Gov Hogan announcement re schools this week?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree that counties have different conditions.

Yesterday I looked up the new cases for each county. It was just one day not a 7 day average (I wish we had these kinds of statistics available as well as positivity rate but right now no one is posting new cases per million per day by county.

Anyhow, it was suprising how high the new cases per million per day were for some counties!

(For comparison purposes, Italy is at THREE new cases per million per day and FLorida is at 552 new cases per million per day)


Worcester: 17/52,000= 326 new cases per million per day

Baltimore City 143/620,000 = 230 new cases per million per day

Howard County 57 / 325,000 = 175 new cases per million per day.

Baltimore County 141/827,000 = 170 new cases per million per day

AA County = 89/580,000= 153 new cases per million per day

Frederick County 40/260,000. 153 new cases per million per day.

PG County 123/909,000 = 135 new cases per million per day

Harford County 29 / 255,000 = 113 new cases per million per day

Garrett County 3/30,000 = 100 new cases per million per day

St Mary's County 11 / 113,000 = 98 new cases per million per day.

MoCo = 89 new cases per million per day

Harvard’s global health department has a great website with 7 day avgs case counts indexed to population by county. No need to do these calcs on the back of an envelope with raw data. https://globalepidemics.org/key-metrics-for-covid-suppression/

That's not all the counties. You're missing several including Charles (just south of PG).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I suspect DL for all public schools. The million dollar question is - will he allow privates to open???? Or will we see a repeat of what happened in CA and Wisconsin?

Again, putting high risk businesses ahead of schools is going to have a negative affect on his approval rating. There is no reason Maryland shouldn’t be on a position to open schools in person when other northeastern states are doing so.

Which other northeastern states have announced that there will be school?

New Jersey, Connecticut, parts of NY, and MA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:None of Maryland’s numbers are increasing (positivity rate, hospitalizations, deaths), not declining as rapid,u as before, bu to de you get below 5 percent, that is inevitable.

Maryland's new cases per day are very much increasing.



Deaths lag by about 4 weeks. Our death rates will rise, and hospitalization rates will rise sooner.

Are you slow about everything or just feign stupidity with respect to covid? After four months of this, you must realize that the number of positive cases is meaningless because it is dependent on how many tests are given. The number that is relevant is percent of tests positive.

Somebody is wrong on the internet!

Until we get to a pervasive testing regime, the percent positive absolutely is a function of the number of tests because you are sampling on the dependent variable.

The number of positive tests is dependent on how many positives cases are in the community. If the spread rate is 10% then 10% of tests is positive no mater whether you do 50 tests a day or 500.

This statement is true if you are sampling in a truly random fashion. You aren’t. The fewer the number of tests the more likely a test is used on someone with a high likelihood of having the disease.

If you don’t understand the implications of this, please don’t stat-splain to the rest of us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:None of Maryland’s numbers are increasing (positivity rate, hospitalizations, deaths), not declining as rapid,u as before, bu to de you get below 5 percent, that is inevitable.

Maryland's new cases per day are very much increasing.



Deaths lag by about 4 weeks. Our death rates will rise, and hospitalization rates will rise sooner.

Are you slow about everything or just feign stupidity with respect to covid? After four months of this, you must realize that the number of positive cases is meaningless because it is dependent on how many tests are given. The number that is relevant is percent of tests positive.

Somebody is wrong on the internet!

Until we get to a pervasive testing regime, the percent positive absolutely is a function of the number of tests because you are sampling on the dependent variable.

The number of positive tests is dependent on how many positives cases are in the community. If the spread rate is 10% then 10% of tests is positive no mater whether you do 50 tests a day or 500.

This statement is true if you are sampling in a truly random fashion. You aren’t. The fewer the number of tests the more likely a test is used on someone with a high likelihood of having the disease.

If you don’t understand the implications of this, please don’t stat-splain to the rest of us.

Part of the reason testing is up is that it is a requirement for unrelated hospital admissions, elective surgery, dental procedures, certain travel destinations. But that has been the case for the past six weeks or so. Maybe longer.

[Anonymous]

Tests are more widely available, and people are wasting them.

There are tons of threads on dcum where people say they got their family tested before driving to visit grandma or go to the cape, and then they got tested again when they came home.

No symptoms. No reason to think they were sick. And their entire family was tested twice within the span of a month.

[Anonymous]

It's concerning that the number of hospitalizations are ticking up again in MD. I don't know how to paste the image, but you can see the data at https://coronavirus.maryland.gov/

The low was 385 hospitalizations on July 10. Today, 11 days later, we are up to 484, about a 25% increase, although admittedly lower than we were a month ago. It's not moving in the right direction, though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Tests are more widely available, and people are wasting them.

There are tons of threads on dcum where people say they got their family tested before driving to visit grandma or go to the cape, and then they got tested again when they came home.

No symptoms. No reason to think they were sick. And their entire family was tested twice within the span of a month.

If the tests are available for everyone with symptoms, then what's wrong with asymptomatic people getting them? Throughout all of this we've been told we could be carrying the virus at any time so everyone has a reason to think they could be positive. And if they are, that helps people make the decision to get their groceries delivered, to stay home from the office, to keep the kids home from daycares which are open.

Now the fact they can't efficiently process the tests and get people results in a timely fashion is a huge problem, but that's not the fault of individuals trying to use all the tools available to avoid spreading the disease.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Tests are more widely available, and people are wasting them.

There are tons of threads on dcum where people say they got their family tested before driving to visit grandma or go to the cape, and then they got tested again when they came home.

No symptoms. No reason to think they were sick. And their entire family was tested twice within the span of a month.

Why is that "wasting" a test? Please explain.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Tests are more widely available, and people are wasting them.

There are tons of threads on dcum where people say they got their family tested before driving to visit grandma or go to the cape, and then they got tested again when they came home.

No symptoms. No reason to think they were sick. And their entire family was tested twice within the span of a month.

If you think you may have been exposed and you don’t test, you might be spreading it around.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tests are more widely available, and people are wasting them.

There are tons of threads on dcum where people say they got their family tested before driving to visit grandma or go to the cape, and then they got tested again when they came home.

No symptoms. No reason to think they were sick. And their entire family was tested twice within the span of a month.

Why is that "wasting" a test? Please explain.

A test administered to anyone, symptomatic or otherwise, has value. We know that asymptomatic individuals can spread the virus, so a positive test result in an asymptomatic person should lead to quarantine, thereby protecting anyone that person might come into contact with.

In a perfect world, sick people shouldn't be out and about. Testing helps to keep positive asymptomatic people from spreading the virus.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:None of Maryland’s numbers are increasing (positivity rate, hospitalizations, deaths), not declining as rapid,u as before, bu to de you get below 5 percent, that is inevitable.

Maryland's new cases per day are very much increasing.



Deaths lag by about 4 weeks. Our death rates will rise, and hospitalization rates will rise sooner.

Are you slow about everything or just feign stupidity with respect to covid? After four months of this, you must realize that the number of positive cases is meaningless because it is dependent on how many tests are given. The number that is relevant is percent of tests positive.

Somebody is wrong on the internet!

Until we get to a pervasive testing regime, the percent positive absolutely is a function of the number of tests because you are sampling on the dependent variable.

The number of positive tests is dependent on how many positives cases are in the community. If the spread rate is 10% then 10% of tests is positive no mater whether you do 50 tests a day or 500.

This statement is true if you are sampling in a truly random fashion. You aren’t. The fewer the number of tests the more likely a test is used on someone with a high likelihood of having the disease.

If you don’t understand the implications of this, please don’t stat-splain to the rest of us.

You are making an assumption that with few tests only symptomatic people will get tested. As we have a great availability of tests now, we are requiring testing for everyone before procedures, with possible exposure etc. We are sampling a truly random sample now. There are test sites in Maryland that do not require a doctor order and are free. We are weaning our asymptomatic carriers. Maryland testing program is robust and yes, we have a random sampling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:None of Maryland’s numbers are increasing (positivity rate, hospitalizations, deaths), not declining as rapid,u as before, bu to de you get below 5 percent, that is inevitable.

Maryland's new cases per day are very much increasing.



Deaths lag by about 4 weeks. Our death rates will rise, and hospitalization rates will rise sooner.

Are you slow about everything or just feign stupidity with respect to covid? After four months of this, you must realize that the number of positive cases is meaningless because it is dependent on how many tests are given. The number that is relevant is percent of tests positive.

Somebody is wrong on the internet!

Until we get to a pervasive testing regime, the percent positive absolutely is a function of the number of tests because you are sampling on the dependent variable.

The number of positive tests is dependent on how many positives cases are in the community. If the spread rate is 10% then 10% of tests is positive no mater whether you do 50 tests a day or 500.

This statement is true if you are sampling in a truly random fashion. You aren’t. The fewer the number of tests the more likely a test is used on someone with a high likelihood of having the disease.

If you don’t understand the implications of this, please don’t stat-splain to the rest of us.

You are making an assumption that with few tests only symptomatic people will get tested. As we have a great availability of tests now, we are requiring testing for everyone before procedures, with possible exposure etc. We are sampling a truly random sample now. There are test sites in Maryland that do not require a doctor order and are free. We are weaning our asymptomatic carriers. Maryland testing program is robust and yes, we have a random sampling.

Testing more people, including asymptomatic people =/= a random sample

[Anonymous]

So is hogan giving an announcement this week? today?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So is hogan giving an announcement this week? today?

He is still researching NYC murder rates and random sampling. Once done, he will make an announcement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:None of Maryland’s numbers are increasing (positivity rate, hospitalizations, deaths), not declining as rapid,u as before, bu to de you get below 5 percent, that is inevitable.

Maryland's new cases per day are very much increasing.



Deaths lag by about 4 weeks. Our death rates will rise, and hospitalization rates will rise sooner.

Are you slow about everything or just feign stupidity with respect to covid? After four months of this, you must realize that the number of positive cases is meaningless because it is dependent on how many tests are given. The number that is relevant is percent of tests positive.

Somebody is wrong on the internet!

Until we get to a pervasive testing regime, the percent positive absolutely is a function of the number of tests because you are sampling on the dependent variable.

The number of positive tests is dependent on how many positives cases are in the community. If the spread rate is 10% then 10% of tests is positive no mater whether you do 50 tests a day or 500.

This statement is true if you are sampling in a truly random fashion. You aren’t. The fewer the number of tests the more likely a test is used on someone with a high likelihood of having the disease.

If you don’t understand the implications of this, please don’t stat-splain to the rest of us.

You are making an assumption that with few tests only symptomatic people will get tested. As we have a great availability of tests now, we are requiring testing for everyone before procedures, with possible exposure etc. We are sampling a truly random sample now. There are test sites in Maryland that do not require a doctor order and are free. We are weaning our asymptomatic carriers. Maryland testing program is robust and yes, we have a random sampling.

Testing more people, including asymptomatic people =/= a random sample

+1 I'm a professor and teach a methods/statistics course. That is not the definition of a random sample.