View Single Post
Old 03-20-2020, 01:31 PM   #47
TiltonBB
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Gilford, NH and Florida
Posts: 3,020
Thanks: 703
Thanked 2,203 Times in 937 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Descant View Post
I think numbers make things clearer but citing your source and a link gives more credibility. For me, this applies to all posters, not just the one quoted above. Saying I read it in the NYT or Boston Globe (same owners, same editorial policy?) is no more reliable than saying "I read it on the internet." Numbers tend to grow easily as they get re-quoted. Above, originally stated as "about 1/4". Then, it becomes a hard "25%". Over time, that becomes "more than" and the next quote is ... you get the idea.
If you test in an area where there is greater likelihood of something, you should expect higher numbers.
Are they testing everyone, in other words a big pool of people, or just those with symptoms who want to get tested?

I don't think 25% of the general public will test positive. It could be that 4% of people requested a test and 25% of those tested positive. That would mean an infection rate of 1%.
TiltonBB is offline