• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

Coronavirus (COVID-19) is too exciting for adults to discuss (CLOSED)

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sort by date Sort by votes
https://www.wired.com/story/new-covid-19-antibody-study-results-are-in-are-they-right/

This is a really good explanation of the data that is fueling the cowboy logic to open up the economy. The lack of reliable information is to be expected with a fast-developing, novel virus. The news that suddenly quotes thousands of prior tests that showed people were positive and recovered often is based on tests that were shown to be invalid and unreliable. Test validation quantifies the false positive and false negative results to be expected.

As the article says, given the number of deaths in New York City, everyone there would have had to have already had COVID-19. Clearly, that is not the case.
 
Upvote 0
Steve19 said:
https://www.wired.com/story/new-covid-19-antibody-study-results-are-in-are-they-right/

This is a really good explanation of the data that is fueling the cowboy logic to open up the economy. The lack of reliable information is to be expected with a fast-developing, novel virus. The news that suddenly quotes thousands of prior tests that showed people were positive and recovered often is based on tests that were shown to be invalid and unreliable. Test validation quantifies the false positive and false negative results to be expected.

As the article says, given the number of deaths in New York City, everyone there would have had to have already had COVID-19. Clearly, that is not the case.
Click to expand...
1.) Not sure I'd consider Wired as a reliable source.
2.) Not sure that gradually opening things up, area by area, is "cowboy logic".
3.) The claim that given the number of deaths in New York City, everyone there would have had to have already had COVID-19 is misguided. The reason why NYC got hit so hard, so fast, was due to its being by far the most densely-populated area in the country and the mayor's initial foot-dragging in implementing control measures. Once those were in place the spread was attenuated which kept a lot more people from getting it. So you really can't claim that "everyone should've had it but they don't".
 
Upvote 0
One obvious problem with having Vegas as an early area to open up is that people travel to and from there from all over the country, so it's not just Vegas that's susceptible to a bounce in cases. Vegas and Disney World are about the last places that should open.

I didn't listen to the above interview yet.
 
Upvote 0
BB73 said:
One obvious problem with having Vegas as an early area to open up is that people travel to and from there from all over the country, so it's not just Vegas that's susceptible to a bounce in cases.

I didn't listen to the above interview yet.
Click to expand...
I recall at one time though they were calling Vegas a hot spot and evidently they had 150 deaths?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Hstead said:
I recall at one time thought they were calling Vegas a hot spot and evidently they had 150 deaths?
Click to expand...
I'm not arguing that some place shouldn't be opened up to see how things go.

I'm just suggesting that the first place to open up should be somewhere where the contact tracing, which would be an important factor in tracking what happens, will be simpler to perform than in Vegas, where a high percentage of people in the casinos would be people that would be in and out of Vegas before they showed any symptoms, if they picked up the virus there.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top