This might be my bias showing, but I would assume that the people at a large biker rally are less healthy than the aggregate of society.
I picture an outsized amount of smokers and other chronic diseases.
Beyond the biker rally aspect, it's a party atmosphere and I suspect there will be plenty of boozing and close interactions. This is like Mardi gras right?
I picture an outsized amount of smokers and other chronic diseases.
Beyond the biker rally aspect, it's a party atmosphere and I suspect there will be plenty of boozing and close interactions. This is like Mardi gras right?
This fall will mark a year since his virus emerged. Shortly after that it'll be about a year since this virus forced international moves to respond to it.
We probably won't have the first general population vaccine at a large level until the spring. One year into this.
The virus continues to move rapidly in some areas and slowly in others. Some countries of the world have yet to experience significant local outbreaks but also do not have tracing and containment plans. they also likely don't have the apparatus or funds for Mass vaccination in the spring, let alone the difficulty spinning up worldwide vaccine production.
It's pretty crazy to think that it may a full two years, into 2022, until we can start really traveling the world un encumbered again.
And between now and then, is there news about plans for concerts? Large sporting events? Do we really think the Olympics will take place in Tokyo in 2021 and anywhere near the usual scale?
We probably won't have the first general population vaccine at a large level until the spring. One year into this.
The virus continues to move rapidly in some areas and slowly in others. Some countries of the world have yet to experience significant local outbreaks but also do not have tracing and containment plans. they also likely don't have the apparatus or funds for Mass vaccination in the spring, let alone the difficulty spinning up worldwide vaccine production.
It's pretty crazy to think that it may a full two years, into 2022, until we can start really traveling the world un encumbered again.
And between now and then, is there news about plans for concerts? Large sporting events? Do we really think the Olympics will take place in Tokyo in 2021 and anywhere near the usual scale?
you guys remember that picture a couple weeks ago of the packed/no-mask HS hallway in Georgia?
26 confirmed COVID cases, and the principal suspended the student.
plot twist - although suspending the student for violating privacy rules would be justified, the principal went on the PA and announced that anyone who posted media that made the school look bad would have to face consequences...so he probably just opened the school district up to a lawsuit.
LoL
26 confirmed COVID cases, and the principal suspended the student.
plot twist - although suspending the student for violating privacy rules would be justified, the principal went on the PA and announced that anyone who posted media that made the school look bad would have to face consequences...so he probably just opened the school district up to a lawsuit.
LoL
there are a lot of really good bikers who are respectful of public health and just like living outside the normal parameters of society.
none of them are at Sturgis this year, so yeah - place is chock full of the worst segment of the biker community.
SD isn't alone in this - FL still has Biketoberfest on the calendar.
What's GA look like overall? They threw the doors open at the same time as Florida if memory serves.
'We cannot stop people': 250,000 are expected at a South Dakota motorcycle rally
Health officials are still warning against even small gatherings, and states with...www.chron.com
This might go poorly for a previous area that had this under control.
Also lol
View attachment 12265
about half of FL/CA/TX...double Louisiana...I have buddy there who mentioned on his FB that it was really hard to get tested, and another friend in OR who's pediatrician nieghbor said they were told yesterday that there's a shortage of tests.
with HHS taking over accounting and a slow down in testing, I'm getting concerned about the accuracy of the 'new case' counts.
the seat track is factory-serviceable part.
That explains why you can't order individual parts for them, Elon.
If they had a legit test then we would consider the numbers
If your data is based upon a flawed input then how good is your data
why do you say the test isn't legit?
People who have never run a pcr before don't understand how easy a false positive can happen from a teany tiny contamination from a wee little bump.
PCR is being abused
It is not a Binary test
arbitrary threshold can determine result
False positives, False negatives
-Kary Mullis-
You cannot trust the "positive tests" data as solid input my brother, I wish that wasn't so but it is.
If we are talking hospitilizations with similar chest x-rays and deaths above the norm for areas then that is more solid data.(although lockdown itself is a variable in the death number)
PCR test isn't solid in any way. Sadly.
With all the money being thrown at the problem I hope somebody is working on a much more reliable test.
i thought the PCR was an NAAT and had high sensitivity...the mistakes were False Negative.
link me some research, I can't find anything that says PCR is giving lots of false Positive
I'm sure that's a common trope on the ground there. And in a vacuum I think that's a perfectly fine thought.
But...I wonder if it's an informed consent.
I wonder how many people will die or kill their loved ones accidentally. These aren't just stats or hypotheticals. It's going to happen. Not only does history show this (parades in Spanish flu) but so does the current virus (Mardi gras tracing).
What I wonder though is what the number will be and if the bikers truly grasp the lottery they're entering for themselves and others. It's not truly freedom if your operating on misinformation and being penalized for it.
That's not really how testing and and statistics work. The concern about how many of the tests are garbage is absolutely valid. There's a ton of them and many are unbelievably bad. But you don't just throw out all of the numbers when you know the aggregate of the test. Even with inaccurate testing, you do have things that are sure like excess deaths. Then you also know the confidence interval that you create from the inaccurate test.
In the same way you might not be able to accurately determine the source of a radio signal with one or two antenna, it becomes increasingly accurate to triangulate with many antennas even if your antennas are bad at this job when you only have a few.
In this case I regularly use a test that is a nearly perfect positive but might miss up to 20% of cases. That is I have an unexpectedly high false negative rate and a population with a lot of coronavirus. This is a major concern and forces me to follow up with more accurate tests that takes much longer to get a result. And on any given day having only an 80% confidence that I haven't missed anybody is not very good. There are surely positive Corona viruses out there that I'm missing. But as I test more and more and more and so do others and we throw them all in a pot You're then able to create a confidence interval which is how these models are created. So you might not know whether you have 150,000 Coronavirus deaths or 200,000 Coronavirus deaths. Matching the variation and testing that is a pretty big range (up to 33%!) But you are mathematically certain at 95% or 99%, (to common confidence intervals used in science) the answer lies inside that range. And if you're sure that the number is at least 150 in less than 200 then you can choose how to act and respond to that and whether that is a big deal or not a big deal.
This is a misunderstanding of all testing then.
The two most common types of tests that are used right now are PCR and ELISA.
PCR with matching nucleotide fragments to a known viral strand and ELISA that is mostly antigen testing like your rapid flu's. This will create a highlighted molecular attachment that lights up a test strip and is often computer read when you're doing mass testing.
Sort of like a pregnancy test, there are thresholds to determine whether that's a positive or negative. And as above you have confidence intervals for sensitivity and specificity.
The test are in fact red is binary at that point. The thresholds are not arbitrary but instead used to find statistics.
While I understand the concern that I could go and adjust my PCR threshold after the fact, that simply not the way this works. The tests are created to a certain standard and then packaged with that information along with them.
The testing currently used is of the exact same technology that we use for rapid flu and PCR flu.
The major problem is significant variation and all of the different manufacturers as we spun things up emergently.
In the case of rapid flu it still doesn't carry a wonderful percentages. But again as above this percentages are known and with a large enough aggregate you can create confidence intervals.
Now if you start seeing confidence intervals that say we might have 100,000 cases or 500,000 cases in that case you start to see the real breakdown in poor testing, if you determine that one of those numbers requires one societal response and the other one requires another societal response.
people test positive and then negative on the next day
I know a doctor that sent in 3 tests from same person and...
Respect to your hard work
I mean that
How about somebody testing positive one day and negative the next?
How about multiple samples from same person coming back with different results?
The man who created the test had issues with it being used for this purpose.
I just think it isn't the end all be all of Data right now...I wish it was.
well of course you're giving me a 24-hour range. Let's talk about just back-to-back test.
Since there are false positives and false negatives that can exist.
You could have your example or vice versa.
Swapping technique by the tech could change things as well as viral shedding if you're going entire 24 hours.
I think the much larger problem is what do I do with somebody who's positive but their symptoms have improved? If I am swabbing you 3 weeks later and you have symptoms and your positive I feel like I'm learning something about the disease. This has occurred with my patients.
I then have that patient back and swapped them again a week later and they're still positive but their fever broke three days before. Are they still shedding enough to infect others? they're probably shedding enough for me to pick up on a test but I don't know when I clear them. So I sit on them for a week and then test them a week later and they're asymptomatic and they're test becomes negative.
I will tell you that in my own small experience I do see on these longer cases positive positive positive positive positive than negative. And typically you know it's going to become negative because their fever has broken and they just constitutionally feel better in general.
PCR?
Well as above it's not. Like all of clinical medicine I test is best when it just simply confirms what you already know.
After I've seen enough patients I will tell you that I can spot the symptomatic Corona viruses in the mix. They stand out for this time of the year.
But in my example above where somebody has this window where I can still find virus but I am a few days after their symptoms have abated, are they still shedding?
Are you attributing excess deaths as being covid deaths?