Vaccine

for what's its worth, i'm inclined to agree that, particularly at this point in the pandemic, vaxxed vs unvaxxed groups are highly reflective of deep personality traits, like in the way psychologists use the term, not some kind of judgement. no big surprise. and those traits dictate behavior as well obviously. so could there be skew in reporting time between the groups big enough to effect large population data as you are suggesting? basically unvaxxed being more prone to tough it out so to speak if i follow you. sure, i could see it. the interesting follow on would then be whether you'd think that would affect the total number of cases between the two groups, rather than just the timing of reporting. And if so, in what way?
One corruption in the data, at least in California, is anyone declining to state their vaxx status or whose vaxx status is indeterminate is lumped into unvaxxed. If tested, I certainly would decline to state (I was asked this question, as well as to mask, at a routine DUI check point....I declined both requests). Don't know how other states handle that.
 
for what's its worth, i'm inclined to agree that, particularly at this point in the pandemic, vaxxed vs unvaxxed groups are highly reflective of deep personality traits, like in the way psychologists use the term, not some kind of judgement. no big surprise. and those traits dictate behavior as well obviously. so could there be skew in reporting time between the groups big enough to effect large population data as you are suggesting? basically unvaxxed being more prone to tough it out so to speak if i follow you. sure, i could see it. the interesting follow on would then be whether you'd think that would affect the total number of cases between the two groups, rather than just the timing of reporting. And if so, in what way?
A consistent reporting delay at least points in the right direction.

So, team panic worries more, gets tested early, has an earlier reported peak. Team virus ignores it, gets tested late, has a later reported peak.

If true, it would bump the reported case rate up for vaccinated, because they’d be catching more of the mild cases.

Not sure if it is the right time scale. Omicron has a pretty short incubation period. That makes it hard to squeeze in a week long delay without the patient recovering and skipping the test entirely. If that is happening, the unvax case rate would be underreported, and the unvax hospitalization/case ratio would be over estimated. (because you are underestimating the denominator.)
 
This gets back to LONG TERM STUDIES.

We are still learning stuff.

Now they are thinking of extending the time period between shots to minimize heart issues.

This amongst many reasons is why you don't mandate a vaxx. This is why you don't mandate the young who have no risk to take a vaxx.

It's embarrasing how behind we are in evolution/understanding of the science. Canada has been doing this for months, their docs figured this out a long time ago. Other countries as well.
 
for what's its worth, i'm inclined to agree that, particularly at this point in the pandemic, vaxxed vs unvaxxed groups are highly reflective of deep personality traits, like in the way psychologists use the term, not some kind of judgement. no big surprise. and those traits dictate behavior as well obviously. so could there be skew in reporting time between the groups big enough to effect large population data as you are suggesting? basically unvaxxed being more prone to tough it out so to speak if i follow you. sure, i could see it. the interesting follow on would then be whether you'd think that would affect the total number of cases between the two groups, rather than just the timing of reporting. And if so, in what way?
I think unvaxed positive tests underreport unvaxed cases. That's rather meaningless on its own since a reliable test will never over-report actual cases. I have no idea by how much it underreports as I believe it depends on how severe most cases get for unvaxed. That's hard to know. My thinking is that the more severe the "average" case is for an unvax individual, the less it will underreport as more will be motivated to get treatment and end up taking a test. I'll add that this is just a thought and I have not looked at the data.
 
A consistent reporting delay at least points in the right direction.

So, team panic worries more, gets tested early, has an earlier reported peak. Team virus ignores it, gets tested late, has a later reported peak.

If true, it would bump the reported case rate up for vaccinated, because they’d be catching more of the mild cases.

Not sure if it is the right time scale. Omicron has a pretty short incubation period. That makes it hard to squeeze in a week long delay without the patient recovering and skipping the test entirely. If that is happening, the unvax case rate would be underreported, and the unvax hospitalization/case ratio would be over estimated. (because you are underestimating the denominator.)

What about the OC...Does it seem that cases rise at the same rate?
1644434276583.png
 
Why would in home tests move the date of peak cases?
You don’t think there was a significant number of home testing going on during the Omicron peak?
Never said it would move the date but would definitely have an impact on how you’ve categorized the positivity rate amongst categories if you have a significant number of the population that isn’t reporting Test results.
 
What about the OC...Does it seem that cases rise at the same rate?
View attachment 12874
Hard to say. SCC only had a 3-5 day lag. It’s hard to find a 3-5 day lag on a graph broken into 7 day chunks. You’re left speculating about why the green line splits off from the red in early January. Not very solid either way.

Do you have the same data reported daily?
 
One corruption in the data, at least in California, is anyone declining to state their vaxx status or whose vaxx status is indeterminate is lumped into unvaxxed. If tested, I certainly would decline to state (I was asked this question, as well as to mask, at a routine DUI check point....I declined both requests). Don't know how other states handle that.

are testing sites asking for VAX status?
 
You don’t think there was a significant number of home testing going on during the Omicron peak?
Never said it would move the date but would definitely have an impact on how you’ve categorized the positivity rate amongst categories if you have a significant number of the population that isn’t reporting Test results.
I do not believe there are enough at home tests being produced to explain the low case rate among unvaccinated. The supply is an order of magitude too small for that.

Vax case rates are about 85% below unvax. Do we see an 85% decline in vaccinated use of PCR tests?

US is still running about 1.5 million PCR tests per day, about the same as November 2021. (It got higher during the Christmas travel season.). No 85% decline, or anything close.

There is a lot of at home testing, but I think that is mostly people trying to add a safety check before a dinner party or sleep over. It does not seem to have replaced PCR testing.
 
Hard to say. SCC only had a 3-5 day lag. It’s hard to find a 3-5 day lag on a graph broken into 7 day chunks. You’re left speculating about why the green line splits off from the red in early January. Not very solid either way.

Do you have the same data reported daily?

No, that's all they post. But as far as a 7 day chunks the peeks are identical
 
Ok I’ve never been asked this
Are you testing for work? Your employer presumably has your vax status. Same for students in LAUSD or certain private schools.

If you produce your drivers license at the county site, they have access to the county data base (though presumably may have a difficult time checking if you got vaccinated out of state or out of county).
 
Or when everyone realized school choice was being co-opted by billionaires (Kochs, etc) to privatize education.

There was a time when this country believed in a strong public education system. I guess we don't anymore -- and it shows. The problem isn't inherent to public schools, it's what we as a country deem important to invest in. God knows there's billion examples of corrupt charter schools.
That's an interesting perspective, but doesnt apply here in San Diego. The corruption here is in the public school districts, SDUSD, Poway, Sweetwater to name a few. The charter high schools in our area are comparable to the publics, but are significantly better than the schools in the areas from where the kids are choicing in from. There have been a few cases of fraud in the very small charters, but a little due diligence from the granting authorities could have avoided many of those cases.

Parents love charters. Whats the harm in giving people options and giving competition to publics? Absolutely nothing.

If the Koch's want to back school choice, more power to them. Its light years better than Soros funding soft on crime DA's. I would think you could appreciate that being from NoCal.
 
The 180 degree turn over the past month is very interesting. Polling is terrible for the dems. Now they want to change the calculus.

One of the things the Biden admin wants to do is get accurate numbers from hospitals. This idea was talked about early on and dismissed as fringe right. Today? Good idea. It was a good idea way back when.

After 2 yrs they are admitting that they have been using wrong info, and that info has been driving BAD policy. This was pointed out long ago.


A task force comprised of scientists and data specialists at the Department of Health and Human Services and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are working with hospitals nationwide to improve Covid-19 reporting. The group is asking hospitals to report numbers of patients who go to the facility because they have Covid-19 and separate those from individuals who go in for other reasons and test positive after being admitted, the two officials said.

The administration’s goal is to get a more accurate sense of Covid-19’s impact across the country and whether the virus is causing severe disease. Senior Biden health officials have increasingly relied on hospitalization numbers, rather than case counts, to determine how to respond to the virus as well as the efficacy of the vaccines. Lower hospitalization rates could inform the administration’s thinking on public health measures such as masking. More accurate Covid-19 numbers also could provide a better picture of the strain on hospitals and which resources they might need during surges.

When you’re done breaking your arm patting yourself on the back, try to figure out what omicron has done to the accuracy of hospital admission numbers.

You know, take a short break from bragging to think a little.
 
Are you testing for work? Your employer presumably has your vax status. Same for students in LAUSD or certain private schools.

If you produce your drivers license at the county site, they have access to the county data base (though presumably may have a difficult time checking if you got vaccinated out of state or out of county).

Do you think they are actually cross referencing all the test with vaccination status? I do wonder if all the testing sites are connected that way, it would be good, but I find it a little stretch to think that is happening when at its peak there was 700,000 to 800,000 test being done every day in California

It seems more likely vaccinated/unvaccinated testing numbers would come more directly from hospitals but I am interested in knowing
 
"I saw a video -- maybe it was a clip of Tucker, Gutfeld, or Watters -- where the guy said, covid is a disease that is deadly for the very old and very fat, and our political leadership class happens to be both of those, so our political leadership class decided to impose the most draconian lockdowns on us, and five year old children, to protect themselves."
 
When you’re done breaking your arm patting yourself on the back, try to figure out what omicron has done to the accuracy of hospital admission numbers.

You know, take a short break from bragging to think a little.
I like most people have moved on and realized we have to live with it.

You keep tilting at windmills hoping that maybe another mask or a lockdown will do the trick. I will give you a heads up. It won't.
 
I like most people have moved on and realized we have to live with it.

You keep tilting at windmills hoping that maybe another mask or a lockdown will do the trick. I will give you a heads up. It won't.
Don’t give up. You can figure it out. I have faith in you.

You have a new variant which infects a very large number of people, but makes relatively few of them sick.

How will this change the profile of hospital admissions? What will happen to the proportion of covid positive patients who are in the hospital for non-covid reasons?

This should be an easy question for someone who is as good with numbers as you keep telling us you are.
 
Do you think they are actually cross referencing all the test with vaccination status? I do wonder if all the testing sites are connected that way, it would be good, but I find it a little stretch to think that is happening when at its peak there was 700,000 to 800,000 test being done every day in California

It seems more likely vaccinated/unvaccinated testing numbers would come more directly from hospitals but I am interested in knowing
There is a database of all vaccinations. There is a database of all tests run. You’re describing a merged database query on a few million records. That’s been easy for decades.
 
Back
Top