The CardBoard
Fruitvale - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: Emergency (https://thecardboard.org/board/forumdisplay.php?fid=11)
+--- Forum: Covid-19 (https://thecardboard.org/board/forumdisplay.php?fid=12)
+--- Thread: Fruitvale (/showthread.php?tid=20655)



Fruitvale - akiddoc - 10-16-2020

https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/UCSF-COVID-19-study-fruitvale-latino-mayan-15653583.php

Many, many of my patients live there, although the clinic is actually in Eastmont, which might be even worse.


RE: Fruitvale - M T - 10-18-2020

Follow the link to get better data
Quote:During the two-day event in late September, a total of 1,099 individuals received nose swab tests – 955 adults and 144 children. In addition, another 859 antibody (blood) tests were given – 803 to adults and 56 to children.

The nose swab tests revealed that 39 individuals (29 adults and 10 children) tested positive for COVID-19 infection on PCR-based tests. Further, 78 adults tested positive for the COVID-19 antibody as did six children, indicating past COVID-19 infection.

UCSF, in conjunction with local community groups, offered free, voluntary COVID-19 testing ... in Fruitvale, a corner of Alameda County that has had the highest rates of COVID.

The article that the OP posted claims the positive results in the 1099 individuals as showing "active infection".  I believe it shows active or recent infection.

When we considered the Stanford antibody study, we questioned how word of the test was spread and how the selection of individuals was done, and therefore should the results be considered representative of the community where the tests were run.

As best I can tell, there is no claim (at least by UCSF) that the people tested were representative of the community so the statistics could be applied to the community.  However, in the press release and news article, the statistics are presented as if they do apply.   It sounds like they took whoever showed up & wanted to be tested.   I see no mention of how the decision was made to test for antibodies versus doing a PCR test, but the wording suggests it was one or the other, not both.

Did you notice that the ratio of positive tests can be considered this way?
PCR % positive Antibody % positiveRatio positive Antibody/PCR
Adults3.0%9.1%3.0
Children6.9%10.7%1.6

For this sample, the children appear to have twice the rate of current/recent infection as the adults, and also appear to be getting infections more recently than the adults.   Could this be an effect of school restarting?


lex24 - lex24 - 10-18-2020

Schools aren’t open in Oakland.