John2290 said:
14% is really good news. I was half expecting these tests to come out at something stupid like 5%. This is celebration worthy news if the it holds true with more testing and with 3000 people in that pool, I can't see why it shouldn't stay at that general %, maybe even edge higher. I wanna see what that percentage is for the city alone, It's gotta be waaaay higher. Fingers crossed for something ober 30%. I mean at 30% you can't get a second wave bigger than the first if the population cap is on the lower end, hell, New York is a big state landwise, the city might show something closer to half than closer to the 14%. |
And that apparently was an igG test, and these particular antibodies take a while to produce. Conceivably, the number of people who have been infected could be significantly higher than this at the moment of testing.
Of course, the question of whether this is an accurate sample (for instance, you could be testing particularly exposed people... but then, it's doubtful you're testing more than one per household, where cases will tend to cluster), and which is the percentage of false positives and false negatives (although it might be assuring to know the latter seems more common), remain.
