Quote:
Originally Posted by SAUTO
vital information that im SURE the people that need it have. why does pete need to spend every day crying about the media not talking about it?
and with the # of asymptomatic (who knows how many) people out there walking around i'm not sure the recovered rate even means anything at this point towards knowing if the carrier pool is being reduced.
we wont know that until they actually do mass testing. THATS whats going to tell us what we really need to know
|
Yeah, it'll help signficantly.
But there's something of a specious driver here (I'm pretty sure I'm using that term correctly) in our fog of war.
Let's say that our unknown asymptomatic carrier population is massive - okay, then our pool of unknown 'recovered' parties is also probably pretty massive - right? Now let's say we actually don't have as many unknown asymptomatic carriers as we thought we might - well then the unknown recovered carriers will also be reduced accordingly.
So what I'm saying is that the unknowns are going to change raw numbers...but will they truly change ratios significantly? Will they change the shape of the graph or merely where we are on it? I think they'll change its shape somewhat, but what they'll really change is where we sit on it.
But in either event, our behaviors probably shouldn't change a lot until we see negative growth rates. So in that sense, I think 'known recoveries among confirmed cases' gives us a fair proxy for determining how much stock we can put in those rates. It gives us numbers we can attempt to scale up or down in
placing ourselves in the model, but maybe doesn't fundamentally alter the models themselves.
I simply don't think its throwaway information. And I do think it's being under-reported but I'm also past expecting any kind of evenhanded approach from a media that knows that tragedy yields ratings.