Coronavirus testing (1 Viewer)

[dtc]

What is the deal with the tests?

Seems like I'm reading we are processing 30% fewer tests this week than last and we've never been testing anywhere near what we should have been.

What happened to the drive-thru testing and all that and why in this nation are we having a hard time putting our hands on freaking cotton swabs?

I find it terribly unnerving to know we haven't been able to test as well as Korea or really anywhere yet.

What gives?

 

[JimEverett]

What is the deal with the tests?

Seems like I'm reading we are processing 30% fewer tests this week than last and we've never been testing anywhere near what we should have been.

What happened to the drive-thru testing and all that and why in this nation are we having a hard time putting our hands on freaking cotton swabs?

I find it terribly unnerving to know we haven't been able to test as well as Korea or really anywhere yet.

What gives?

We are testing more than France, UK, and the Netherlands - amongst others. we are basically even with Korea. Although we are testing half as much as Germany, Italy, and Spain. Certain U.S. states have very high rates of testing.

 

[dtc]

We are testing more than France, UK, and the Netherlands - amongst others. we are basically even with Korea. Although we are testing half as much as Germany, Italy, and Spain. Certain U.S. states have very high rates of testing.

How are we not 10,000 times better than the best?

What's the freaking hangup?

 

[not2rich]

We are testing more than France, UK, and the Netherlands - amongst others. we are basically even with Korea. Although we are testing half as much as Germany, Italy, and Spain. Certain U.S. states have very high rates of testing.

I'm assuming you're using rates per capita rather than raw numbers, but even so the positivity rate of testing shows whether we are testing enough.

A New Statistic Reveals Why America’s COVID-19 Numbers Are Flat

Few figures tell you anything useful about how the coronavirus has spread through the U.S. Here’s one that does.

www.theatlantic.com

"According to the Tracking Project’s figures, nearly one in five people who get tested for the coronavirus in the United States is found to have it. In other words, the country has what is called a “test-positivity rate” of nearly 20 percent.

That is “very high,” Jason Andrews, an infectious-disease professor at Stanford, told us. Such a high test-positivity rate almost certainly means that the U.S. is not testing everyone who has been infected with the pathogen, because it implies that doctors are testing only people with a very high probability of having the infection. People with milder symptoms, to say nothing of those with none at all, are going undercounted."

 

[Beach Friends]

How are we not 10,000 times better than the best?

What's the freaking hangup?

10,000x better than the next best?

I know you are a firm believer in American exceptionalism, but is that a reasonable expectation?

 

[JimEverett]

How are we not 10,000 times better than the best?

What's the freaking hangup?

I agree we should be the best - but that is not really the point I was responding to.

 

[JimEverett]

I'm assuming you're using rates per capita rather than raw numbers, but even so the positivity rate of testing shows whether we are testing enough.

Of course. The only time raw numbers should be used to compare is total cases and deaths. Otherwise, the U.S. doesn't look nearly as bad as the people wanting to score political points want it to be.

 

[not2rich]

Of course. The only time raw numbers should be used to compare is total cases and deaths. Otherwise, the U.S. doesn't look nearly as bad as the people wanting to score political points want it to be.

Not sure why you had to respond with a non-sequitur, but back to the point. Do you think a 20% positive rate for testing nationally is indicative of adequate testing.

 

[dtc]

I agree we should be the best - but that is not really the point I was responding to.

The point you were responding to is not really what I wanted to discuss.

Why are we not the best and I don't care if we're on par with Korea or not. We are not doing better than Germany or Italy.

Why is that? What do we do to not only fix it, but to make sure that we are never middle of the pack when it comes to this sort of thing.

Why have we not flipped a switch and shown our mettle?

 

[Joe Okc]

Not trying to debate... But it may have something to do with the Population per square mile.

Italy - 532 people per sq mile.
Ger - 235 People per sq Mile
USA - 92 people per sq mile
Rus - 22 People per sq mile.

During this crisis, there is something to be said for fly over states... OKC is so spread out.. Housing is so far apart... and the distance between cities gets further and further apart the more west you go.

So just surmising, I think that the majority of testing is going to major population areas and unless there become a growing concern for more rural area states... Perhaps that is why...

I think the everybody has got to get tested. ANd one it is shown that you contracted it and got over it, then you a free to go on and get back to work now without delay.

 

[Beach Friends]

Seems like someone is making the argument that the mortality rate of the Communist virus is a lot lower than predicted.

 

[JimEverett]

The point you were responding to is not really what I wanted to discuss.

Why are we not the best and I don't care if we're on par with Korea or not. We are not doing better than Germany or Italy.

I was responding to this:

I find it terribly unnerving to know we haven't been able to test as well as Korea or really anywhere yet.

I am not sure why you think France, UK, Netherlands are not anywhere. In addition - our testing is basically the same as Korea.

If your point was that you think the USA should be 10,000 times better than anywhere else you should have said that instead of inaccurately saying we are not doing better than anywhere.

 

[JimEverett]

Not sure why you had to respond with a non-sequitur, but back to the point. Do you think a 20% positive rate for testing nationally is indicative of adequate testing.

"Non-sequitur"? Did you really forget that you are the one who bought up the question of per capita numbers v. raw numbers???????

As far as your second question, who knows if it is "adequate" - the criticism has been we are not testing enough. Yet we are testing better than most nations and some other criticism pops up.

Is a 20% positive rate abnormal? Doesn't look to be when compared to the top 8 western European nations' figures - we are right in the middle.



France 32%
Belgium 26%
UK 24.8%
Spain 20.2%
US 19.9%
Netherlands 19.7%
Italy 13.9%
Switzerland 13.1%
Germany 8%

 

[dtc]

I was responding to this:



I am not sure why you think France, UK, Netherlands are not anywhere. In addition - our testing is basically the same as Korea.

If your point was that you think the USA should be 10,000 times better than anywhere else you should have said that instead of inaccurately saying we are not doing better than anywhere.

There's always someone who would prefer the semantics rather than the point. Sometimes it's me.

As I said, why aren't we outperforming these places in gross or per capita testing?

 

[JimEverett]

There's always someone who would prefer the semantics rather than the point. Sometimes it's me.

As I said, why aren't we outperforming these places in gross or per capita testing?

What was the point? It seemed to me your point was that the US testing was the worst in the world - given that that is what you wrote. I mean I guess we can dismiss with semantics and whenever we write something that has some particular meaning just claim to interpret it that way is preferring the semantics.

But okay, lets drop it.

Why are we not outperfoming who? Everyone? We are outperforming most. I would imagine that part of the reason we are not outperforming Italy and Spain is due to those countries having been dealing with a large outbreak for a longer period of time. Numbers from where our outbreak is centered - NY - show far superior testing than those countries as a whole - but obviously that is not a true 1-to-1 comparison. But it does go to show more testing where outbreaks are strong.

I am not sure why Germany is outperforming us. Do you have any thoughts?

 

[dtc]

What was the point? It seemed to me your point was that the US testing was the worst in the world - given that that is what you wrote. I mean I guess we can dismiss with semantics and whenever we write something that has some particular meaning just claim to interpret it that way is preferring the semantics.

But okay, lets drop it.

Why are we not outperfoming who? Everyone? We are outperforming most. I would imagine that part of the reason we are not outperforming Italy and Spain is due to those countries having been dealing with a large outbreak for a longer period of time. Numbers from where our outbreak is centered - NY - show far superior testing than those countries as a whole - but obviously that is not a true 1-to-1 comparison. But it does go to show more testing where outbreaks are strong.

I am not sure why Germany is outperforming us. Do you have any thoughts?

No, that's why I asked.

We have had plenty of time to do better than anyone and we aren't. We actually tested fewer last week than before.

For a group with a whole lot of members who prefer conspiracy theories to more logical explanations I thought there might be a good discussion.

Why did we test fewer than last week?

Why are we not blowing the doors off the rest of the world? We sure would if it came to chili eating contests or war.

Why aren't any of our "conservative" members or politicos ranting about testing and the failed tests that were delivered? Is it one team covering for their side or is there something there?

I want to know why our testing isn't better than it is. And, given that I feel our country should be the world's leader in just about anything, it troubles me that we are middling.

 

[dtc]

"Non-sequitur"? Did you really forget that you are the one who bought up the question of per capita numbers v. raw numbers???????

As far as your second question, who knows if it is "adequate" - the criticism has been we are not testing enough. Yet we are testing better than most nations and some other criticism pops up.

Is a 20% positive rate abnormal? Doesn't look to be when compared to the top 8 western European nations' figures - we are right in the middle.



France 32%
Belgium 26%
UK 24.8%
Spain 20.2%
US 19.9%
Netherlands 19.7%
Italy 13.9%
Switzerland 13.1%
Germany 8%

From a statistical standpoint, it tells me we aren't testing enough to even approximate what the real infection level is.

Are we sandbagging to save face? That doesn't make much sense because other nations are also not really doing well, but some are.

 

[Beach Friends]

No, that's why I asked.

We have had plenty of time to do better than anyone and we aren't. We actually tested fewer last week than before.

For a group with a whole lot of members who prefer conspiracy theories to more logical explanations I thought there might be a good discussion.

Why did we test fewer than last week?

Why are we not blowing the doors off the rest of the world? We sure would if it came to chili eating contests or war.

Why aren't any of our "conservative" members or politicos ranting about testing and the failed tests that were delivered? Is it one team covering for their side or is there something there?

I want to know why our testing isn't better than it is. And, given that I feel our country should be the world's leader in just about anything, it troubles me that we are middling.

It's no secret that we lost testing time on the front end due to a SNAFU with the first CDC test. But currently, tests are widely available at least in my area.

Is there a specific article that you read that has you so riled up? I don't even know how many fewer we tested this week compared to last.

Your insistence that we should be outpacing the rest of the world by a significant margin seems odd.