Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

I'm just glad non-essential travel for a bunch of untested people is back up.  What could go wrong?!?

I wouldn't focus at all on the recovered numbers.

I see three numbers that are key:

• Deaths. No matter what you look at regarding test rates, test availability, etc, that's the one that's really hard to falsify. (That said, NY just added ~3.8K on Tuesday for people who died at home rather than in a hospital).
• Cases. This of course is much more dependent on test rates, availability, etc. So it's not especially reliable. But assuming that day-to-day testing protocols aren't changing TOO quickly, it gives you a rough idea of growth of the infected population.
• Serious/critical cases. This is actually reported here: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/#countries  -- I'm not sure how accurate it is, unfortunately. But if you are trying to understand which confirmed cases are most likely to result in deaths, tracking that might be meaningful.

But "recovered" cases seems to be a completely useless number for the reasons discussed...

I beg to differ, but Covid related deaths are VERY easy to falsify. Dr. Birx herself said that one does not have to test positive for the virus, just show some of the symptoms prior to death and they will be considered to have died from Covid. 

The question is, how many people died FROM Covid vs how many died WITH Covid? Sure, there are those that had underlying conditions that if not for Covid, would have survived. I am not arguing that. But the way the government is tracking this thing, all you have to do is have a cough, fever or soar throat before you die and you are considered to have died FROM Covid. 

My question is, those symptoms could also be contributed to Influenza. Why are these people considered to have died from Covid and NOT Influenza? It is very curious that with Covid being the hot topic these days, the number of deaths from Influenza are considerably lower than previous years. Coincidence? 

WRONG!


My sister and brother in law both tested positive for the virus. They both did their 14 day quarantine and now are allowed to leave the house for the essentials. However, neither are listed as "recovered" because neither have been given the 2 tests. They were not eligible for testing again. Don't know why, just know that they have not been tested since while asking to be tested. Therefore, they do not count in the "Recovered" statistic.

They are if one assumes recovery after 14 days of course you have to consider any deaths in that number

as an example on day 1 there are 30 new cases

on the 14th day later the data lists 10 recovered plus 6 deaths one can assume the recovered number is

low by 14 and for data sake add that to the recovered number

I mean... you COULD do that... but nobody really is.

Which was kind of the point-- illustrating that the recovered numbers aren't really being reported, or celebrated, at all.  

if you track the daily numbers which I have since Feb 27th when we were at 60

the current number of recovered listed as 57844 for the US is too low by 185,114 

so the true number of active cases is not 585,205 for the US but closer to 400,000

more importantly one can compare the daily new cases to the daily recovered to see 

whether were are gaining or losing 

currently we are at about a break even point but the trend shows we will be in a gaining

position within the next 10 days

I mean... you COULD do that... but nobody really is.

Which was kind of the point-- illustrating that the recovered numbers aren't really being reported, or celebrated, at all. 

I wonder how much of this is data presentation. Like literally the way it looks when the data is presented.

Having a high standard for "recovered" seems like a choice, but not a particularly meaningful one. That is unless some emotional weight is put behind it, or it's always posted next to the "cases" number. But it seems a great deal of emotional weight is being put behind all the numbers. 

I wonder if it would be worth tracking cases under quarantine and cases no longer under quarantine. I wonder how tight the reporting would be with that. 

As the protocol for reporting cases is evolving, I don't think the relative figures are reliable.  The same is true for cause of death reportage.