4 ms·

It is very dangerous to draw any conclusions from the number of cases in the US. They follow the number of tests that are done and those are limited by the test

It is very dangerous to draw any conclusions from the number of cases in the US. They follow the number of tests that are done and those are limited by the test kits available. I spoke with one doctor in upstate New York. She said that the local hospital, Albany Medical Center, was stopping community testing and going back to the old procedure of only testing people who met a narrow range of parameters. (Exposure, travel, etc.) Then she said, "So it looks like we'll start plateauing." The rate of case growth will vary with the rate of testing.

Bahamut 7y ago
I've heard multiple cases of people in NY turned away from testing as well even though they have been in close contact with others who tested positive or live with them. It's very bad there I'm hearing, I think the best we can draw is that NY is probably very much underreporting the true number of cases due to test kit limitations.
steve_gh 7y ago
Provided the testing strategy doesn't change (as the parent poster has stated may be the case), then it is a reasonable assumption that the testing is sampling the population in the same way, day by day. So the important thing to look at is the growth rate. On that measure, it looks like the growth rate of cases in the US is outpacing that in Italy. That's worrying.
EvanAnderson 7y ago
Then she said, "So it looks like we'll start plateauing." Could you qualify how that statement is to be read? Is that an observation about what the results are going to look like as a result of limited testing, or is it a statement about the intention beind behind decreased testing (to make the number appear to be plateauing artificially). Aside: 'Plateauing' is a funny word to type with all those vowels together.
- xhkkffbf 7y ago
  She did not suggest anything about the intention. Only that wide-open testing would yield many more positives than tightly controlled testing. And if they're going to tighten testing that will reduce growth in positive cases.

Bahamut 7y ago

I've heard multiple cases of people in NY turned away from testing as well even though they have been in close contact with others who tested positive or live with them. It's very bad there I'm hearing, I think the best we can draw is that NY is probably very much underreporting the true number of cases due to test kit limitations.

steve_gh 7y ago

Provided the testing strategy doesn't change (as the parent poster has stated may be the case), then it is a reasonable assumption that the testing is sampling the population in the same way, day by day. So the important thing to look at is the growth rate. On that measure, it looks like the growth rate of cases in the US is outpacing that in Italy. That's worrying.

EvanAnderson 7y ago

Then she said, "So it looks like we'll start plateauing." Could you qualify how that statement is to be read? Is that an observation about what the results are going to look like as a result of limited testing, or is it a statement about the intention beind behind decreased testing (to make the number appear to be plateauing artificially). Aside: 'Plateauing' is a funny word to type with all those vowels together.

xhkkffbf 7y ago
She did not suggest anything about the intention. Only that wide-open testing would yield many more positives than tightly controlled testing. And if they're going to tighten testing that will reduce growth in positive cases.