Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum

2020 Dumpster Fire (Enter at your own risk)

jk

By jk
in Community

 Share

Recommended Posts

Oxbow6 Grand Master

Oxbow6

Posted
Posted
22 minutes ago, UNDBIZ said:

Healthcare, jail, and LTC employees are tested pretty often (weekly?).  Also, if you live with someone who tested positive, it may be beneficial to get tested, hope you're positive, and shorten the quarantine time from 2 weeks beyond the end of your family member's quarantine to just 10 days from the positive test day.

If "pretty often" mean rarely...if ever then I agree.

  • Replies 23.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Hayduke1

    1804

  • Oxbow6

    1786

  • BarnWinterSportsEngelstad

    1135

  • The Sicatoka

    1072

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Yote 53
Yote 53

The only people who need to be tested are health care workers, the elderly, and those with underlying health conditions.  If you are young (under 50) and healthy and are taking up a test kit, crowding

Oxbow6
Oxbow6

This country is being bright to its knees by fear....not the virus. Recovery from getting the virus is a couple weeks. Recovery of society from this hysteria will be years.

Siouxphan27
Siouxphan27

It’s sad that about half the country still believes outlets like msnbc and cnn.  You would think after they lied everyday for 3 years about Russian collusion, people would get the hint of what their t

Posted Images

UNDBIZ Experienced

UNDBIZ

Posted
Posted
Just now, Oxbow6 said:

If pretty often mean almost rarely......I agree.

Hmm, depends on the position and provider maybe?  I've heard from one saying he's tested weekly, but maybe he's full of it or going to the free public testings.  State prisons are testing every 1-2 weeks and I thought LTC facilities in ND were weekly.

Oxbow6 Grand Master

Oxbow6

Posted
Posted
22 minutes ago, Goon said:

One of my friends from college gets tested every week. He's yet to get COVID-19. He's not a healthcare professional. 

Has he won $500 from the UND Bookstore yet?

  • Upvote 1
Bison06 Community Regular

Bison06

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, UNDBIZ said:

Hmm, depends on the position and provider maybe?  I've heard from one saying he's tested weekly, but maybe he's full of it or going to the free public testings.  State prisons are testing every 1-2 weeks and I thought LTC facilities in ND were weekly.

So...if someone tests positive, how often do they get tested afterwards? What I'm curious about is we know that positive tests as a metric do not equal cases.

By what factor are positive tests higher than actually cases?  Is each case getting tested 2-3x while they are still positive? 

Oxbow6 Grand Master

Oxbow6

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, UNDBIZ said:

Hmm, depends on the position and provider maybe?  I've heard from one saying he's tested weekly, but maybe he's full of it or going to the free public testings.  State prisons are testing every 1-2 weeks and I thought LTC facilities in ND were weekly.

Most systems have their own protocol and in house hotlines to call. Those people determine your risk. Healthcare workers/providers rarely get tested even with exposure.

UNDBIZ Experienced

UNDBIZ

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Bison06 said:

So...if someone tests positive on a Monday let's say, how often do they get tested afterwards? What I'm curious about is we know that positive tests as a metric do not equal cases.

By what factor are positive tests higher than actually cases?  Is each case getting tested 2-3x while they are still positive? 

Depends on the individual I suppose.  Some employers require employees to test negative prior to returning to work though.  The ND Dept of Health doesn't push positives to get retested, just to isolate for 10 days.

A positive case only shows up in the data once though, regardless of the number of times tested.  The number reported is based on the individual person, not the number of times a positive test comes back for that person.

Bison06 Community Regular

Bison06

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, UNDBIZ said:

Depends on the individual I suppose.  Some employers require employees to test negative prior to returning to work though.  The ND Dept of Health doesn't push positives to get retested, just to isolate for 10 days.

A positive case only shows up in the data once though, regardless of the number of times tested.  The number reported is based on the individual person, not the number of times a positive test comes back for that person.

Are you certain about this? I've heard different, though I very well could be wrong.

UNDBIZ Experienced

UNDBIZ

Posted
Posted
Just now, Bison06 said:

Are you certain about this? I've heard different, though I very well could be wrong.

Can't guarantee against errors, but in ND the number of daily positives reported is not supposed to include repeat positives from active cases.

  • Upvote 1
UNDlaw80 Apprentice

UNDlaw80

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Shawn-O said:

The polling organizations are having a hard-time getting their hands around a statistically relevant "likely voter" sample set.  And Wall Street knows it.   

 

That was the scenario 4 years ago more so than today.  Voter turnout was the lowest in decades and polls indicated a large contingent of ‘undecideds’ up to the end, of which most pundits mistakenly assumed would vote blue.  The landscape is flipped upside down this year.  So far early voting turnout is breaking records, and few undecideds exit.      
By and large, aggregated polling is relatively accurate.  Interesting read out of the Smithsonian:


Polls Are Still As Accurate As They Were 75 Years Ago

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/polls-are-still-accurate-they-were-75-years-ago-180968467/

The Sicatoka Grand Master

The Sicatoka

Posted
Posted
50 minutes ago, Bison06 said:

And this is where politics gets in the way of reality.

This would be impossible to do at this point, but what would a logical person take as an approach given the above data set?

What REALLY bothers me is the bar chart on the NDDoH site showing the Deaths data I gave: They stop the bar chart Y-axis at 80 deaths and just write the "234" number on the 80+ bar. It completely blows the scale of reality. The 80+ bar should be nearly 4x as tall as the 70-79 but on that mis-scaled mess they're about the same. Grossly deceptive. 

Look for yourself: https://www.health.nd.gov/diseases-conditions/coronavirus/north-dakota-coronavirus-cases 

  • Upvote 1
UNDBIZ Experienced

UNDBIZ

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, The Sicatoka said:

What REALLY bothers me is the bar chart on the NDDoH site showing the Deaths data I gave: They stop the bar chart Y-axis at 80 deaths and just write the "234" number on the 80+ bar. It completely blows the scale of reality. The 80+ bar should be nearly 4x as tall as the 70-79 but on that mis-scaled mess they're about the same. Grossly deceptive. 

Look for yourself: https://www.health.nd.gov/diseases-conditions/coronavirus/north-dakota-coronavirus-cases 

That is bad.  Let them know.

https://ndhealth.co1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_9XOCwgC3JJV33hP

Wilbur Grand Master

Wilbur

Posted
Posted

And my school district goes to orange.

Online learning for all starting on Monday.

At least ACB is giving a good online lecture and Q & A on what exactly the constitution is.  

  • Like 2
Teeder11 Proficient

Teeder11

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, jdub27 said:

I'd venture that a decent amount of Biden winning is already priced in based on recent polls.

That was my thought, too.  It seems that the market has traditionally surged initially when the President's party doesn't change on election day but seems to initially dip when there's a change in party .... before moderating after a few weeks. Markets above all else like predictability.

Nodak78 Grand Master

Nodak78

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, Teeder11 said:

That was my thought, too.  It seems that the market has traditionally surged initially when the President's party doesn't change on election day but seems to initially dip when there's a change in party .... before moderating after a few weeks. Markets above all else like predictability.

not in 2016.  just the opposite.

 

homer Experienced

homer

Posted
Posted
39 minutes ago, Teeder11 said:

That was my thought, too.  It seems that the market has traditionally surged initially when the President's party doesn't change on election day but seems to initially dip when there's a change in party .... before moderating after a few weeks. Markets above all else like predictability.

Historically yes.  Will be interesting to how it responds to some of the regulation changes that will likely happen with a Harris/Biden win.  

Shawn-O Experienced

Shawn-O

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, homer said:

Historically yes.  Will be interesting to how it responds to some of the regulation changes that will likely happen with a Harris/Biden win.  

Lots of regulatory changes (additions) coming in a President Harris administration.   

  • Like 1
jdub27 Veteran

jdub27

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, homer said:

Historically yes.  Will be interesting to how it responds to some of the regulation changes that will likely happen with a Harris/Biden win.  

The impact/volatility will likely depend on how the Senate shakes out. If R's lose the WH but not the Senate, I wouldn't expect a large change. If the R's lose the WH and Senate, I could foresee some signfiicant negative volatility. 

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...