with associated conventions. People sitting in enclosed casinos with recirculated air is a very good way to spread the virus, not to mention the other big industries where close contact is encouraged (nudge nudge, wink, wink). How to you open successfully, put people back to work safely in a casino environment?
From a strictly immediate economic standpoint (i.e., not accounting for long term effects on kids or non-Covid health issues that are worse because of lockdowns), a piece that is also significant in Nevada is small business. Those are reopening Friday. These are the types of things that extended closures needlessly hurt.
Unfortunately, a large piece of the Nevada economy comes from conventions and trade shows etc. Those are not coming back for at least a long time.
The Governor and gaming regulators are allowing casinos and gaming to open on June 4. From what I've seen, there will be a lot of reduced capacity, a lot of plexi-glass to divide people, and a lot of mask wearing. Who knows what the demand will be, but Arizona has seen demand for their few casinos. It will likely depend on how many people from California are willing to take trips over to Vegas.
I was only pointing out that the data you linked to show "There is literally not a single piece of data that points to an 'increase.' ", actually shows an increase. I was not weighing in on why there was an increase, only that the data shows an increase, in contradiction to your claim.
The NY Times article you link criticized clearly states that states showing increases in reported cases show increases "in part because some have recently ramped up their testing capacity."
I don't know what portion of the increase in Nevada is due to increased testing. Increased testing may be responsible for all of the increase in cases, some of the increase, or none of the increase. I don't know. I'm not inclined to do that analysis, since that is not the point I was making. But since the link you provided contains the data needed to do that analysis, you or someone else can certainly crunch the numbers and determine what part of the increase is due to increased testing.
Nonetheless, the fact remains that the data you linked shows an increase in cases in Nevada.
Well, the conversation started with a comment that "I am very likely right as the numbers in numerous states are going up, not down." When the NYTimes were cited in support of an apparent large number of states going up, I guess most just assumed it meant meaningful numbers. If not meaningful numbers are "going up," the data shows nothing.
Indeed, the NYTimes numbers show nothing. I do not know why they are tracking it if not to use to support a position not supportable by actual meaningful data.
So yeah, there is no increase in any piece of meaningful data. To cite to non-meaningful data means one either doesn't know better or is pushing an agenda.
There are more reported cases because there is more testing!! Why can't you understand this. The percentage of people test positive is dropping not climbing. Some of you are f-ing clueless!
https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/testing/individual-states
Take a look at the increase in tests in Nevada recently. The percentage of positives is way down!! Over 10% in the beginning of May now under 5%. Please stop the bullcrap
What are people advocating here? Are people really saying we should just go back to normal? That’s just crazy. This is very simple. We need to open up slowly and practice social distancing and wear masks when we can’t social distance. That’s the answer. There is no other answer.
Why? The percentage of positives test has plummeted. From a high of over 20% to a low in most places under 5% and still dropping. This is virus. It is acting like one. We put restrictions on healthy people but we haven't changed the policy on nursing homes. #s posted an article on this. The percentage of people living in nursing homes in the U.S. is .5% yet they account for 25% of deaths in the U.S. Yet no changes there.
Why? Because I have watched people I know who are young upper 30’s and low 40’s die who were perfectly healthy. I have friends in the same age group with no conditions end up in the hospital for weeks on ventilators and will have permanent long term damage. So there is a middle ground. Not saying we can’t reopen but we can do it and wear masks. Restaurants can reopen with no masks. That is a persons choice to go there. But stores and offices and parks should be mandatory to wear masks. It’s not that big of a deal to wear one. We can reopen while making it as safe as possible for everyone.
- Status
Similar threads
