Coronavirus in the United States - news and thoughts

You own one of the many bridges in Arizona? Sweet.

 

It makes sense that yes, it would drop significantly after the holidays, where people get together more than any other time of the year. And given the 10-14 day incubation period, and it's been a month since Christmas and three weeks since New Years, now would be the time we should be seeing significant drops.

And oh, I'll take the original London Bridge in Lake Havasu.

 

And if that's not for sale, how about the Salt River Canyon Bridge. Beautiful scenery, though probably also not for sale, since it's on tribal land located between Globe and Show Low.

 

Aww man! I wanted that one!

 

Yes. We've been pretty consistently declining since January 8th. There isn't any kind of big jump like one would expect to see if it was a drop due to a change in the definitions.

If anything, the decline has slowed down since Biden took office. The week before the inauguration saw a bigger drop than the week after the inauguration.

 

but,but biiden was in office, not trump,there should have been massive drops, after all, he has the solutuion. gee, maybe things were really getting better before he took office, hope he does not screw it up.

 

like i said in a earlier post, in the 6 days since the WHO eased their criteria for a positive test daily new cases dropped over 50,000 a day, show me any other 6 day time frame that has a 50,000 a day drop.

 

I'm sure this won't sway the teachers unions who don't give 2 craps about kids.

 

Each of the two weeks before the inauguration had a similar drop.

 

because that is what viruses do.

 

this is where you are so wrong . the 2 weeks before the inaguration, jan.6-jan.20 the daily average was over 217,000. the 6 days after the WHO redo, jan.20-jan. 25 the average is around 168,000, again a 50,000 a day drop, so where was the big drop-off before the inaguration?

 

the 6 days from jan.1-jan.6 saw a 217,000 daily average, so, again i ask you, show me a 6 day period with a 50,000 case a day drop, you cannot because it does not exist, the WHO just gave biden a house-warming gift so to speak.

 

First, the WHO doesn't run testing in the US. It is run by private firms that administer their own procedures. Second, you are discussing changes that occurred before the WHO policy change and saying that it was because of the policy change (the moving 7-day average had decreased from 254K at its peak on Jan 11 to 198K on inauguration day, when the new policy recommendation was released- since then, it has decreased to 175K). Third, there is no way that the patchwork of testing sites have implemented any change, especially given the variety of different methods and procedures already used.

 

I am trying to figure out the point of this. Is it to argue that human beings have no control over viral spread, because we have fairly strong evidence that this is false.

 

i would assume if there were 10 differant private firms doing tests, that there would be a uniform threshhold to establish a positive result, and that all 10 would use the same one, thus it has to be established on the national level.you cannot have 1 criteria for florida, another for texas, and another for calofornia, so lowering criteria affects all testing sites, if you lowere the threshhold you lowere the number of new cases, wether the WHO or CDC or some other agency sets it, it was lowered about a week ago, thus the massive daily drop-off.

 

The WHO didn't change the threshold. And no, there isn't a single uniform standard, as equipment differences make such a policy nonsensical. It was not lowered a week ago. All they did was suggest retesting for people on the borderline, which some places were already doing and other places are still not doing. There is no policy shift here that is distinct.

 

Actually the spike and drop are attributable to human behavior, it is not at all “what viruses do”.

Viruses do not have intelligence, they only spread when they have the opportunity to do so. Humans, purportedly intelligent creatures, have some degree of control.

 

so how are we to get accurate numbers, believe what they are if every test site differs in how it gets results, we may be doing 300,000 a day or 25,000 a day depending on how much testing goes on at each site.large testing centers with a high threshhold may give out many more than small sites with lower threshholds.

 

Because we need to understand that we don't have the expertise in the nature of the equipment and medical testing procedures that those running the testing do. Weirdly, people that actually set policy in those areas have more knowledge than we do about those issues.

 

in another thread about the WHO it stated that on jan.20, the day of the inauguration, the WHO reduced the pcr level used to determine a positive test thus drastically reducing the number of positive tests, go read it and then tell me standards were not lowered.