General Discussion

Midnightwalk

(3,131 posts)

10. Maybe a dumb question.

Thu Apr 9, 2020, 02:29 AM

Apr 2020

I’m not sure how to ask this right.

When you say there will be more cases until around the 15th or 16th how does that vary by state?

I think the most cases are in New York, New Jersey and Michigan? Does that mean the data more accurately reflects what’s happening there or can I be more hopeful for the rest of the country?

I’ve seen some web sites that show different states peaking later, but I don’t have the background to tell if they are accurate.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

42 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Growth rate for new cases nearly static for 4 days. [View all] Ms. Toad Apr 2020 OP

good news Demovictory9 Apr 2020 #1

I wish it was still declining - Ms. Toad Apr 2020 #2

We still don't have enough testing to know who's infected. It's a disgrace! ffr Apr 2020 #3

You appear to be misunderstanding what I have posted. Ms. Toad Apr 2020 #5

Would a sub par per capita testing rate of symptomatic effect the multiplier any? Thx in advance uponit7771 Apr 2020 #6

Impossible to be absolutely certain without a lot more number crunching. Ms. Toad Apr 2020 #8

Could an infinite supply of test affect the smoothness of the curve also? My understanding is uponit7771 Apr 2020 #9

The challenge with local focus is that the data set Ms. Toad Apr 2020 #13

I agree, Analyst are not trying to hold numbers down but Trump is ... NO DOUBT ... holding numbers uponit7771 Apr 2020 #18

Fauci doesn't dictate what local states do, Ms. Toad Apr 2020 #20

It Doesn't Here In Illinois ProfessorGAC Apr 2020 #22

Agreed. Ms. Toad Apr 2020 #25

100% ... didn't think about this, Red Don can say all clear but it'll be local areas that give the uponit7771 Apr 2020 #35

Maybe a dumb question. Midnightwalk Apr 2020 #10

The curve I'm working with is the national curve Ms. Toad Apr 2020 #11

They should, imo, be not only testing more SheltieLover Apr 2020 #15

Agree. ananda Apr 2020 #16

Their preventing mass testing to hide the real numbers duforsure Apr 2020 #17

Texas test per million is a disgrace; Ohio is on the lower-end tests per million*, but not too bad greenjar_01 Apr 2020 #30

Yeah, but we are not testing much. Ohio ranks 40th for tests per capita krawhitham Apr 2020 #4

This isn't Ohio data - Ms. Toad Apr 2020 #7

Compared to national testing numbers FreeState Apr 2020 #12

I'll have to play with that. Ms. Toad Apr 2020 #14

Great info. It took a week to double. Much better than the 3 days it was Squinch Apr 2020 #32

The first step in proper data analysis is proper data collection. Yavin4 Apr 2020 #19

Absolutely - but there is nothing I can do about that Ms. Toad Apr 2020 #21

We're dealing with a president that only believes in narratives not saving lives. Yavin4 Apr 2020 #23

Fortunately, since local restrictions on movement are local decisions Ms. Toad Apr 2020 #27

We hardly test anyone, and therefore have NO IDEA how many Americans are infected... ElementaryPenguin Apr 2020 #24

BUT, is it safe to think that the fraction tested is relatively stable? Squinch Apr 2020 #28

When the first derivative is zero DBoon Apr 2020 #26

Yes. n/t Ms. Toad Apr 2020 #29

Look at the number of tests gibraltar72 Apr 2020 #31

Agreed. n/t Ms. Toad Apr 2020 #34

I'm having a difficult time wrapping my head around the numbers. NoMoreRepugs Apr 2020 #33

In terms of absolute numbers of infected - the lack of testing means the data Ms. Toad Apr 2020 #36

Appreciate your insight. Once there is a better handle on all the deaths both at home and in NoMoreRepugs Apr 2020 #41

Agreed - the toll will be staggering. Ms. Toad Apr 2020 #42

This is good but we really don't know for sure what the numbers are captain queeg Apr 2020 #37

Absolute numbers, no. Ms. Toad Apr 2020 #38

have to think the number stagnating te last 4 days...... Takket Apr 2020 #39

That's possible - Ms. Toad Apr 2020 #40