Soaring Contest and Coronavirus

Question: The Seniors contest was held in FL a few weeks ago employing rules to reduce group gatherings and attempts to maintain social distancing. Just for informational purposes, has there been any reports of any of the contestants, crews, organizational people, volunteers, etc., being tested positive or having any health issues associated with the corona virus during of after the contest?
Boise Pilot

Jim Lee came down with presumed case on his drive home, per report from his wife.

On Friday, April 17, 2020 at 4:20:09 PM UTC-4, Tony wrote:
Jim Lee came down with presumed case on his drive home, per report from his wife.

From my understanding this case finally turned out to be positive, please correct me if I am wrong. The test has a 50% capacity of being wrong positive and negative.

Bob Youngblood wrote on 4/17/2020 3:22 PM:
On Friday, April 17, 2020 at 4:20:09 PM UTC-4, Tony wrote:
Jim Lee came down with presumed case on his drive home, per report from his wife.

From my understanding this case finally turned out to be positive, please correct me if I am wrong. The test has a 50% capacity of being wrong positive and negative.

A test that is wrong 50% of the time can be replaced with a coin toss.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to email me)
- "A Guide to Self-Launching Sailplane Operation"
https://sites.google.com/site/motorg...ad-the-guide-1

A test that is wrong 50% of the time can be replaced with a coin toss.

Right, and one that is 90% wrong for a yes/no question is highly valued.

On Friday, April 17, 2020 at 5:44:58 PM UTC-5, Eric Greenwell wrote:
Bob Youngblood wrote on 4/17/2020 3:22 PM:
On Friday, April 17, 2020 at 4:20:09 PM UTC-4, Tony wrote:
Jim Lee came down with presumed case on his drive home, per report from his wife.

From my understanding this case finally turned out to be positive, please correct me if I am wrong. The test has a 50% capacity of being wrong positive and negative.

A test that is wrong 50% of the time can be replaced with a coin toss.

--


Tea leaves would work.

They sued Sister Cleo for having a batting average less than that and put her out of business.

A test that is wrong 50% of the time can be replaced with a coin toss.


Not true actually, a test with a 50% chance of being wrong can be quite useful.

Suppose 2% of the population has the disease. Take a test that has 100% chance of positive if you do have it, and 50% chance of positive if you don't have it. It tells the 2 people who do have it they have it, and it tells one other healthy person he has it too. Three people stay home, 97 go soaring in perfect safety.

Take a test that has 100% chance of negative if you don't have it, but 50% chance of positive if you do have it. 98 people are correctly cleared, 1 person is incorrectly cleared, 1 stays home. Well, we got half the sick people out of the population and reduced the reproduction rate by half.

John Cochrane.

John Cochrane wrote on 4/17/2020 8:22 PM:

A test that is wrong 50% of the time can be replaced with a coin toss.


Not true actually, a test with a 50% chance of being wrong can be quite useful.

Suppose 2% of the population has the disease. Take a test that has 100% chance of positive if you do have it, and 50% chance of positive if you don't have it. It tells the 2 people who do have it they have it, and it tells one other healthy person he has it too. Three people stay home, 97 go soaring in perfect safety.

Take a test that has 100% chance of negative if you don't have it, but 50% chance of positive if you do have it. 98 people are correctly cleared, 1 person is incorrectly cleared, 1 stays home. Well, we got half the sick people out of the population and reduced the reproduction rate by half.

John Cochrane.

Bob's description of the test seem to indicate it was wrong 50% of the time for
positive people, and wrong 50% of the time for negative people, so your results
would always be 50% positive, regardless of the actual percentage of positive people.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to email me)
- "A Guide to Self-Launching Sailplane Operation"
https://sites.google.com/site/motorg...ad-the-guide-1

On Friday, April 17, 2020 at 8:22:13 PM UTC-7, John Cochrane wrote:
A test that is wrong 50% of the time can be replaced with a coin toss.


Not true actually, a test with a 50% chance of being wrong can be quite useful.

Suppose 2% of the population has the disease. Take a test that has 100% chance of positive if you do have it, and 50% chance of positive if you don't have it. It tells the 2 people who do have it they have it, and it tells one other healthy person he has it too. Three people stay home, 97 go soaring in perfect safety.

Take a test that has 100% chance of negative if you don't have it, but 50% chance of positive if you do have it. 98 people are correctly cleared, 1 person is incorrectly cleared, 1 stays home. Well, we got half the sick people out of the population and reduced the reproduction rate by half.

John Cochrane.

John, I'm afraid I don't understand the first part of your example. If you test 100 people with a test that has 50% false positives, and 2 actually have the disease, you will get 51 positive results - the two that have it and half of the remaining 98.

Fortunately, the coronavirus test is much more accurate than Bob suggests. The main problem with it is its scarcity.

On Friday, April 17, 2020 at 6:22:27 PM UTC-4, Bob Youngblood wrote:
On Friday, April 17, 2020 at 4:20:09 PM UTC-4, Tony wrote:
Jim Lee came down with presumed case on his drive home, per report from his wife.

From my understanding this case finally turned out to be positive, please correct me if I am wrong. The test has a 50% capacity of being wrong positive and negative.

I just spoke with someone who stated that his test was still negative.