Todays COVID-19 UPDATE

Okiya said:
Very wrong. The real data is the 45 million Kenyans. But since they cannot test everyone, they should do random testing.

The graph doesn't show rapidly growing infection rate. It just shows that they have managed to get 303 cases in the whole country. If they stopped testing for 1 week and the graph goes down does it mean that infection rate is reducing?

If we continue with this mode of testing, prepare to be locked up until they finish testing every kenyan.
Click to expand...

So the number of real verified cases tells us nothing? Does counting the number of deaths tell you something?

The 303 cases were confirmed over a period of time. It is the case that the number of infections have been increasing continuously over that period.

Now go read about continuous growth before we discuss this any further

https://betterexplained.com/articles/what-does-an-exponent-mean/
 
bigDog said:
Enda usome hiyo link nimeweka hapo juu. Its maths but usiogope. Its very well explained.
Click to expand...
Wewe huelewi, there will never be a negative value on that graph, the best you can hope for is a zero, when additional cases get added it starts going up again.

The only thing you can derive from such a graph if it is steep is that the testing capacity has increased, best case scenario if you follow the graph to the end they have tested everybody
 
Okiya said:
Click to expand...


Even with our little resources we can have thesample derived from key populations like medics, mass transport operators, motorists or from the patients pool, at least that offers a sample of the population that cuts across all races, genders and basically any other parameter necessary.

It seems like our response measures are dictated by non-experts, those pressers are superficial and ambigous by design to mask their inability to grasp the gravity of the task.
 
bigDog said:
Why do you need to sample when you have the real data? The graphs clearly shows a rapidly growing rate of infection. If we continue at this rate, how many people will be infected by next week?
Click to expand...
I think a better way to read the info of the graph is tracking the number of confirmed cases over a time period. That's all. @Okiya has a point. It doesnt show rate of infection at all because all that graph tells you is that on day 2 there were Y number of people infected. The same number of people were presumably infected on day 3 with an increase of x.
This is not enough to determine the rate of infections.
 
Okiya said:
Your graph is not telling us anything at all because it is targeted testing. It's like entering a matatu and doing a survey to find out how many people use matatus compared to other modes of transport.

Or can you kindly interpret for us what the graph means
Click to expand...
:) kwa nini kuwa hivyo, I remember back in college we had a maths lecturer called Dr Ali, though I never understood much of what he said in statistics but I always heard him talk about sample size and how that is important.
 
Burner said:
I think a better way to read the info of the graph is tracking the number of confirmed cases over a time period. That's all. @Okiya has a point. It doesnt show rate of infection at all because all that graph tells you is that on day 2 there were Y number of people infected. The same number of people were presumably infected on day 3 with an increase of x.
This is not enough to determine the rate of infections.
Click to expand...

Even hit ratio gives better and useful information than this graph.
 
Burner said:
I think a better way to read the info of the graph is tracking the number of confirmed cases over a time period. That's all. @Okiya has a point. It doesnt show rate of infection at all because all that graph tells you is that on day 2 there were Y number of people infected. The same number of people were presumably infected on day 3 with an increase of x.
This is not enough to determine the rate of infections.
Click to expand...

I agree, it does not show rate of growth. @Okiya I was wrong on that one.
 
Last edited:
bigDog said:
I agree, it does not show rate of growth. @Okiya was wrong on that one.
Click to expand...

Where was I wrong? I told you that graph tells nothing other than the number of people identified as positive.

You cannot and should not use that graph to know whether we are flattening the curve. Testing 500 people a day?? No way!!!
 
Okiya said:
Where was I wrong? I told you that graph tells nothing other than the number of people identified as positive.

You cannot and should not use that graph to know whether we are flattening the curve. Testing 500 people a day?? No way!!!
Click to expand...

A typo. I meant to say I was wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top