- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Louisiana COVID-19 - August 12, 2020 Update: 134,304 cases - 4238 deaths - 1,598,609 tests
Posted on 8/12/20 at 1:36 pm to TigersSEC2010
Posted on 8/12/20 at 1:36 pm to TigersSEC2010
Sorry I’m late today
1
Posted on 8/12/20 at 1:39 pm to Weekend Warrior79
quote:
it would show 26,554 active cases.
quote:
past 10 days at just over 8k
Both of these numbers make my head hurt when you spread that out over the population of the state
Posted on 8/12/20 at 1:40 pm to LNCHBOX
quote:
Yes, as it affects a way smaller set of the population. The goal should be minimizing impacts, not making them hit everyone just because.
I don’t think you’re grasping the flaws in this mindset.
Posted on 8/12/20 at 1:40 pm to AmosMosesAndTwins
quote:
It sounds great in theory, but is blocking certain populations any less intrusive or more constitutional than a blanket set of restrictions?
Yes. And who said anything about blocking? Ask at risk people isolate, socially distance from others, and use extra sanitation methods such as hand sanitizer religiously. If an at risk person wants to go out, they’ve chosen that risk.
quote:
And does it even work when everyone supplying those goods and services and basic necessities are all sick?
I’d like to know how many people caught this virus from surface contamination compared to air bone inhalation. And wouldn’t the extra sterilization mentioned above prevent this?
Posted on 8/12/20 at 1:41 pm to LSUJML
Damn it JML!
Also, good on the state for publishing the % from the previous week. Let’s us know this isn’t some huge dump from June. I hope they continue this
Also, good on the state for publishing the % from the previous week. Let’s us know this isn’t some huge dump from June. I hope they continue this
This post was edited on 8/12/20 at 1:42 pm
Posted on 8/12/20 at 1:43 pm to TigersSEC2010
1320 in hospitals (-15), 213 on vents (-1)
Posted on 8/12/20 at 1:44 pm to LSUGUMBO
Another day of good numbers.
Posted on 8/12/20 at 1:45 pm to Oilfieldbiology
quote:
If today’s numbers are higher, shouldn’t that mean that negative cases are back dated and the % positive should lower?
Not necessarily. My suspicion is that the % positive discrepancy is caused by removal of duplicate cases. The % positive calculation in this thread is only valid if both duplicate tests and cases have been removed, but I don’t think that’s true. So you’re effectively counting duplicate positive tests (which have been removed from the “cases” data) as negative - leading to a lower % positive than reality.
Posted on 8/12/20 at 1:49 pm to lostinbr
That doesn’t make mathematical sense. If I relive a positive test and a positive case, the overall positivity should decrease.
Unless you are saying they remove the number in positive cases (numerator) but not in overall tests?
Unless you are saying they remove the number in positive cases (numerator) but not in overall tests?
Posted on 8/12/20 at 1:50 pm to Oilfieldbiology
quote:
That doesn’t make mathematical sense. If I relive a positive test and a positive case, the overall positivity should decrease.
Unless you are saying they remove the number in positive cases (numerator) but not in overall tests?
He is saying the positivity rate does decrease, thus understating actuality.
Posted on 8/12/20 at 1:52 pm to Oilfieldbiology
quote:
Unless you are saying they remove the number in positive cases (numerator) but not in overall tests?
This.
OP is calculating % positive from cases / tests. We know duplicates have been removed from cases. I do not think they have been removed from tests. So it’s effectively the same thing as counting duplicates as negative.
Which means that the OP’s % positive numbers would be lower than LDH’s numbers regardless of date.
Posted on 8/12/20 at 1:53 pm to tigga1951
quote:
Today is the first time I ever looked at this chart. This chart has absolutely no value at all.
Prepare to be downvoted, but you are mostly right.
Posted on 8/12/20 at 1:54 pm to Bonkers119
quote:
Y’all are so dumb, we all want this to end. It finally seems like things are moving in the right direction, let’s hope it continues and we can resume our lives.
And when everything goes back to normal and we’re back in the same spot again in a few months, what then? What did we accomplish?
Posted on 8/12/20 at 1:54 pm to The Pirate King
quote:
And when everything goes back to normal and we’re back in the same spot again in a few months, what then? What did we accomplish?
I have never understood that. Let's lockdown so we can beat this thing. Then what? Only option is to stay locked down.
Posted on 8/12/20 at 1:55 pm to notiger1997
quote:
positivity rate
quote:
rolling 7 day on this would be interesting
paging Golfer
This post was edited on 8/12/20 at 1:56 pm
Posted on 8/12/20 at 1:56 pm to lsu13lsu
I’ve asked that of friends of mine that got angry football is threatened and they went off in people not wearing masks to slow the spread. The response was predictably silent.
Posted on 8/12/20 at 1:56 pm to DomincDecoco
quote:
paging Golfer
Hi, I’m a terrible golfer.
Posted on 8/12/20 at 1:57 pm to tigga1951
Hospitalizations are meaningless? And don’t you dare tell the guy from earlier in the thread that the death numbers are meaningless you cold hearted bastard.
Posted on 8/12/20 at 1:59 pm to Oilfieldbiology
quote:
Hospitalizations are meaningless?
They can be misinterpreted. State hospital metrics are not nearly as insightful as regional, or, drilled down even further, by municipality.
Posted on 8/12/20 at 2:03 pm to lostinbr
I think the math on the positivity must be something like this:
100 tests
5 "new" positives
10 "repeat" positives
85 negatives
Reported as 100 tests, 5 new cases, apparent positivity 5%
JBE positivity calculation = 15 positives so 15%
It's still a useless goalpost
100 tests
5 "new" positives
10 "repeat" positives
85 negatives
Reported as 100 tests, 5 new cases, apparent positivity 5%
JBE positivity calculation = 15 positives so 15%
It's still a useless goalpost
This post was edited on 8/12/20 at 2:06 pm
Page 7 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News