Lol at everyone ignoring Bratzler’s comments about the data. Says a lot.

Work blocks Facebook and Twitter (and Instagram).

Gotcha. I wish it had been posted to a venue other than FB but the discussion seemed timely.

Google just announced they are giving most employees the option of working from home until July 2021.


I really wonder how much the pandemic will change the way companies work. The move to telecommuting has been very slow but this might end up being a huge tipping point.

As an employer, I can tell you we spent a small fortune on rent and utilities plus other office-related costs. I personally like going into an office every day and working with people face-to-face, but it may be paying for all that might not be the best investment.

Google just announced they are giving most employees the option of working from home until July 2021.


I really wonder how much the pandemic will change the way companies work. The move to telecommuting has been very slow but this might end up being a huge tipping point.

As an employer, I can tell you we spent a small fortune on rent and utilities plus other office-related costs. I personally like going into an office every day and working with people face-to-face, but it may be paying for all that might not be the best investment.

There are a lot of employers who are still "old-school" they want butts in chairs even if it is just people sitting at a computer all day. Pretty ridiculous.

There are a lot of employers who are still "old-school" they want butts in chairs even if it is just people sitting at a computer all day. Pretty ridiculous.

I call it "arse in seat" or A.I.S.

But only when it applies to meetings when others are waiting on someone.

Monday's meeting is 10AM A.I.S!!

Highest single, non-backlog-impacted day of cases: 1,401

From https://twitter.com/KassieMcClung/status/1287777559866990593

Daily #COVID19 update via the state Department of Health:

Highest number of new cases* reported and new high in the 7-day avg., which is over 1,000 for first time.

- 32,686 cases (+1,401)
- 496 deaths (+0)
- 625 hospitalizations, as of 7/24
- 6.4% positive rate as of 7/24

This is definitely not flattening

1,410 new cases today.

Another daily record and a huge total for a Monday in particular.

Is there anywhere to find the number of total tests tied to the 1,410 positives (i.e., the positivity percentage tied to this number) or does that only come in the end-of-week reports? Here's to hoping this number ties to a huge number of total tests (I remember seeing something saying there were a large number of tests pending late last week).

At least no deaths and it looks like the "currently hospitalized" is down 3 from Friday. Still not good though.

^

We typically have very few deaths reported on Mondays for some reason.

Last 8 Mondays: 0, 1, 2, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1

Tuesdays are usually much higher: 9, 4, 5, 2, 2, 4, 5, 5

To respond to my own question, Dillon Richards tweeted that the state reported 43,103 negative tests today, "on a day of the week that the state often reports no new negative tests at all." Even with this number of positives, the two-week positivity rate actually decreased today. Not in any way saying today's number is good or that we're out of the woods in the slightest, but today isn't as bad as the raw 1,410 number would have us believe.


This thread is what I'm referencing: https://twitter.com/KOCODillon/status/1287777675415887877?s=20

1,500 for sure tomorrow. Do I hear 2,000. Watch out Nation Oklahoma is coming for that number one spot. We have a governor that don't seem to care and a shut down or even a roll back is never going to happen. We get this Oklahoma. WERE NUMBER 1 WERE NUMBER 1.

Google just announced they are giving most employees the option of working from home until July 2021.


I really wonder how much the pandemic will change the way companies work. The move to telecommuting has been very slow but this might end up being a huge tipping point.

As an employer, I can tell you we spent a small fortune on rent and utilities plus other office-related costs. I personally like going into an office every day and working with people face-to-face, but it may be paying for all that might not be the best investment.

At first, you had a lot of employers say "hey we can save money on office space and people can still be productive working at home" when all of this started. To a certain extent, that definitely can be true but I think there are certain industries that still like to have that face to face contact. I'm more of the opinion that people should be allowed the flexibility to work from home as long as they still get their work done, but I know some bosses who believe that people are less productive working from home.

To respond to my own question, Dillon Richards tweeted that the state reported 43,103 negative tests today, "on a day of the week that the state often reports no new negative tests at all." Even with this number of positives, the two-week positivity rate actually decreased today. Not in any way saying today's number is good or that we're out of the woods in the slightest, but today isn't as bad as the raw 1,410 number would have us believe.


This thread is what I'm referencing: https://twitter.com/KOCODillon/status/1287777675415887877?s=20

That's good context, and helps cut the urgency of the numbers a tad. We'll have to see what tomorrow holds, as Tuesdays are usually the worst day.

Just under a month ago, we had never had more than 478 cases in one day.

Today, we had 3X that amount.


We are doing more tests because more people have symptoms and/or have had exposure. I have never thought the positive % was a very meaningful number -- unless we were to test everyone every single day.

At first, you had a lot of employers say "hey we can save money on office space and people can still be productive working at home" when all of this started. To a certain extent, that definitely can be true but I think there are certain industries that still like to have that face to face contact. I'm more of the opinion that people should be allowed the flexibility to work from home as long as they still get their work done, but I know some bosses who believe that people are less productive working from home.

I know my company has been very happily surprised with the results of working from home. I know that many of the managers have been resistant to working remotely, including my boss, but they've changed their tunes. We've hit records every month we've been working from home. I'm sure there's some extra motivation on some folks part (who wants to be unemployed right now) but I think it will hold long term. It's nuts with our company how much we've been paying for facilities for several hundred folks, when 95% can work remotely with absolutely no difference in their jobs.

1,410 new cases today.

Another daily record and a huge total for a Monday in particular.

https://i.imgflip.com/1x6i5.jpg

Sorry, this Xbox meme came to mind immediately upon reading the headline. No laughing matter but couldn’t help myself.

At first, you had a lot of employers say "hey we can save money on office space and people can still be productive working at home" when all of this started. To a certain extent, that definitely can be true but I think there are certain industries that still like to have that face to face contact. I'm more of the opinion that people should be allowed the flexibility to work from home as long as they still get their work done, but I know some bosses who believe that people are less productive working from home.

I came to terms with productivity vs. attendance a long time ago.

I used to be a COO for a huge financial company and when the Internet started to really take off, there was all types of hand-wringing among senior execs about employees wasting time and they wanted me (I was in charge of IT) to block out a ton of sites and content.

I explained to them that this was a management issue, pure and simple. That as managers the job was to make sure the staff understood the hill to climb and not stand over them and tell them how to climb it (unless there was a problem, then that's a whole different conversation).

And I also explained that even if they were shopping or paying bills they were learning to do things that would ultimately help built skillsets for their jobs. Were we going to block them from talking on the phone as well or doodling on a notepad?

There has to be trust until that it is violated. And I know that even though I do laundry, run to the store and constantly play with my dogs, I am a buzzsaw of productivity when working from home even if I take frequent breaks to live my life.

Is there anywhere to find the number of total tests tied to the 1,410 positives (i.e., the positivity percentage tied to this number) or does that only come in the end-of-week reports? Here's to hoping this number ties to a huge number of total tests (I remember seeing something saying there were a large number of tests pending late last week).

At least no deaths and it looks like the "currently hospitalized" is down 3 from Friday. Still not good though.

yeesh.

I'm going to be in the "take it with a grain of salt" crowd for a while longer. Hoping that these are backlogged tests...

^

The rolling averages are escalating quickly as well.


I just don't see how anyone can possibly look at any of this data and not be anything but gravely concerned.

^

The rolling averages are escalating quickly as well.


I just don't see how anyone can possibly look at any of this data and not be anything but gravely concerned.

Oh, I'm definitely concerned. There's no denying that this is a serious escalation of cases; however, the issues with the data do allow a shred of possibility that these cases me just be temporarily artificially high. It's a "hope for the best, plan for the worst" mentality for this data.

^

The rolling averages are escalating quickly as well.


I just don't see how anyone can possibly look at any of this data and not be anything but gravely concerned.

Because people decided months ago whether they were concerned with COVID or not, regardless of numbers or facts.

ROMEO
Have courage, man. The wound can’t be that bad.

MERCUTIO
No, ’tis not so deep as a well nor so wide as a church-door, but ’tis enough, ’twill serve. Ask for me tomorrow, and you shall find me a grave man.

A vast majority of Americans want a national mask mandate: https://thehill.com/homenews/coronavirus-report/509177-majority-say-they-support-national-face-mask-mandate-poll

We just have a failure of leadership.

Because people decided months ago whether they were concerned with COVID or not, regardless of numbers or facts.

I actually agree with that. I think we could have 200 deaths a day and people who still think it was nothing to worry about. We are still 6 to 8 months away from a vaccine at the absolute earliest. This is going to be a very tough year.

Because people decided months ago whether they were concerned with COVID or not, regardless of numbers or facts.

Eh we see some change with the data. The vast majority of Americans are concerned about Covid, with a significant jump in the percentage of folks "very" concerned as this new spike emerged

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/coronavirus-polls/

I actually agree with that. I think we could have 200 deaths a day and people who still think it was nothing to worry about.

Many would employ the myriad of rationalizations that keep getting trotted no matter how nonsensical: 'They are counting everything as a Covid death'. Or, 'The numbers are manipulated.' Or, 'It's still only an X% death rate'. Or, 'People die all that time.' Or, 'People are shooting each other in Chicago and why aren't we talking about that??'.

I just saw on Oklahoma Source’s FB page that they confirmed with OSDH that rapid tests are now being counted in the daily totals. They’ve seemed to be a pretty reliable source of information. Any way anyone on here with contacts could verify or discredit that report? If rapid tests started being included last week then that would make the numbers a little better. Still really concerning but at least a little better.

I just saw on Oklahoma Source’s FB page that they confirmed with OSDH that rapid tests are now being counted in the daily totals. They’ve seemed to be a pretty reliable source of information. Any way anyone on here with contacts could verify or discredit that report? If rapid tests started being included last week then that would make the numbers a little better. Still really concerning but at least a little better.

If that is true, then that screws any type of trend analysis we can do with this data. They essentially changed the goal posts mid-way through the game.

I wonder if the can retroactively add back in the positive tests from the rapid testing going back to when they were implemented.

If that is true, then that screws any type of trend analysis we can do with this data. They essentially changed the goal posts mid-way through the game.

I wonder if the can retroactively add back in the positive tests from the rapid testing going back to when they were implemented.

i must be missing something. as long as they give us the total tested included in that, how does this change the goal posts and make any trend analysis vastly scewed? the rapid tests would still be tests done, just moved from a future day to today... not like it isn't still a tested number and a positive number.

i must be missing something. as long as they give us the total tested included in that, how does this change the goal posts and make any trend analysis vastly scewed? the rapid tests would still be tests done, just moved from a future day to today... not like it isn't still a tested number and a positive number.

Unless I misunderstand, these rapid tests haven't been included into our daily totals to date. If you suddenly add them, then your daily case line will shift up dramatically. It makes it really difficult to determine whether we are continuing to climb, plateauing, or coming down. If you can add them in retroactively, then no big deal.

You also have the issues of false positives from those tests.

Unless I misunderstand, these rapid tests haven't been included into our daily totals to date. If you suddenly add them, then your daily case line will shift up dramatically. It makes it really difficult to determine whether we are continuing to climb, plateauing, or coming down. If you can add them in retroactively, then no big deal.

You also have the issues of false positives from those tests.

The graphs they have been producing for their site had already being sorted by 'date of onset' and 'date reported' respectively, which seems like should be something new collection methods should be able to be fit into nicely.

The graphs they have been producing for their site had already being sorted by 'date of onset' and 'date reported' respectively, which seems like should be something new collection methods should be able to be fit into nicely.The questions would be. Did anyone keep real records of rapid tests anywhere. And since the reason for not including them, from what I understand, is that until recently they were considered pretty inaccurate should they be added retroactively. So if the report I saw is true test results and trends have got to be “Before reporting rapid tests” and “After reporting rapid tests” .

The U.S. has now passed 150,000 deaths due to Covid-19.

I never really understood why the rapid test were not being counted? Too many false positives? I don't think it's much higher than the nose swab is it? Also when you see 1,400 some cases for today we really have no clue to when those cases actually were. Some were a couple days ago some were over a week ago. Who knows. This is why it will take at least another week to see if mask are helping at all.

Here’s a screenshot of the post I read.
16289

Reading an exchange on Twitter with COVID health reporters they bring up a good point. Just looking at cases presents a problem in the fact that there is a backup log of tests to be processed and sometimes you have too many backlogged to get a good number.

Looking at hospitalizations can be a better data point as those tend to not lag on who is currently in the hospital. As those go up you really get a picture of how many people have this virus. If the hospitalization number is up then there is a high spread.

^

But hospitalizations are a lagging indicator.

They only manifest a week or two after a positive case.

And the # of new cases has been an accurate indicator of future hospitalization and deaths.


This is important when trying to get out ahead of things, rather than waiting for a bunch of people to die before making changes.

The U.S. has now passed 150,000 deaths due to Covid-19.
i'm trying to remember... did we hit 100k at the beginning of july or the beginning of june? either way, not good.

^

But hospitalizations are a lagging indicator.

They only manifest a week or two after a positive case.

And the # of new cases has been an accurate indicator of future hospitalization and deaths.


This is important when trying to get out ahead of things, rather than waiting for a bunch of people to die before making changes.
I kind of see what I think the point of FightTheGoodFight’s post. If you contract the thing, and say five days later you start showing symptoms and go get tested. I would think it’s then possible or probable that if the test results take 14 to 21 days then if you’re going to be hospitalized you’re probably there before the test results are recorded.

^

They only manifest a week or two after a positive case.


While in a perfect world I would completely agree, these days I would say "only manifest a week or two after contracting the virus" (and that may have been what you meant). There's a growing amount of anecdotal evidence that people aren't receiving test results until 1, 2, even 3 weeks after being tested (and I am assuming the reporting happens contemporaneous with or after results are received by the patient). To the extent this is widespread (I have no hard numbers either way), hospitalizations may be just as timely of a figure as positive test results, as people are going to the hospital when they need to go to the hospital, not only after they've received a positive result.

And I think this entire discussion just go to show how difficult drawing any simple but accurate conclusions is when you're dealing with (in some cases, severely) flawed data and the importance of a reliable testing and reporting infrastructure. The ship has of course sailed on this pandemic, but hopefully we will be better in the future (though I'm not counting on it).

Frankly, I think this is a case of the pursuit of great information at the expense of good info.

No matter if case data is delayed or combined with rapid tests, or how they report hospitalizations or deaths, these numbers are all way, way higher than anywhere else has ever been and lots of people are getting very sick and way too many are dying.

Unless I misunderstand, these rapid tests haven't been included into our daily totals to date. If you suddenly add them, then your daily case line will shift up dramatically. It makes it really difficult to determine whether we are continuing to climb, plateauing, or coming down. If you can add them in retroactively, then no big deal.

You also have the issues of false positives from those tests.

right... but won't it lower numbers of the next few days and then literally have sorted itself out in 7 days??? it's really not a big deal

Oklahoma County led the way in new cases last week, by a significant number. We have now regained our pole position vis a vis Tulsa County, not by cases per capita, but by total cases.

Our county is not alone. The Darwin theory is going to play itself out, but there will be some terrible collateral damage affecting people who are forced to encounter the unmasked. This story about a young woman who works in a grocery makes me sick, and is a reminder of the degree of delustional, even sociopathic, selfishness the anti-maskers represent.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/26/us/coronavirus-family-houston-masks.html

Unless I misunderstand, these rapid tests haven't been included into our daily totals to date. If you suddenly add them, then your daily case line will shift up dramatically. It makes it really difficult to determine whether we are continuing to climb, plateauing, or coming down. If you can add them in retroactively, then no big deal.

You also have the issues of false positives from those tests.

False positives? I thought the inaccuracy was up to 50% false negatives, not positives.

False positives? I thought the inaccuracy was up to 50% false negatives, not positives.

Yes, these can give false positives.

Regardless, they’re inaccurate tests and including them in our metrics only convolutes the story that we’re all trying to unravel.

OSDH: “we’re currently having data quality issues with our current test counts. Let’s add even more unreliable data to the mix so the story will be so confusing that it will be impossible to understand. Then we can just blame all these issues on test reliability as opposed to our inept system.”

Is it time to go back and start testing people only with symptoms for a little bit so we can get caught up. I know asymptomatic people can spread it but are they reallying staying home for 7 days waiting for a test result if they are showing no symptoms? I also know a few people that are getting test pretty much every other day cause they are working in the public and they are scared they have it. I'm also know others getting test cause it's free and hey why not just to be safe. We have as of Friday 573,185 total tested that is a lot of test coming back negative and slowing down the system. Let's face it contract tracing at this point is way to difficult. Might be easier to trace people with symptoms with positive results coming back within 2 days just to start. There has to be a better way then what is going on now.

There are false positives happening for sure. I know of a clinic here in OKC that has even done their own test by sending in samples that have been unused on anyone/thing and they are coming back as positives.

There is no doubt that cases are rising, but the data is definitely rocky.

The U.S. has now passed 150,000 deaths due to Covid-19.

It's important to step back every now and then and realize how far we've come in such a short amount of time. We started hearing about this virus at the end of last year. At the time, it seemed like such a remote thing to most people here. If you were to tell me back in January that 150,000 Americans would die in the US, I would've said to put that pipe down but here we are.

Just an absolutely staggering number and shameful that we were so ill-prepared for this. And we're not even close to being done with this thing...

It's important to step back every now and then and realize how far we've come in such a short amount of time. We started hearing about this virus at the end of last year. At the time, it seemed like such a remote thing to most people here. If you were to tell me back in January that 150,000 Americans would die in the US, I would've said to put that pipe down but here we are.

Just an absolutely staggering number and shameful that we were so ill-prepared for this. And we're not even close to being done with this thing...

And we will deal with the repercussions for 10 years after. It is one of those sobering moments you realize you are living during a huge worldwide history lesson in the future.

I know of a clinic here in OKC that has even done their own test by sending in samples that have been unused on anyone/thing and they are coming back as positives.


Uh... is this not highly unethical, if not malpractice of some sort?

Uh... is this not highly unethical, if not malpractice of some sort?

No idea, but they have reported the issues to the state HD. I am sure it is a major cluster F in those offices, though.

Is it time to go back and start testing people only with symptoms for a little bit so we can get caught up. I know asymptomatic people can spread it but are they reallying staying home for 7 days waiting for a test result if they are showing no symptoms? I also know a few people that are getting test pretty much every other day cause they are working in the public and they are scared they have it. I'm also know others getting test cause it's free and hey why not just to be safe. We have as of Friday 573,185 total tested that is a lot of test coming back negative and slowing down the system. Let's face it contract tracing at this point is way to difficult. Might be easier to trace people with symptoms with positive results coming back within 2 days just to start. There has to be a better way then what is going on now.

Actually, it would probably make more sense to treat symptomatic people as assumed positive, have them quarantine, and use testing to find asymptomatic contagious people, because that's the only way they can be identified for isolation. We clearly don't have the capacity or maybe even the technology to effectively do that, at this point, but it would certainly contribute more to controlling the spread than would simply identifying already sick people as COVID positive. The reality is that once someone becomes symptomatic, they have most likely already contributed to the spread.

This is why some medical professionals advocate using the rapid tests, even with the high false negative problem. It seems the false negatives are generally due to a low viral load, which means still infected, but presumably not as contagious. But if the tests are able to cheaply and rapidly identify the more contagious asymptomatic spreaders, then the tests would still be an extremely useful tool in mitigating the spread, even with the false negative problem. Any false positives are really more of an inconvenience for the testee, than a hindrance to containing the virus.

That may not result in data that accurately tells the whole story, but, especially right now, the main objective and focus of testing should be containment and it's become clear that the main obstacle to containing this thing has been an inadequate testing infrastructure that has been unable to identify the contagious before they infect numerous people.

I never really understood why the rapid test were not being counted? Too many false positives? I don't think it's much higher than the nose swab is it? Also when you see 1,400 some cases for today we really have no clue to when those cases actually were. Some were a couple days ago some were over a week ago. Who knows. This is why it will take at least another week to see if mask are helping at all.

Rapid tests have no real problem with false positives. The false negative rate is higher than laboratory tests, but the positives are pretty accurate and no different the laboratory tests.

The reason the state doesn’t count them is because they are not “laboratory confirmed”. There is no real reason to think that a positive rapid test isn’t accurate, so nobody is going to go through the work of confirming a rapid test at a laboratory. That would take twice as many testing supplies, and it would increase the strain on the laboratories.

I don’t think the state approaches CLIA-waived flu tests the same way, but for some reason they have decided to not count CLIA-waived SARS-CoV-2 tests.

Of course they also simply stop counting active cases after 14 days if they aren’t dead or hospitalized, so there is that.

Uh... is this not highly unethical, if not malpractice of some sort?

How/why would it be? Just call it "the control group". :) Absolutely ridiculous that completely unused samples are coming back positive - someone, somewhere at a high level at the lab that's sending out those positive results needs to fix things at that lab *now*.

Actually, it would probably make more sense to treat symptomatic people as assumed positive, have them quarantine, and use testing to find asymptomatic contagious people, because that's the only way they can be identified for isolation. We clearly don't have the capacity or maybe even the technology to effectively do that, at this point, but it would certainly contribute more to controlling the spread than would simply identifying already sick people as COVID positive. The reality is that once someone becomes symptomatic, they have most likely already contributed to the spread.

This is why some medical professionals advocate using the rapid tests, even with the high false negative problem. It seems the false negatives are generally due to a low viral load, which means still infected, but presumably not as contagious. But if the tests are able to cheaply and rapidly identify the more contagious asymptomatic spreaders, then the tests would still be an extremely useful tool in mitigating the spread, even with the false negative problem. Any false positives are really more of an inconvenience for the testee, than a hindrance to containing the virus.

That may not result in data that accurately tells the whole story, but, especially right now, the main objective and focus of testing should be containment and it's become clear that the main obstacle to containing this thing has been an inadequate testing infrastructure that has been unable to identify the contagious before they infect numerous people.

I see your point here. With it not being flu season if they have a fever, coughing, low oxygen or something lets just treat them like they have covid and save the test.
We are now 4 months into this you think by now there would be a spit test or a blood test or something that would have a quicker turn around time.

Don't believe or spend any time on the "an OKC clinic has sent in unused tests and they came back positive" anecdote, that is a Coronavirus denialist talking point that is straight up lies. Same story is being passed around about unnamed clinics all over the country with just the location changed. It is, quite literally, fake news.

Actually, it would probably make more sense to treat symptomatic people as assumed positive, have them quarantine, and use testing to find asymptomatic contagious people, because that's the only way they can be identified for isolation. I try not to erase most of a post but this is the part of a long post that I have something to say about. How would we know who to test of asymptomatic people because they’re asymptomatic. I had no idea I had it until weeks afterward when I had my first positive antibody result. Then I put 2 and 2 together and figured out the timetable. And for contract tracing. I’m sure I contracted it from a guy at Twin Peaks the night of the postponed Thunder-Jazz game . Absolutely no possible way to contract trace everyone that was there that night. The only way I see to control this thing is for everyone to stay home as much as possible without killing businesses. No family fun fairs, no live music at bars, have Churches, and we hadn’t missed a Sunday in years before March, go back to online only, curbside restaurant service only or REQUIRE restaurants to enforce distancing. etc. and make REAL fines for not adhering to the rules. And when you do go out to shop or whatever WEAR A FREAKIN MASK!!!!!!

I try not to erase most of a post but this is the part of a long post that I have something to say about. How would we know who to test of asymptomatic people because they’re asymptomatic. I had no idea I had it until weeks afterward when I had my first positive antibody result. Then I put 2 and 2 together and figured out the timetable. And for contract tracing. I’m sure I contracted it from a guy at Twin Peaks the night of the postponed Thunder-Jazz game . Absolutely no possible way to contract trace everyone that was there that night. The only way I see to control this thing is for everyone to stay home as much as possible without killing businesses. No family fun fairs, no live music at bars, have Churches, and we hadn’t missed a Sunday in years before March, go back to online only, curbside restaurant service only or REQUIRE restaurants to enforce distancing. etc. and make REAL fines for not adhering to the rules. And when you do go out to shop or whatever WEAR A FREAKIN MASK!!!!!!

Basically a roll back which we really truly need but that is NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN. Only way that happens is in the fall when people are lined up at the hospitals because they don't know if they have the flu or covid. That's going to happen if we don't either get it under control or have a vaccine

I try not to erase most of a post but this is the part of a long post that I have something to say about. How would we know who to test of asymptomatic people because theyÂ’re asymptomatic.

Oh, you're totally right. That's the bitch of this thing. You can't identify the asymptomatic spreaders among us without testing them, but how do you know to test them?? That is actually THE problem. I don't have a solution for that. I'm not that smart.

But limiting testing to only symptomatic people doesn't really accomplish anything, either, if containment is the goal. The ideal is to be able to test everyone cheaply and quickly. We don't have any way of doing that, that i know of, and I didn't mean to imply that we do, but for testing to be a containment effort, and that should be it's primary goal, that's really what it would take. If anything, I was echoing the support for rapid testing despite its false negative problem, because it might bring to light more asymptomatic positives, which is key, imo.


I had no idea I had it until weeks afterward when I had my first positive antibody result. Then I put 2 and 2 together and figured out the timetable. And for contract tracing. IÂ’m sure I contracted it from a guy at Twin Peaks the night of the postponed Thunder-Jazz game . Absolutely no possible way to contract trace everyone that was there that night. The only way I see to control this thing is for everyone to stay home as much as possible without killing businesses. No family fun fairs, no live music at bars, have Churches, and we hadnÂ’t missed a Sunday in years before March, go back to online only, curbside restaurant service only or REQUIRE restaurants to enforce distancing. etc. and make REAL fines for not adhering to the rules. And when you do go out to shop or whatever WEAR A FREAKIN MASK!!!!!!

Yeah, there's no way you could have known. Even with good tracing, there's no way to really know. That's kind of the crux of this thing. There's no way to identify who should take a test, except for symptoms, and at that point, does it really matter?

If you're sick, stay freaking home.

If you're not sick, you may still have it, so, like you said, 'WEAR A FREAKIN MASK'.

And, I'm with you on what not to do. Live music at bars IS my church, but I'm not attending until I know that testing is readily available for everyone or there's an effective vaccine that's been widely available and distributed. I can wait if that means it helps my fellow Oklahomans stay alive and well, and I can wear a mask until then for the same reason. As, you've pointed out, It's really not that hard.

And thank you for your personal efforts to aide with the crisis. You have saved lives.

Good context from good follow Kassie McClung


Important: Of the 1,401 new cases reported today, 77% of those specimens were collected between July 15-July 26. So some of those results are almost two weeks old, according to the state's daily report.

That is a *lot* of old data