Would expect that more in tomorrow and Mondays numbers to reflect Saturday and Sunday testing though.
Resource COVID19 V - The Info Thread
- Thread starter Biggie
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Would expect that more in tomorrow and Mondays numbers to reflect Saturday and Sunday testing though.
- Sep 16, 2006
- 35,878
- 35,484
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Felt no side effects with either of my first two shots but my booster... yikes. pain down my whole arm, swelling in my arm pit (lymph node apparently) and had body aches for a couple days, only just subsided today. Imagine if I had the real thing. I'd be a statistic I reckon. I'll get every jab recommended from here on.
Good news - RAT was a false positive!
I know there's a lot of reports that cases are in reality higher than reported due to asymptomatic cases, people not testing etc, but I wonder how much that is offset by false positive RATs?
How does that work now? Did she report the RAT or wanted to wait for PCR first?
If I got a positive RAT I wouldn't bother doing the PCR, and I doubt I'm alone there. So could be extra cases being reported.
Whoa! I thought they were something like 99.7% accurate for positive results!
Lots of false negatives from a variety of reasons like people not doing them correctly but it is supposed to be very hard to get a false positive
She did report the RAT. Positive RAT result will be overwritten by the negative PCR result in the WA Health systems.
And you're absolutely right, most people won't bother. Only reason she also went do get a PCR is she's a teacher and covid is wiping them out, so she wanted to be 100% certain. It was also a very faint line but I don't know if that matters.
Forward Press
Hall of Famer
Isn't that figure for people with symptoms like coughs and shortness of breath? If you have no or slight symptoms RATs are a hazardous guess.
The doctors I've talked to have mentioned loads of situations of positive RATs and negative PCRs - basically, a RAT is a preliminary test with large inaccuracy ranges while PCRs are far more sensitive and accurate. The key reason why RATs are important is because they give quick results and can effectively confirm you have COVID if you are displaying all the symptoms - if you are coughing your lungs out and get a positive RAT, it's a safe assumption you have COVID.
Makes sense, wife had a sore throat but more scratchy than a full blown nightmare (sore throats are something I cannot handle) but had no other symptoms.
kane249
Wibble
- Oct 27, 2006
- 52,169
- 68,925
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- Sth Freo, Liverpool, Chicago Bulls
8910 new cases
6 new deaths, 5 were historic
219 in hospital, 6 in ICU
49,796 active COVID cases in WA.
6 new deaths, 5 were historic
219 in hospital, 6 in ICU
49,796 active COVID cases in WA.
Forward Press
Hall of Famer
Still remarkably stable and manageable numbers. Soft landing here we come.
touches wood
- Jun 27, 2006
- 12,869
- 4,032
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- Lakers,Internazionale, Man U
the fact that out of that 8900 cases only 300 additional active cases shows we are now at the peak
- Apr 30, 2015
- 13,627
- 24,453
- AFL Club
- West Coast
For those of you who have recovered from Covid, does WA Health contact you to confirm that you have tested negative? (assuming you reported your positive result in the first place)
I have recovered. You don't have to test again after the initial positive (mine was a RAT - my wife tested positive on PCR for work, so I didn't bother getting a PCR as it would be a waste). You isolate for 7 days from test date and you can end isolation if you don't have symptoms. No test required.
WA health doesn't do s**t in terms of contact. I recieved an automated text with a questionnaire to see if I had been to any high risk places (hospital, aged care etc). My wife had due to work, so she had a phone call asking about this only. I received nothing. That was the extent of the contact.
It is all an honesty system, which is fair enough, because most people will obey the rules. There is limited risk from people who don't, as COVID is everywhere anyway. We must be getting close to a point where a lot of restrictions won't be needed due to the numbers of people already exposed.
- Apr 30, 2015
- 13,627
- 24,453
- AFL Club
- West Coast
I was wondering how the govt knows the number of active cases. They must just assume that at 7days an infected person is deemed recovered, then they minus the death toll and voila, active case number.
My experience is a little different to Rowan18. The Health Dept certainly rang me the day after I tested +ve. I think there were around 3,500 who tested +ve the day I did so I thought that it was a mighty effort for them to be in touch the next day. I guess that the numbers are just to great now for that level of contact. As Rowan18 said after 7 days you are free to leave isolation provided that you have no symptoms but there was no contact from the Health Dept other than a text on my last day of isolation saying I was ok to leave isolation the next day (provided that I was free of symptoms). So, yeah, I guess that the Health Dept assume that after 7 days you are a recovery.
I was told not to do a test prior to leaving iso (as would be required if I was only close contact) as I would most likely still test +ve for the next month or so.
kane249
Wibble
- Oct 27, 2006
- 52,169
- 68,925
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- Sth Freo, Liverpool, Chicago Bulls
9,754 new cases overnight
208 people in hospital, 6 in ICU
3 more historical deaths added
50,957 active cases total
208 people in hospital, 6 in ICU
3 more historical deaths added
50,957 active cases total
Miguel Sanchez
(Unique injury) TBC
Are we going to start to see those numbers going down soon?
Restrictions easing at peak woo!
Hospital and ICU have been steady though.
- Jun 26, 2011
- 3,344
- 7,319
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- Perth Wildcats, Perth Lynx
Always easier to see these things as a graph I reckon. (blue dots = 7 day moving average)
Miguel Sanchez
(Unique injury) TBC
Forward Press
Hall of Famer
Case numbers aren't really that important, there is no doubt the real case numbers are far higher than official figures anyway - the numbers in hospital are what matters, and they seem to be steady.
Yeah true, it's all about hospitalisations and ICU numbers now.
Similar threads
- Locked
