- 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
Math help: what does avg. rate of transmission was 0.32% translate to in 1 out of _____
Posted on 10/4/20 at 11:22 pm
Posted on 10/4/20 at 11:22 pm
LINK
Study done on those who were trapped in the same train car next to someone with COVID.
From this study it would appear one has a 1 in 300 chance of catching the virus from being in prolonged exposure to someone with COVID. But my math must be off, because we have examples where 20 people in a 100 person party have caught the virus (Spring break, weddings, etc.) So can anyone help me understand this better.
Study done on those who were trapped in the same train car next to someone with COVID.
quote:
Based on high-speed routes in China, researchers from WorldPop found that for train passengers sitting within three rows (widthwise) and five columns (lengthwise) of an infected person (index patient) between zero and ten percent (10.3) caught the disease. The average rate of transmission for these 'close contact' travelers was 0.32 percent.
The study, in collaboration with the Chinese Academy of Sciences, China Academy of Electronics and Information Technology, and Chinese Centre for Disease Control and Prevention, also showed that passengers traveling in seats directly adjacent to an index patient suffered the highest level of transmission, with an average of 3.5 percent contracting the disease. For those sitting on the same row, the figure was 1.5 percent.
From this study it would appear one has a 1 in 300 chance of catching the virus from being in prolonged exposure to someone with COVID. But my math must be off, because we have examples where 20 people in a 100 person party have caught the virus (Spring break, weddings, etc.) So can anyone help me understand this better.
19
Posted on 10/4/20 at 11:23 pm to Kujo
Posted on 10/4/20 at 11:33 pm to Kujo
Beats the hell out of me. I don’t know what to think about Rona.
Posted on 10/4/20 at 11:36 pm to Kujo
So by prolonged, you mean i would basically have to let some one with Covid come cough in my mouth?
It would actually get me two weeks off of work paid so anyone that wants to, feel free.
It would actually get me two weeks off of work paid so anyone that wants to, feel free.
Posted on 10/4/20 at 11:41 pm to Kujo
I don't know.
Just make up some numbers. Then change them next week if you want to.
You will qualify as an "expert".
A white lab coat helps.
Just make up some numbers. Then change them next week if you want to.
You will qualify as an "expert".
A white lab coat helps.
Posted on 10/4/20 at 11:44 pm to Kujo
Covid has been linked to "Super Spreaders", and it has been confirmed in multiple studies. I would assume the infection rate would be highly dependent on if the initial spreader was carrying a high viral load and could be considered a "Super Spreader". If not, their likelihood of infecting others would be much lower, and at times near zero, I would think.
This post was edited on 10/4/20 at 11:45 pm
Posted on 10/4/20 at 11:55 pm to Kujo
quote:Well it's not a simple math problem. It's a bunch of probabilities that depend on countless factors which are impossible to accurately account for in a simplified way. You can't perform experiments for ethical reasons (I would guess), and you can't control for all the variables anyway. The best we can do is just measure what happens. And a study on a train (where people mostly keep to themselves) is going to have different results than a party (where people interact and mingle) or any other scenario. Even at very large scales where all of these different scenarios "average out", rates of transmission vary by state and country.
But my math must be off
Posted on 10/5/20 at 12:25 am to SEClint
288
Posted on 10/5/20 at 12:50 am to Kujo
.32% would be 1out of 320
This post was edited on 10/5/20 at 12:53 am
Posted on 10/5/20 at 12:52 am to Kujo
.350
Posted on 10/5/20 at 12:56 am to MileHighDraw
quote:Leave it to the OT.
.32% would be 1out of 3200.
0.32% is about 1 in 300. This is really simple to do in your head since you know 1% is 1 in 100, and 0.32% is about 1/3, so 1/3 * 1/100 is 1/300.
1 out of 3200 is 1/3200 = 0.0003125 X 100 (to convert to %) = 0.03125%.
Edit: Obviously I caught it before your edit, but now after your edit you're just being pedantic. And you're still an incorrect pedant, at that, because 1/320 is 0.3125%. If you want to be precise, 0.32% is 1 in 312.5
This post was edited on 10/5/20 at 12:59 am
Posted on 10/5/20 at 1:41 am to Kujo
The diesel powered METRA trains I take to work carried about 1600 commuters during rush hour before the Covid outbreak. A lot of the same people take the train every day to and from work in the city. The passenger cars are double decked with an open section in the middle, so a second level passenger is less than 6’ from anyone walking in the isle on the lower section.
A 1 in 300 chance that any person could catch the virus from an infected individual means that each sick person will infect about 5.3 commuters. Commutes are two way, so that’s about 10 infected people per day.
The symptoms are usually minor, so those 10 people are still going to work at least for a while. I am not sure how long it takes for the virus to become contagious after day 1 of infection, so let’s call that time the “commuter interval”.
So starting with one sick person, the second commuter interval results in 10 sick people are getting on the train, and there is now a 1 in 30 chance that any given person can be infected (1 in 300 for each of the 10 sick people). That means that 53 people get sick on the second interval.
The third interval would start from 53 sick people.
So it keeps increasing and could spiral out of control pretty quickly especially if sick people get contagious within a week or so from catching it and remain contagious for a while. Not sure I’d get on that train if I were at risk; I would definitely not ban the use of the train for young, healthy people though - especially now that ridership is down about 90%, which makes it easier to be socially distant.
A 1 in 300 chance that any person could catch the virus from an infected individual means that each sick person will infect about 5.3 commuters. Commutes are two way, so that’s about 10 infected people per day.
The symptoms are usually minor, so those 10 people are still going to work at least for a while. I am not sure how long it takes for the virus to become contagious after day 1 of infection, so let’s call that time the “commuter interval”.
So starting with one sick person, the second commuter interval results in 10 sick people are getting on the train, and there is now a 1 in 30 chance that any given person can be infected (1 in 300 for each of the 10 sick people). That means that 53 people get sick on the second interval.
The third interval would start from 53 sick people.
So it keeps increasing and could spiral out of control pretty quickly especially if sick people get contagious within a week or so from catching it and remain contagious for a while. Not sure I’d get on that train if I were at risk; I would definitely not ban the use of the train for young, healthy people though - especially now that ridership is down about 90%, which makes it easier to be socially distant.
This post was edited on 10/5/20 at 1:57 am
Posted on 10/5/20 at 5:11 am to Kujo
quote:
From this study it would appear one has a 1 in 300 chance of catching the virus from being in prolonged exposure to someone with COVID. But my math must be off, because we have examples where 20 people in a 100 person party have caught the virus (Spring break, weddings, etc.)
The problem isn’t your math. It’s your reading comprehension. Like too many on these boards you skim these articles, pull out a single factoid you happen to like, and over generalize it and apply it wherever you want.
That value is based on a wide dispersal of people.
Axx
Xxx
Xxx
Xxx
XxB
The transmission rate is going to be zero in this seating arrangement.
However here,
ABx
The transmission rate can be over 10%, with an average of 3.5% with the variation based primarily on precise adjacency to infected and on travel duration.
All this study does is indicate how much direct proximity matters. It doesn’t spread easily over air. It’s by direct contact with secretions, either by the person getting snot or saliva on their hands and touching something or sending droplets flying.
Now as for your question, consider the amount of incidental contact between strangers on a train vs family at a wedding or among drunken friends at a party.
Entirely different situation.
This post was edited on 10/5/20 at 6:26 am
Posted on 10/5/20 at 5:17 am to Korkstand
quote:
1 in 312.5
how do you get half a person? this study is bullshite!!
Posted on 10/5/20 at 5:21 am to Kujo
Only 6%
Posted on 10/5/20 at 5:33 am to Kujo
There simply are too many variables to put an exact percentage of "rate of transmission". The flu, along with other viruses, have been around forever, and I doubt there has ever been a truly accurate and useful analysis done that shows an exact percentage of ROT.
Certainly there can be generalities answered, like keeping your distance away from others, but that's about it.
Certainly there can be generalities answered, like keeping your distance away from others, but that's about it.
Posted on 10/5/20 at 5:37 am to Kujo
quote:
The study, in collaboration with the Chinese Academy of Sciences, China Academy of Electronics and Information Technology, and Chinese Centre for Disease Control and Prevention,
If China is providing numbers, they are suspect from the start.
Posted on 10/5/20 at 6:27 am to ksayetiger
quote:
how do you get half a person? this study is bullshite!!
MIDGET LIVES MATTER
Posted on 10/5/20 at 7:38 am to Kujo
quote:
The study, in collaboration with the Chinese
Found the problem. Trash data in, trash data out.
Posted on 10/5/20 at 7:38 am to Kujo
This post was edited on 10/13/20 at 8:25 am
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News