5 ms·

Look at chart 7 of Pueyos article. He uses this chart to underpin his argument that the lockdown in Wuhan is the way to approach controlling the virus. But note

by sgt101 7y ago

Look at chart 7 of Pueyos article. He uses this chart to underpin his argument that the lockdown in Wuhan is the way to approach controlling the virus. But note, on that chart it shows that testing only became available to the Chinese authorities 9 days before the lockdown. In all other outbreaks (even the US one) there has been widespread testing - it's just not reasonable to make inferences from that situation to any of the others. Pueyo doesn't understand the data, worse he has made no effort to understand the data (like actually reading the chart for a start). He's just a lad messing round with numbers.

eyko 7y ago
> In all other outbreaks (even the US one) there has been widespread testing Can you back up that claim? From what I've read, the opposite seemed to be the case, especially in the USA.
- wideasleep1 7y ago
  Until late Feb, it was mainly CDC, but in March many more states came into the picture: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/testing-in-us.html https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/test... Depending on one's view of 'widespread' testing, we have currently about 20K tested, and around 2.4K positively diagnosed.
  - golem14 7y ago
    I think it's about 19K "SPECIMEN" tested, not people. Maybe 8K people tested as of today, but only <1K people tested until about a week ago. So, yes, I think claiming the US had widespread testing is stretching the truth beyond BS level.
    - sgt101 7y ago
      But in China for the equivalent stage of the outbreak there was zero testing. Because there were no tests. The data cannot be compared.
- sgt101 7y ago
  The UK has tested 37,746 times so far. [1] Italy is 80k + The testing incidence is going to change the infection confirmation number. The testing protocol will change the confirmation number. The type of testing will change the number (I believe that there are several types of test with a different confusion matrix). [1] https://www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-covid-19-information-for-the-public https://www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-covid-19-information...
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]

by sgt101 7y ago

eyko 7y ago

> In all other outbreaks (even the US one) there has been widespread testing Can you back up that claim? From what I've read, the opposite seemed to be the case, especially in the USA.

wideasleep1 7y ago
Until late Feb, it was mainly CDC, but in March many more states came into the picture: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/testing-in-us.html https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/test... Depending on one's view of 'widespread' testing, we have currently about 20K tested, and around 2.4K positively diagnosed.
- golem14 7y ago
  I think it's about 19K "SPECIMEN" tested, not people. Maybe 8K people tested as of today, but only <1K people tested until about a week ago. So, yes, I think claiming the US had widespread testing is stretching the truth beyond BS level.
  - sgt101 7y ago
    But in China for the equivalent stage of the outbreak there was zero testing. Because there were no tests. The data cannot be compared.
sgt101 7y ago
The UK has tested 37,746 times so far. [1] Italy is 80k + The testing incidence is going to change the infection confirmation number. The testing protocol will change the confirmation number. The type of testing will change the number (I believe that there are several types of test with a different confusion matrix). [1] https://www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-covid-19-information-for-the-public https://www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-covid-19-information...
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]