1 in 5 people tested in New York City had antibodies for the coronavirus

Jan 4, 2020
46
12
55
So probably 20% of those tested were infected. Immunity aside, do we know how many of those NOT tested have been infected? Are they toughing it out at home? Are they dying in the streets or with erroneous diagnoses? Are only the symptomatic still being tested? Are those tested a representative sample? -- e.g., does their plucky appearance at grocery stores and willingness to be tested perhaps indicate that they are LESS likely to come up positive than the population as a whole? I am not a scientist. I definitely am not a statistician. I'm just an old retiree trying to make sense of the data, recommendations, and numbers that are coming at us. I'm not part of the problem (I've been in isolation since Day One in CA); I just want to be part of the solution by requesting explanations for us in the masses in words of one or two syllables.
 
Apr 3, 2020
4
1
15
Also not A knowledge giant but I am older and my past seems to make me think of life when Measles and Mumps was just A great way to get out of school as A 3rd grader. My point is this, we all were in the same classrooms so we were all exposed yet only A few actually got the cool bumps and swollen cheeks while the rest went on with school.
This virus we get some of us and others will never know they had it.If Trump had not acted when he did it would have probably been nasty. His actions bought us time to let those with the skills to prepare and while we will be damaged in our billfolds our lives will probably adjust and move on.
 
Apr 27, 2020
1
0
10
So probably 20% of those tested were infected. Immunity aside, do we know how many of those NOT tested have been infected? Are they toughing it out at home? Are they dying in the streets or with erroneous diagnoses? Are only the symptomatic still being tested? Are those tested a representative sample? -- e.g., does their plucky appearance at grocery stores and willingness to be tested perhaps indicate that they are LESS likely to come up positive than the population as a whole? I am not a scientist. I definitely am not a statistician. I'm just an old retiree trying to make sense of the data, recommendations, and numbers that are coming at us. I'm not part of the problem (I've been in isolation since Day One in CA); I just want to be part of the solution by requesting explanations for us in the masses in words of one or two syllables.
Wanda,

The idea of random sampling or testing is to capture the most diverse subset of people possible. This should, if done correctly, mean that the subset very closely resembles the general population not being tested. With this said we should be able to extrapolate that up to 20% or those living in NYC have had the virus and recovered. Now as for toughing it out or misdiagnosis, I doubt that either of these things are happening with any regularity. There is a ton of evidence coming in that points to infection without symptoms, or with extremely minor nearly unnoticeable symptoms, so that I suspect a great majority of these people never even knew they had the virus in the first place.

Bottom line, between 50 and 85 people have the virus and never know it for every one that has it bad enough to seek treatment. The reason the governor brings up not knowing if the antibodies stop a person from reinfection is because people like me are watching the antibody statistics very intently. Antibodies are our safeguard against this thing so if they do what they are supposed to, stop reinfection, we are a quarter of the way to herd immunity (the virus can't spread because people who are introduced to the virus destroy it with their immune response and thus fail to pass it to someone else. We are essentially 1/4 of the way to this thing running its course without a vaccination. And with the exponential growth rate, even slowed with precautions, In my opinion that means we are a few short months from getting things back to normal.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

Latest posts