Probably more than 3x maybe more like 10x
Awhile ago we were doing the per capita thing. Does that only apply to emissions or do we need to take that into account for covid-19 cases?
Maybe national vs per capita cases only matter depending on what side of the argument one is on?
From the Acadiana Advocate yesterday afternoon.
"Louisiana is second in the country for deaths per capita and third in the country for cases per capita."
Louisiana has tested 3500, 150 have died, 380 on ventilators. La positive test rate is 13%.
By comparison, NJ has tested over 13000 with 160 deaths. NJ positive test rate is at 38%.
If La tested 4x as many people as currently, the death toll is still the same as NJ.
NJ population is essentially twice that of La.
I don't understand the fascination with testing as opposed to preventing transmission.
I don't think there is a "fascination" with testing. Early on public health officials and the medical community said we must ramp up testing capacity (and not just in the US) if we want to better understand and slow down the spread of the disease. We were warned by the WHO that the tests are not perfect and that sometimes people who have the disease will be wrongly told they do not. WHO also said there would be a positive correlation between tests performed and cases confirmed. And per capita data (or tests per million people) helps us understand the scope of the testing being conducted.
Dr. Birx recently told NPR the U.S is still prioritizing sick people, symptomatic first responders and people in nursing homes for testing. She said a new test that could speed things up was just granted "emergency-use authorization" by the FDA and will be rolled out soon. It can provide results in under 15 minutes, instead of days. The hope is the new test will allow more widespread testing, which will provide more accurate data on who is getting infected and where.
To clarify, public health officials and the medical community did say initially that we needed testing kits. We did, and we still do.
But it seems to me that the media picked up on that and ran with it. Instead of promoting mitigation in the hopes of minimizing transmission, the focus was that there aren't enough tests, we need more tests. Early on, the medical community was also saying that if you think you've been exposed, then stay home. But people were seeking tests, and the 93% negative test rates were using much needed test kits, ppe, and resources.
Data analysis is essential, but sufficient data is needed. I just don't know how useful the data from 1-2 weeks ago is.
Getting NYC, Washington, Detroit and NOLA under control are first priority. Hopefully we'll have the data to help control the rest of the country when it's their turn.
There's no immunity, no cure, and no vaccine. I bought into "stay home" early.
Recent
What are you listening to...
by bringbackself wtf is wrong with the rig... by illiniray
Total Members: 142