[rockandroller]

This morning, went to

Florida's COVID-19 Data

Then did a little math, comparing tri-county population to state and nation, totals vs infections

sumter 128,754
lake 356,495
marion 359,977
total population 845,226

comparing total populations and reported CV infections

271 / 845,226 tri-county or .03%
0.00032062431 or .03%

14,747 / 21,477,737 state of florida
0.00536059615 or .07%

374,329 / 336,056,200 united states
0.00011138881 or .01%

accepting that I did the math correctly

comments?

[blueash]

You did the math and decided to post the numbers. What useful information do you think you derived from the work? What point are you making by starting the thread?

[Aloha1]

The useful information is that the positive infection rate per capita appears to be much less than the media reports. Of course, the media never paid attention to total population as a denominator since that isn't scary enough.

[Kim Fowler]

Looks like you need to correct your Florida population — it is 21 million, not 2.7 million.

[rockandroller]

Originally Posted by Kim Fowler

Looks like you need to correct your Florida population — it is 21 million, not 2.7 million.

Thanks Kim, made the correction. Now, the stats make more sense.

[Dean62]

One important thing to keep in mind with the infection rates is the fact that there is an extreme shortage of tests so the number of people infected is most likely much higher than what is being reported.

[wbadger]

Referencing the Florida COVID - 19 Data and Surveillance Dashboard from the Florida Dept of Health, the stats shown raise concern.
Lake County - 133 tested positive out of 2430 total tested for a rate of 5.4%.
Marion County - 72 tested positive out of 1404 total tested for a rate of 5.1%.
Sumter County - 100 tested positive out of 1050 total tested for a rate of 9.5%!!!!

Why so many fewer tests in Sumter? If testing would be comparable to the other counties, the positive cases for Sumter ( assuming the same 9.5% rate) would be considerably higher than the other 2 counties. It appears with all the previous hype of concern about Sumter county being a concern with its older population, there isn't the emphasis being put on testing that is in the other 2 tri county areas. It appears that Sumter may have a higher number of positive cases not recognized yet, which means we need to maintain, and probably increase our vigilance. This website is updated daily at 11:30 AM and 6:30 PM for anyone interested.

[biker1]

The Sumter County numbers probably didn't include the UFHealth asymptomatic research testing at the Polo Grounds. I believe that testing reflected 2 positives out of approximately 1400 tests.

Originally Posted by wbadger

Referencing the Florida COVID - 19 Data and Surveillance Dashboard from the Florida Dept of Health, the stats shown raise concern.
Lake County - 133 tested positive out of 2430 total tested for a rate of 5.4%.
Marion County - 72 tested positive out of 1404 total tested for a rate of 5.1%.
Sumter County - 100 tested positive out of 1050 total tested for a rate of 9.5%!!!!

Why so many fewer tests in Sumter? If testing would be comparable to the other counties, the positive cases for Sumter ( assuming the same 9.5% rate) would be considerably higher than the other 2 counties. It appears with all the previous hype of concern about Sumter county being a concern with its older population, there isn't the emphasis being put on testing that is in the other 2 tri county areas. It appears that Sumter may have a higher number of positive cases not recognized yet, which means we need to maintain, and probably increase our vigilance. This website is updated daily at 11:30 AM and 6:30 PM for anyone interested.

[blueash]

Originally Posted by biker1

The Sumter County numbers probably didn't include the UFHealth asymptomatic research testing at the Polo Grounds. I believe that testing reflected 2 positives out of approximately 1400 tests.

You are correct that the negative research tests are not included in the data. I don't know if the symptom-free positives were included. The test being used is not approved and may not be reliable, or may be.

In looking at the rate of positive tests, the only meaningful comparison is positive tests in people with symptoms compared to other people with symptoms. Keep in mind something special about the FDA test approved Polo testing. It was testing symptomatic people who had low grade illness. Almost nowhere else are people with low levels of symptoms being offered testing as the kits are in very short supply.

These individuals would not likely have presented to an ER, which may or may not have kits. So when you compare and include Sumter data, be very cautious. We have had greater testing of people with mild symptoms which would decrease the positive yield. Many other etiologies can explain some sore throat or fever or cough beyond Covid. If you only test those with higher fever, pneumonia, and hypoxia you will get a much higher positive Covid test rate.

The promised [one month ago] widely available drive-thru sites at CVS, Target, Walgreens and Walmart failed to materialize. These promised sites would have mimicked the Polo Field ill testing profile. But that announcement was a failed promise.

"Today we’re announcing a new partnership with private sector to vastly increase and accelerate our capacity to test for the coronavirus. We want to make sure that those who need a test can get a test very safely, quickly, and conveniently. ..
We’ve been in discussions with pharmacies and retailers to make drive-thru tests available in the critical locations identified by public health professionals. The goal is for individuals to be able to drive up and be swabbed without having to leave your car.

I want to thank Google. Google is helping to develop a website. It’s going to be very quickly done, unlike websites of the past, to determine whether a test is warranted and to facilitate testing at a nearby convenient location."

[Google denied they were working on any such site and it never has appeared unlike that "website of the past" which was a criticism of the ACA website which took a few days to function well, but actually did get done.]

[billethkid]

Why is it that it seems like all that gets reported and the attention is the number of infections and the number of deaths?

Usually completely ignoring the second biggest number on the board!

Recoveries!!!!!!

Carson reported yesterday that of those who get the virus 98% survive. Yet very little gets reported.
He also stated that 50% that get it show no or minor symptoms.

Granted in areas like TV the numbers/rates will be somewhat different because of the concentration of over age 65.

I suspect it is easier to control folks when there is a fear factor ever present.
I am not suggesting any changes in actions being put forth to mitigate the spread. Only for a more complete understanding of the actual reality.

The daily death scorecard doesn't do it (for me).

[gatorbill1]

We have not enough testing to know ANYTHING!

[C. C. Rider]

Originally Posted by rockandroller

This morning, went to

Florida's COVID-19 Data

Then did a little math, comparing tri-county population to state and nation, totals vs infections

sumter 128,754
lake 356,495
marion 359,977
total population 845,226

comparing total populations and reported CV infections

271 / 845,226 tri-county or .03%
0.00032062431 or .03%

14,747 / 21,477,737 state of florida
0.00536059615 or .07% Should be 0.0006866

374,329 / 336,056,200 united states
0.00011138881 or .01% Should be 0.0011139 = 0.1%

accepting that I did the math correctly

comments?

Numbers in BLUE should be corrected as shown. Once corrected, you'll see that the rate for Florida (0.07%) is not all that different from the rate for the US (0.1%).

[Mendy]

We have only tested less than .8% of the population. Until we test a lot more, the numbers are not very meaningful. There is way too much noise in the numbers. The comparisons to other countries are often misstated as well (i.e. # of tests vs per capita tests, positives per capita, death rates, etc). I believe we are well on our way to mitigating this pandemic and need to stay the course until the numbers show a much reduced risk. We need to dot the "i" and cross the "t" in my opinion.

[jebartle]

Originally Posted by Aloha1

The useful information is that the positive infection rate per capita appears to be much less than the media reports. Of course, the media never paid attention to total population as a denominator since that isn't scary enough.

Based on TESTING, which is not consistent.

[NotFromAroundHere]

Originally Posted by billethkid

Carson reported yesterday that of those who get the virus 98% survive. Yet very little gets reported.
He also stated that 50% that get it show no or minor symptoms.

I suspect it is easier to control folks when there is a fear factor ever present.
I am not suggesting any changes in actions being put forth to mitigate the spread. Only for a more complete understanding of the actual reality.

The daily death scorecard doesn't do it (for me).

Well... If they report that 2% die, aren't they kind of also reporting that 98% survive? Just a little quick math off the top of my head.

They numbers are pretty sobering. I don't think anybody should be trying to minimize the severity of this - there probably should be an ever-present fear factor.

The actual reality is that if you catch it, you might, or might not get really sick. If you get really sick and go to the hospital, They can't really do much for you, and you have a good chance of dying. You also have a pretty good chance of not dying. Yay?