Welcome Guest
Sign In | Register

Not necessarily. The testing is trying to be random,

Posted on: July 10, 2020 at 13:13:30 CT
alwaysright MU
Posts:
48929
Member For:
16.95 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
0
therefore they are not totally focusing on those who are likely to be sick. However, they can't be totally random because a lot of people who aren't sick or don't think they're at risk as not willing to get tested.

Therefore, the type of people who are getting tested is generally about the same, leading to a generally steady % of positives.
Report Message

Please explain why this message is being reported.

REPLY

Handle:
Password:
Subject:

MESSAGE THREAD

How does this logic make any sense? - BigSlickTiger MU - 7/10 12:25:50
     Joey Gallo (TX Rangers) has had four tests - Sarazen KC - 7/10 13:16:56
          Previously people who were sick couldn't get tested - alstl MU - 7/10 13:47:40
          The US is going to reach 500 million positive cases - tiger4real MU - 7/10 13:19:08
               Crazy..with only 331 million people nm - sYsTiger MU - 7/10 13:32:51
                    [that'sthejoke.mpeg](nm) - dangertim MU - 7/10 13:43:58
               ha ha. So true that this could happend(nm) - SabertoothTiger MU - 7/10 13:21:46
     Not necessarily. The testing is trying to be random, - alwaysright MU - 7/10 13:13:30
          wtf are you spewing here about randomizing testing? good - 90Tiger STL - 7/10 13:20:57
               Like people are sitting around and wanting to get a swab - Lt. J. Dangle MU - 7/10 13:23:40
                    I get that. My wife is having surgery in two weeks and has - Lt. J. Dangle MU - 7/10 13:31:22
                    Texas tests every single hospital patient for covid - zoomer 99 - 7/10 13:26:43
                         KC does that too. Easier to know where to put them. This - dangertim MU - 7/10 13:29:36
          it's not random at all. The free testing sites are for - dangertim MU - 7/10 13:19:00
          Also depends are they counting the number of people getting - Lt. J. Dangle MU - 7/10 13:17:55
          It's actually not a steady number of positives. In MO - hefeweizen MU - 7/10 13:15:08
     The good news is deaths declined from an all time high - tiger4real MU - 7/10 13:10:48
     Are you really this stupid? Even one additional positive - hefeweizen MU - 7/10 13:08:15
     you don't make any sense. you're conflating increased testi - 90Tiger STL - 7/10 13:01:52
     are you really asking why increased testing - pickle MU - 7/10 12:49:51
     Example - I was sick as a dog in March - alstl MU - 7/10 12:46:26
     This post is a mess - tbluck STL - 7/10 12:33:14
     Maybe it's just possible the tests results are largely - Diamond Dave MU - 7/10 12:28:28
          YOU'RE LARGELY FRAUDULENT!! - Joeboo MU - 7/10 12:29:20
               RE: YOU'RE LARGELY *FLATULENT!!! nm - sYsTiger MU - 7/10 12:30:34
                    YOU'RE LARGELY OPULENT!!!(nm) - cnk ATL - 7/10 12:31:57
                         YOU'RE LARGELY SUCCULENT!!!(nm) - Carlos Rossi KC - 7/10 12:46:45
                              RE: YOU'RE LARGELY DELICANT!!!(nm) - sYsTiger MU - 7/10 12:49:11
               I will start shopping my huge life insurance policy - Diamond Dave MU - 7/10 12:30:05
     Or the virus is and always has been more more widespread - Eggs MU - 7/10 12:27:32
          That would account for the number of total cases, - BigSlickTiger MU - 7/10 12:30:36
               yes. the positivity rate is a shell game - pickle MU - 7/10 12:54:51
               Depends who is getting tested and why - Eggs MU - 7/10 12:33:11
                    This. Plus employers are requiring anybody with any - Lt. J. Dangle MU - 7/10 13:12:25
          CDC. Lol(nm) - Diamond Dave MU - 7/10 12:29:15
               True, but they have data on antibody tests - Eggs MU - 7/10 12:30:30




©2024 Fanboards L.L.C. — Our Privacy Policy   About Tigerboard