Covid-19 in OKC (coronavirus)

[kukblue1]

What is worrying me is that hospitalizations went up from 177 on Friday to 180.

While 3 isn't a massive increase, still something to watch.

? I think that's a good number it was 233 I think just a couple days ago anyway starting about the 15th is when we really need to see what the numbers are doing because that's when we're going to start seeing what the opening has done. Couple days out an about. 5 to 9 days to get symptoms (on average) couple days to get a test couple days to get the results.

[OKC Guy]

This from post 2,300 article:

“Oklahoma is one of the few states that includes long-term care COVID-19 test results in overall case statistics, which do not necessarily reflect the impact of COVID-19 in the general population.”

So that means our rates compared to other states are unfairly compared. Meaning we add the most vulnerable group to reports where other states are not. This is actually good news meaning our real general population rates are lower.

Thats how I read it. And its good we reported factually no data catching up to do so to speak.

[PhiAlpha]

Updated for Tuesday:

Encouraging that we seemingly avoided the usual large Tuesday spike in hospitalizations and deaths.

[soonerguru]

I really wish they reported total # of tests done or what percentage of tests came back as positive. While rising raw number of cases isn't great, if it's due to a significant increase in our testing it's actually a bit of good news and adds important context.

Referencing my post above, a handful of people have been tested numerous times, so we don't really know how many people have been tested. Also, even in Guymon, home to the biggest outbreak in the state, they are only getting about 40 people a day tested. There is still test rationing going on.

The coworker I mentioned has never received a final test showing herself to be negative. They quit testing her when her symptoms went away, but like I said, she had had multiple tests.

100,000 "specimens" out of 4 million people is just not much to draw from. Also take into account that as many as 25% of negative test results turn out to be false negatives, as happened in the White House last week. Katie Miller, Pence's spokesperson, tested negative on Thursday, then positive on Friday. So there are probably hundreds of test results that came back negative in Oklahoma for someone whom later tested positive.

It is absurd we are still even having a conversation about the lack of testing right now. This is a massive, colossal policy blunder.

We need the capacity to test everyone. Certain workplaces need the capacity to test and retest to ensure safety (like meat plants and the White House).

Trump has figured out he needs to test his staff daily now to ensure his own safety. Not sure why he wouldn't see the value in that approach beyond his office.

[jdizzle]

Referencing my post above, a handful of people have been tested numerous times, so we don't really know how many people have been tested. Also, even in Guymon, home to the biggest outbreak in the state, they are only getting about 40 people a day tested. There is still test rationing going on.

The coworker I mentioned has never received a final test showing herself to be negative. They quit testing her when her symptoms went away, but like I said, she had had multiple tests.

100,000 "specimens" out of 4 million people is just not much to draw from. Also take into account that as many as 25% of negative test results turn out to be false negatives, as happened in the White House last week. Katie Miller, Pence's spokesperson, tested negative on Thursday, then positive on Friday. So there are probably hundreds of test results that came back negative in Oklahoma for someone whom later tested positive.

It is absurd we are still even having a conversation about the lack of testing right now. This is a massive, colossal policy blunder.

We need the capacity to test everyone. Certain workplaces need the capacity to test and retest to ensure safety (like meat plants and the White House).

Trump has figured out he needs to test his staff daily now to ensure his own safety. Not sure why he wouldn't see the value in that approach beyond his office.

So basically we can't take any results seriously, unless they are positive? I am wondering what the % of false positives is. I honestly don't know. But the constant fear mongering and almost hope that any positivity is fake news is starting to wear on people.

[PoliSciGuy]

Referencing my post above, a handful of people have been tested numerous times, so we don't really know how many people have been tested. Also, even in Guymon, home to the biggest outbreak in the state, they are only getting about 40 people a day tested. There is still test rationing going on.

The coworker I mentioned has never received a final test showing herself to be negative. They quit testing her when her symptoms went away, but like I said, she had had multiple tests.

100,000 "specimens" out of 4 million people is just not much to draw from. Also take into account that as many as 25% of negative test results turn out to be false negatives, as happened in the White House last week. Katie Miller, Pence's spokesperson, tested negative on Thursday, then positive on Friday. So there are probably hundreds of test results that came back negative in Oklahoma for someone whom later tested positive.

It is absurd we are still even having a conversation about the lack of testing right now. This is a massive, colossal policy blunder.

We need the capacity to test everyone. Certain workplaces need the capacity to test and retest to ensure safety (like meat plants and the White House).

Trump has figured out he needs to test his staff daily now to ensure his own safety. Not sure why he wouldn't see the value in that approach beyond his office.

I wholly agree with you with the need to expand testing. I was merely stating that knowing the overall number of tests and/or positivity rate adds needed context to the spread of the disease compared to just knowing the raw number of cases: https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/st...12108155625472

If the positive test rate is falling, then we know AT LEAST one of two GOOD things is happening.

Either infections are falling OR we've figured out how to do more widespread testing, or both.

[d-usa]

So basically we can't take any results seriously, unless they are positive? I am wondering what the % of false positives is. I honestly don't know. But the constant fear mongering and almost hope that any positivity is fake news is starting to wear on people.

The sensitivity for most tests looking for viral RNA is pretty high, it’s the specificity that’s a problem for many of them.

[Bill Robertson]

Encouraging that we seemingly avoided the usual large Tuesday spike in hospitalizations and deaths.

Two Tuesdays in a row. And today was even with the explanation of three long term care facilities numbers being added in.

[happyday]

My boss has invited everyone back to work. It has been a two month furlough. He wants a voluntary return to work. In other words, you can stay out an undefined longer period of time. I do office work where I must interview 14 different people every day. Here's my question to everyone. In central Oklahoma, has the probability of infection to me increased or decreased since my mid-March furlough? (I've been staying at home except for groceries.) They talk about 'flattening the curve'. But has the curve actually gone down measured month to month?

[PoliSciGuy]

My boss has invited everyone back to work. It has been a two month furlough. He wants a voluntary return to work. In other words, you can stay out an undefined longer period of time. I do office work where I must interview 14 different people every day. Here's my question to everyone. In central Oklahoma, has the probability of infection to me increased or decreased since my mid-March furlough? (I've been staying at home except for groceries.) They talk about 'flattening the curve'. But has the curve actually gone down measured month to month?

It's decreased. Well, it's probably the same as it was in mid-March but it's gone up and back down since then. Our R0 is under 1, hospitalizations have decreased to the point where we're discharging more people than taking in and a significant proportion of what cases we do have are from nursing homes.

[kukblue1]

My boss has invited everyone back to work. It has been a two month furlough. He wants a voluntary return to work. In other words, you can stay out an undefined longer period of time. I do office work where I must interview 14 different people every day. Here's my question to everyone. In central Oklahoma, has the probability of infection to me increased or decreased since my mid-March furlough? (I've been staying at home except for groceries.) They talk about 'flattening the curve'. But has the curve actually gone down measured month to month?

Depends I guess on if your healthy and low risk. The death rate I think for people in Oklahoma is .5% for under the age 50. No worse then probably the flu in that age group. I just looked up Indiana numbers and I have family there and death rate there for people under 40 is .8% Both states go up in the 50-60 range and really go up from 65 and up.

[kukblue1]

Well Just what i thought. They are starting to slow down on testing so the labs can catch up. So yeah we might be doing more testing but they labs can only process so many a day. So just because our percentage is going down how back logged are we?

[Bill Robertson]

Well Just what i thought. They are starting to slow down on testing so the labs can catch up. So yeah we might be doing more testing but they labs can only process so many a day. So just because our percentage is going down how back logged are we?

Yesterdays report (rounded) 2800 tests reported, 4700 results pending. But there’s really no reason to believe the pending won’t run about the same percentage positive.

Edit: Today’s just posted. 3200 complete, 4900 pending.

[kukblue1]

How are they coming up with the 2 under Hospitalized? The Executive Order reports shows 190 in Hospital with the 5-11 report (counting under investigation) and on the 5-12 report it shows 218. That's an increase of 28. What am I not seeing here?

[soonerguru]

nm

[soonerguru]

Two Tuesdays in a row. And today was even with the explanation of three long term care facilities numbers being added in.

We didn’t avoid them. For some reason the Oklahoma Department of Health is not reporting hospitalizations in Texas County, where a massive outbreak is occurring. I have no idea why they would not.

I got this information from a press release by the Texas County Emergency Management office. You can read it yourself on their Facebook page.

Again, why would OSDH not report hospitalizations from that county? I would be surprised if there were less than 100 from that county alone.

[soonerguru]

It's decreased. Well, it's probably the same as it was in mid-March but it's gone up and back down since then. Our R0 is under 1, hospitalizations have decreased to the point where we're discharging more people than taking in and a significant proportion of what cases we do have are from nursing homes.

When hospitalizations are not being reported for the county with the largest outbreak in the state, you can take that hospitalization data and chuck it. It is worthless.

[Martin]

When hospitalizations are not being reported for the county with the largest outbreak in the state, you can take that hospitalization data and chuck it. It is worthless.

i don't see where osdh is reporting the total hospitalizations for any individual county... point me to the data if you have access. i suspect that the release is a bit poorly worded. hospitalizations for texas county patients are being reported in the state totals but the individual rate for texas county (as with all oklahoma counties) is not being reported.

[FighttheGoodFight]

i don't see where osdh is reporting the total hospitalizations for any individual county... point me to the data if you have access. i suspect that the release is a bit poorly worded. hospitalizations for texas county patients are being reported in the state totals but the individual rate for texas county (as with all oklahoma counties) is not being reported.

I was going to look on coronavirus.ok.gov as I figured they would have that information. They have a line graph for hospitalizations but it is the only stat you can't break down and see more. How strange.

[Martin]

I was going to look on coronavirus.ok.gov as I figured they would have that information. They have a line graph for hospitalizations but it is the only stat you can't break down and see more. How strange.

this is exactly what i saw.

i think the county data for cases/deaths is correlated to patient residence... which would make sense in determining the infection levels of places that people live and likely work. however, given the severity of symptoms and proximity to medical resources, that patient may require hospitalization in an entirely different location... that is, a patient who lives and works around guymon may require treatment in enid or oklahoma city depending on the severity of symptoms. outside of capacity, the county of hospitalization may therefore provide information that confuses the analysis process. this is just my best guess, so take it with a grain of salt!

[Jersey Boss]

this is exactly what i saw.

i think the county data for cases/deaths is correlated to patient residence... which would make sense in determining the infection levels of places that people live and likely work. however, given the severity of symptoms and proximity to medical resources, that patient may require hospitalization in an entirely different location... that is, a patient who lives and works around guymon may require treatment in enid or oklahoma city depending on the severity of symptoms. outside of capacity, the county of hospitalization may therefore provide information that confuses the analysis process. this is just my best guess, so take it with a grain of salt!

My guess is Guymon patients would go to Amarillo before Enid or OKC as it would be closer.

[Bill Robertson]

We didn’t avoid them. For some reason the Oklahoma Department of Health is not reporting hospitalizations in Texas County, where a massive outbreak is occurring. I have no idea why they would not.

I got this information from a press release by the Texas County Emergency Management office. You can read it yourself on their Facebook page.

Again, why would OSDH not report hospitalizations from that county? I would be surprised if there were less than 100 from that county alone.

100? Why so many. Based on the percentage of positive cases vs hospitalizations statewide there would be about 9.

[Martin]

My guess is Guymon patients would go to Amarillo before Enid or OKC as it would be closer.

good point... which would make the county of hospitalization even more confusing since the treating facility would be out of state.

[soonerguru]

100? Why so many. Based on the percentage of positive cases vs hospitalizations statewide there would be about 9.

I was basing that on “recoveries.” You are probably right or perhaps it is somewhere between the two.

[soonerguru]

My boss has invited everyone back to work. It has been a two month furlough. He wants a voluntary return to work. In other words, you can stay out an undefined longer period of time. I do office work where I must interview 14 different people every day. Here's my question to everyone. In central Oklahoma, has the probability of infection to me increased or decreased since my mid-March furlough? (I've been staying at home except for groceries.) They talk about 'flattening the curve'. But has the curve actually gone down measured month to month?

Not really. If so it is marginally less. It has mostly flattened. With the lag in getting test results it is hard to say. I don’t know what to tell you about being safe in that role except wondering if you can conduct the interviews via Teams or Skype.