Currently Online 
jason1637 said:
NYC is ~21% Long Island ~16% Westchester ~11% Upstate NY ~3% Blacks ~22% Latinos ~22% Other ~22% Whites ~9% Asians ~7% He also said that the State has not counted at home deaths into the 15k deaths. So with bursing home and hospital deaths the rate of death is 0.5% based on the antibody test right now. Will probably end up being more than that when all the deaths from homes and the deaths still happening at hospitals and nursing homes have been accounted for. |
I found the article which suggest as many as 2.7 million New Yorkers have already had the virus.
It also says the the virus must have been circulating since early Februari.
That's a date range of 82 days, including today.
It's mathematically possible if at least 12 people were already infected Februari 1st, then unhampered growth all the way to today would make it reach 2.7 million people today. However these anti body tests are from people already done and over with the disease, can't have anti bodies until after the incubation time thus substract at least 5 days from when the tests were taken. Say it only took a week to take all those blood samples and get the analyzed, so let's substract 8 days from the 82 (5 incubation and 3 for mid point in testing), 76 days to let it grow.
New Yorkers must really suck at social distancing, or it's more infectious and R0 of 2.2 is incorrect. The math says at least 26 actively infected people must have been walking around in NYC on Februari 1st to make this possible. It's possible, yet either the R0 of 2.2 is wrong and the virus is far more infectious or New Yorkers really suck at social distancing and all the measures did absolutely nothing at all.
https://www.iheartradio.ca/610cktb/news/covid-19-82-yr-old-woman-is-new-york-s-first-coronavirus-death-1.10755441
The [first covid19] victim was an 82-year-old woman who passed away at a New York City hospital after being admitted on March 3rd.
That was reported on March 14th. If it was already spreading since early Februari, then why did it take so long for the first death to appear? Perhaps earlier deaths went undetected like in California.
https://globalnews.ca/news/6856758/coronavirus-california-early-deaths/
Two people with the coronavirus died in California as much as three weeks before the U.S. reported its first death from the disease in late February
Ok lets look at the test method
State researchers sampled blood from the approximately 3,000 people they had tested over two days, including about 1,300 in New York City, at grocery and big-box stores.
3000, decent sample size, however that's not a random sample. That's testing people that still go out to stores. People that are more at risk of exposure vs those staying at home, having done their shopping earlier or get their food delivered. Also chances are you will end up testing those that frequent the stores more often vs those that do a single run to minimize exposure. I also assume it was voluntary, and those that are more careful will naturally avoid participating.
What's the purpose of this test
“It is a way to say this person had the disease and they can go back into the work force,” Dr. Zucker said. “A strong test like we have can tell you that you have antibodies.”
So, we're going to give people immunity arm bands to clear them for work? I'm not quite seeing how this will play out in reality.
Plus:
But he cautioned that the length of any such immunity remained unknown. “The amount of time, we need to see. We don’t know that yet,” he said, adding, “They will last a while.”
A while... Not sure I can find that date on my calendar :)
Biased sample, math that doesn't fit very well, suggesting its far more contagious than we thought and all our current measures are for nothing, only raising more questions. It's good to do these tests, but make it a random sample at least ugh.
Essay Pro