The numbers of newly infected per day will always be an estimate, based only in part on the numbers of new diagnosed positives per day. Hopefully the latter number is pretty accurate. It would be nice if the estimates are also pretty accurate, but modeling can fail.bannination wrote: ↑Thu Apr 09, 2020 8:53 pmHelp me out here....
We're testing 150,000 people daily for CV, that number does not appear to be growing. On average between 17% and 20% result in positives giving us about 30,000 positive people per day.
If the tests do not increase in numbers, we're going to be stuck at 30,000 people per day making the curve look "flat" while it could and probably is anything but.
The numbers of new infected per day are complete horseshit.
Am I missing something?
Also, if the curve is steepening the "between 17% and 20%" positives will increase to a higher percentage, increasing the newly infected estimate. Otherwise, we've plateaued, unless the characteristics of who is being tested is changing. For example, if the percent positive drops in the short term that does not necessarily mean we've reached the apex. It could be just that the ongoing or increased testing is broadening to reach somewhat less vulnerable people or people that we're less suspicious of having the disease.
Complex stuff. I'm good with accepting whether the epidemiologists and public health folks tell us if things are getting better or not.