Earlier I wrote
SCC has added another page of data. Among the tables there is Cases by Method of Transmission. Of the 7795 cases, only 5145 are classified (updated 7/20):
362 7.0% Outbreak associated (LTCFs?)
1050 20.5% Contact to a Case
37 0.7% Travel
3696 71.7% Unknown/Presumed Community Spread
Let me be clear. There is no verbiage that indicates these numbers come directly from contact tracing. I would guess these are from questions posed to new positive cases. I (and others here) make the assumption that if contact tracers had previously contacted the new case, the person would have classified it as "contact to a case" even if they didn't know who was the case.
6 days later: (updated 7/26) 6398 (up 1253) of 9041 cases (up 1246)
445 7.0% Outbreak associated (up 83)
1288 20.1% Contact to a case (up 238)
38 0.6% Travel (up 1)
4627 72.3% Unknown/Presumed Community Spread (up 931)
Of the 1253 cases newly categorized,
83 6.6% Outbreak associated
238 19.0% Contact to a case
1 0.1% Travel
931 74.3% Unknown/Presumed Community Spread
This seems disappointing for contact tracing to be able to control the spread much.
As I've said before, I'd think spread within households would make contact to a case be more than 20%!
(Another possibility is that symptomatic household members of positive cases are NOT being tested and so not giving this info. If this is true, the incidence of cases is far higher than reflected in the positive case numbers.)
I'd love to have a Q&A with the SCC PHD about contact tracing.
SCC has added another page of data. Among the tables there is Cases by Method of Transmission. Of the 7795 cases, only 5145 are classified (updated 7/20):
362 7.0% Outbreak associated (LTCFs?)
1050 20.5% Contact to a Case
37 0.7% Travel
3696 71.7% Unknown/Presumed Community Spread
Let me be clear. There is no verbiage that indicates these numbers come directly from contact tracing. I would guess these are from questions posed to new positive cases. I (and others here) make the assumption that if contact tracers had previously contacted the new case, the person would have classified it as "contact to a case" even if they didn't know who was the case.
6 days later: (updated 7/26) 6398 (up 1253) of 9041 cases (up 1246)
445 7.0% Outbreak associated (up 83)
1288 20.1% Contact to a case (up 238)
38 0.6% Travel (up 1)
4627 72.3% Unknown/Presumed Community Spread (up 931)
Of the 1253 cases newly categorized,
83 6.6% Outbreak associated
238 19.0% Contact to a case
1 0.1% Travel
931 74.3% Unknown/Presumed Community Spread
This seems disappointing for contact tracing to be able to control the spread much.
As I've said before, I'd think spread within households would make contact to a case be more than 20%!
(Another possibility is that symptomatic household members of positive cases are NOT being tested and so not giving this info. If this is true, the incidence of cases is far higher than reflected in the positive case numbers.)
I'd love to have a Q&A with the SCC PHD about contact tracing.
- Do they consider contact tracing, by its effects so far, to be effective & efficient at reducing spread?
- Why are so many cases are being considered community spread, apparently signifying that they weren't being alerted by contact tracing?
Lack of cooperation? COVID-19 is primarily NOT spread by close contacts? Widespread undetected cases? Is this info being collected from new cases before they are being contacted as a result of contact tracing of their infectors (ie, contact tracing is too slow to be effective)?
- The "contact to a case" numbers are so low that it implies there is almost no spread in households. Is that true, or is something else going on?