The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
21% of NYC Grocery Shoppers Have Antibodies
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From the New York Times:

1 in 5 New Yorkers May Have Had Covid-19, Antibody Tests Suggest

By J. David Goodman and Michael Rothfeld
April 23, 2020, Updated 6:35 p.m. ET

One of every five New York City residents tested positive for antibodies to the coronavirus, according to preliminary results described by Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo on Thursday that suggested that the virus had spread far more widely than known.

If the pattern holds, the results from random testing of 3,000 people raised the tantalizing prospect that many New Yorkers — as many as 2.7 million, the governor said — who never knew they had been infected had already encountered the virus, and survived. Mr. Cuomo also said that such wide infection might mean that the death rate was far lower than believed.

While the reliability of some early antibody tests has been widely questioned, researchers in New York have worked in recent weeks to develop and validate their own antibody tests, with federal approval. …

In New York City, about 21 percent tested positive for coronavirus antibodies during the state survey.

Most estimates of the herd immunity level would therefore put NYC at about 1/3rd of the way there, which is substantial. On the other hand, NYC, when it’s functioning, doesn’t function as an isolated herd, but as the crossroads of the world. So it’s hard to see how herd immunity short of virtually 100% could work for NYC without the virus dying out in the rest of the world.

The rate was about 17 percent on Long Island, nearly 12 percent in Westchester and Rockland Counties and less than 4 percent in the rest of the state.

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.

So the respondents were out and about shopping. It would be nice to know if they collected any data from a survey of people in the study to see how their behavior compared to a survey of people online.

… Dr. Howard A. Zucker, the state health commissioner, said the lab had set a high bar for determining positive results … He said that while concerns about some tests on the market were valid, the state’s test was reliable enough to determine immunity — and, possibly, send people back to the office.

“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.”

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.” …

Dr. Demetre C. Daskalakis, the city’s top official for disease control, wrote in an email alert on Wednesday that such tests “may produce false negative or false positive results,” pointing to “significant voids” in using the science to pinpoint immunity. …

Dr. Michael Osterholm, an infectious disease expert at the University of Minnesota, praised the overall intent of New York’s study, but said the results in this case probably skew to a higher estimate than is real because a survey of grocery store shoppers in a pandemic would not be representative.

A small test of people out on the street in the Chelsea barrio of Boston found 1/3rd infected.

The sampling may disproportionately include those who have either already had the illness, or those who naturally tend to go out more and so are more likely to be exposed to the virus, he said.

Say there are 300 people in NYC:

A. 100 go grocery shopping 3 times per week and are 24% infected.

A. 100 go grocery shopping once per week and are 8% infected.

B. 100 never go grocery shopping and have what they need delivered and are 1% infected.

So, a random sample of grocery shoppers would be 75% group A, 25% group B, and 0% group C, adding up to 21% infected.

But the actual population is about 11% infected.

Two warnings: I made up all these numbers and I did the arithmetic in my head.

It would miss children, teenagers and older adults who may be sheltering in place.

“It’s not a criticism. It’s more of a comment that we have to be careful about interpreting supermarket customers as a representative sample when the state was in lockdown,” he said.

State officials said the test had been calibrated to err on the side of producing false negatives — to miss some who may have antibodies — rather than false positives, which would suggest a person had coronavirus antibodies when they did not. …

Mr. Cuomo on Thursday did not talk about any potential for immunity among those previously infected.

But he did suggest, based on the survey, that if as many as 2.7 million New Yorkers had the virus, the death rate in New York from Covid-19 would most likely be far lower than previously believed, possibly 0.5 percent of those infected.

More than 15,000 people have died of the virus in the state, a figure that does not include an additional 5,000 people in New York City who were never tested but were presumed to have died from the disease.

As of yesterday, New York City was at 15,740 official CV deaths, which include 5,000 who weren’t tested for CV. The population of New York City was 8.4 million people in 2018, so 15,740/(.21)*8,400,000 = 0.9% Infection Fatality Rate in NYC if this 21% Infection Rate is representative.

Now there are two time related problems.

First, antibodies don’t develop immediately, so the cumulative Infection Rate would likely be higher than the 21%. That would tend to lower the final IFR.

Second, and pushing in the opposite direction, not everybody who will die of an existing infection has already died. That would push the final IFR higher.

How to balance out the two factors is beyond me at present.

Somebody needs to figure how many more of the currently infected are likely to die in NYC. There are currently about 15,000 people in New York State hospitalized with CV.

If NYC is 1/3rd of the way to herd immunity, then 3 times the current 15,740 deaths would be about 47,000 deaths in NYC. (But maybe the equation would be more like 3 times 25,000 or 75,000 total deaths.)

NYC is about 1/40th of the U.S. population, so 40 times 47,000 deaths is almost 1.9 million.

… Mr. Cuomo said antibody testing results, along with hospitalization numbers, would influence the state’s reopening strategy, noting that the number of people being hospitalized was still too high to consider easing restrictions.

The state’s plan would involve tracking infections as restrictions are loosened on gatherings and businesses. Antibody testing would be used, Mr. Cuomo said, for identifying coronavirus survivors who can donate convalescent plasma — the part of the blood that contains antibodies.

Plasma treatment is quite promising, although I’m not aware of it being proven yet to work in this case. The challenging logistics of it are easier to make work later in an epidemic when there are large numbers of recovered blood donors.

Governor Cuomo tweeted demographic statistics for the whole state (in which 13.9% had antibodies):

Percent positive by demographic:

Female: 12%
Male: 15.9%

Asian: 11.7%
Black: 22.1%
Latino/Hispanic: 22.5%
Multi/None/Other: 22.8%
White: 9.1%

(Weighted results)

Upstate New York is much whiter than New York City, so it’s hard to tell offhand how much this is a race difference vs. how much it’s a difference of geography.

 
Hide 150 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Anonymous[367] • Disclaimer says:

    “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.”

    So 1300 of the 3000 were out and about shopping. Where and who were the other people?

    I think all 3000 were at grocery and big box stores. Of the 3000 at grocery and big box store in NYS, they tested 1300 specifically in NYC grocery and big box stores.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Thanks.
  2. @Anonymous
    “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.”

    So 1300 of the 3000 were out and about shopping. Where and who were the other people?

    I think all 3000 were at grocery and big box stores. Of the 3000 at grocery and big box store in NYS, they tested 1300 specifically in NYC grocery and big box stores.

    Thanks.

    • Replies: @viennacapitalist
    "...Plasma treatment is quite promising, although I’m not aware of it being proven yet to work in this case.."

    Yesterday there was an article in an Austrian newspaper about how antibody serum worked on a 36 year old male who, due to an immune deficiency, could not produce antibodies which sounds like a hard case. Nevertheless, after 1 week he recovered.
    But it is odd that you do not read more about it...
  3. Interesting.

    My in-laws live in NYC.
    Some of them haven’t left their apartment in over a month. They get food delivered. They are of the opinion that avoiding crowded elevators and streets and markets decreases their chances of getting Coronavirus.

    If 1/5 of the shoppers in markets are positive, they may be correct.

    That also tends to cast doubt as to whether 1/5 of NYC residents have Coronavirus. Shutins weren’t tested.

    • Agree: Black-hole creator
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Say there are 300 people in NYC:

    A. 100 go grocery shopping 3 times per week.

    A. 100 go grocery shopping once per week

    B. 100 never go grocery shopping and have what they need delivered.

    So, a random sample of grocery shoppers would be 75% group A, 25% group B, and 0% group C.

    , @Kaz
    Do shutins exist in NYC? Kind of a bad place to be a shut in.
    , @Redman
    You sound rather asperger effected. No offense.
  4. PiltdownBrother2 lives alone in a Manhattan high rise apartment and is in his eighth decade.

    He says it has been almost impossible for him to avoid contact with other New York City residents for more than a couple of days at a time, even though he hasn’t used public transportation in six weeks and has tried to be very careful.

    In the City, not all supermarkets and grocery stores deliver. The amount of groceries and supplies he can carry home in shopping bags by hand is limited, necessitating more than one trip a week out of his building.

    Also, like in many residential high-rises in that city, laundry facilities are communal-buildings have a few washer-dryers in a laundry room on each floor, or, in his building, more than a dozen in a basement laundry room. He inevitably has contact with neighbors down there, and his clothing goes in the same machines that others have used.

    I’m not surprised so many people in New York City have antibodies to Covid-19. Despite the lockdown, they’ve likely been exposed to each others germs in many ways that would likely not be possible in the living arrangements typical in most of the rest of America.

    • Replies: @epebble
    Why didn't he leave NYC and go to upstate NY or other less crowded place? (This is before shutdown started) . I am guessing, since he is in a Manhattan high rise, that he can afford to do that.
    , @Keypusher
    I’ve had very limited contact. I’m in Washington Heights in northern Manhattan. I take two long walks (or one walk and one run) a day. We grocery shop in Jersey once a week. Not hard to maintain social distances. I feel pretty safe.
    , @Redman
    Absolutely. I got the CV on 3/10 and my 78 y/o father who lives on the UWS got it a few days later. Folks in NY have been cagey for a month. It’s not like we’re all Tom Hanks. People here have it but aren’t about to brag about it. It’s all on the down low.

    If you live in LA it’s probably something to crow about because it’s so rare. But not here in NY. The rate of infection is likely much higher than what’s being reported. New Yorkers rarely vote and there ain’t no way they’re volunteering for blood tests. So just assume infection rates are a lot higher than reported.
    , @Prester John
    It is not at all surprising that NYC turned out to be the epicenter of this thing. It is the most densely populated city north of the Rio Grande. With 8.4 million people (probably more) living shoulder-to-shoulder (so to speak), many if not most of whom availing themselves of the largest mass transportation system in the Western Hemisphere, given how contagious the virus is the chances of mass infection are for all intents and purposes 100%. Thus, level of developmental immunity which appears to have followed comes as no surprise.

    Slightly OT but given the obvious connection with population density, I wonder if this phenomenon will eventually trigger mass movement to less densely populated environs. Could be interesting.

  5. A couple comments based on what I learned from reading about Sweden.

    First, the herd immunity is, is as people know, dependent on Ro which is importantly dependent on suppression measures. Therefore, it is possible to drive down Ro substantially, but not less than 1.0, by minimal and sustainable social distancing ala Sweden. So NYC may be much closer to a sustainable herd immunity as long as the Ro is kept down by mild social distancing.

    Also the Swedish feel that the IFR for the first cohort of fatalities will be much greater than future cohorts simply because the most vulnerable will tend to die first. Therefore, they believe the IFR will keep decreasing as time goes on. Based on this reasoning, you can’t just multiply the number of deaths times the remaining gap to achieve herd immunity to estimate total deaths to achieve herd immunity. It may be much less than that.That is why Sweden accepts that their current death rate is a bit higher, at this time, than other Scandinavian countries.

    The more I understand what Sweden is trying to do, the more impressed I become. They have come up with a brilliant approach (that would work with any western country) that does not require new medicines or vaccine, tracking programs, massive testing of virus or antibodies etc. And importantly limits damage to their freedom and economy.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    "Also the Swedish feel that the IFR for the first cohort of fatalities will be much greater than future cohorts simply because the most vulnerable will tend to die first."

    Why?

  6. @Paleo Liberal
    Interesting.

    My in-laws live in NYC.
    Some of them haven’t left their apartment in over a month. They get food delivered. They are of the opinion that avoiding crowded elevators and streets and markets decreases their chances of getting Coronavirus.

    If 1/5 of the shoppers in markets are positive, they may be correct.

    That also tends to cast doubt as to whether 1/5 of NYC residents have Coronavirus. Shutins weren’t tested.

    Say there are 300 people in NYC:

    A. 100 go grocery shopping 3 times per week.

    A. 100 go grocery shopping once per week

    B. 100 never go grocery shopping and have what they need delivered.

    So, a random sample of grocery shoppers would be 75% group A, 25% group B, and 0% group C.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    What was the middle one again ?

    Who gives a fuck about New York grocery shoppers.

    Ditch this bs where copying vague stats, anaysid from your old marketing days is big data.

    This is not informative nor interesting.
  7. @Paleo Liberal
    Interesting.

    My in-laws live in NYC.
    Some of them haven’t left their apartment in over a month. They get food delivered. They are of the opinion that avoiding crowded elevators and streets and markets decreases their chances of getting Coronavirus.

    If 1/5 of the shoppers in markets are positive, they may be correct.

    That also tends to cast doubt as to whether 1/5 of NYC residents have Coronavirus. Shutins weren’t tested.

    Do shutins exist in NYC? Kind of a bad place to be a shut in.

    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous
    Part of me hates NYC. But to be honest, I love it every time I go there.
    , @Paleo Liberal
    Shutins exist everywhere.

    Normally my in-laws aren’t shutins. In normal times they are out and about every day. But these are not normal times. They have some children and grandchildren living in their apartment with them, so they don’t get too lonely.
  8. If the virus is as contagious as claimed, all those high-rise apartment buildings are perfect incubators through ventilation vents. AFAIK, it was claimed that was how some high rises in Hong Kong were centers of infection.

    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous
    Nah.

    They talked about fecal plumes and apartment building spread in Hong Kong during the first SARS epidemic, but the living situation in Hong Kong is quite different from New York. You have people living on top of each other in Hong Kong and sharing the same bathrooms and kitchen spaces. New York is crowded, and I have only been a couple New York apartments, but I have never heard of people sharing kitchens and bathrooms in New York.
    , @Inverness
    Typically the (powered) ventilation in high-rise apartment buildings is exhaust-only. So it should actually help, not hurt. Elevators are another matter entirely. Along with laundry rooms, mail rooms, etc.
    , @The Last Real Calvinist

    AFAIK, it was claimed that was how some high rises in Hong Kong were centers of infection.

     

    Where did you get this idea? I live in Hong Kong, and I've heard nothing like this.

    Back in 2003 SARS spread in one residential tower because sewage from a leaking pipe was dripping into a fan, got aerosolized, and spread to other flats. (Yes, very disgusting.)

    But so far as I know, for COVID-19 there have been no such incidents.
    , @Buck Ransom
    A high percentage of NYC apartment buildings, being vintage structures, do not have the kind of air-recirculating central HVAC systems that you are picturing. Heating is provided via steam rising through pipes and venting through cast-iron radiators. Air conditioning is provided by the individual-room-size units mounted in windows, like the AC installed by Marilyn Monroe's smitten, single-for-the-summer downstairs neighbor in "The Seven-Year Itch."
  9. Anonymous[105] • Disclaimer says:

    The final accepted official death rate for the Witch Corona will be right down there with influenza.

    Also look for the patient zero date in America to keep getting pushed backward on the calendar.

    Also look for the final SARS2 (covid19) CDC website info page to be filled with weasle words —– just like SARS1.

    • Agree: BB753
    • Replies: @danand

    "Also look for the patient zero date in America to keep getting pushed backward on the calendar."
     
    #105, this poor woman was the 1st known victim of SARS-CoV-2 in the US. She was 57, and had not traveled outside the US for quite a while. She worked at LAM Research, a semiconductor equipment manufacturer; located across the freeway from the Tesla auto factory in Fremont California:

    https://flic.kr/p/2iTJFia
    , @danand

    "The final accepted official death rate for the Witch Corona will be right down there with influenza."
     
    #105, could be, but doesn't appear likely. In Sweden last year 505 people succumbed to influenza. So far SARS-CoV-2 has taken over 2000 there.
    , @AnotherDad

    The final accepted official death rate for the Witch Corona will be right down there with influenza.

     

    No it won't.

    Unless a) you mean population death rate AND b) there is a vaccine before next winter's flu season.

    This is the kind of abject stupidity you get from a few commenters here. The 50,000 odd US China virus deaths are indeed ballpark of a severe but not world beating flu year. But we're only at 50,000 because we stomped on this thing. Duh.

    Anyplace--towns in Diamond Princess, Northern Italy, some towns in Germany, NYC--this thing has gotten traction and tests show significant infection rate, there are also a bunch of deaths. Enough in many cases to far surpass any recent flu already--with lots of people still not infected.

    Totally on board with the argument that a lot--perhaps even most--of what was done was misguided even ridiculous. But this idea that this deal isn't considerably--maybe 10X--more lethal than recent flu doesn't square with the data.

  10. Anonymous[337] • Disclaimer says:
    @Steve Sailer
    Say there are 300 people in NYC:

    A. 100 go grocery shopping 3 times per week.

    A. 100 go grocery shopping once per week

    B. 100 never go grocery shopping and have what they need delivered.

    So, a random sample of grocery shoppers would be 75% group A, 25% group B, and 0% group C.

    What was the middle one again ?

    Who gives a fuck about New York grocery shoppers.

    Ditch this bs where copying vague stats, anaysid from your old marketing days is big data.

    This is not informative nor interesting.

    • Replies: @SunBakedSuburb
    "Who gives a fuck about New York grocery shoppers."

    Much attention is lavished on NYC by the media hive who live in NYC. It's already been said: if the NYC death-rate occurred in the intermountain states the story would be second or third below how New Yorkers feel about the death-rates in the intermountain states. NYC ceased being interesting in the mid-1980s. It's time to send NYC out on one of those Eskimo ice floes.
    , @Keypusher

    Who gives a fuck about New York grocery shoppers.
     
    I do, seeing that I am one. Who gives a fuck about you?
  11. @PiltdownMan
    PiltdownBrother2 lives alone in a Manhattan high rise apartment and is in his eighth decade.

    He says it has been almost impossible for him to avoid contact with other New York City residents for more than a couple of days at a time, even though he hasn't used public transportation in six weeks and has tried to be very careful.

    In the City, not all supermarkets and grocery stores deliver. The amount of groceries and supplies he can carry home in shopping bags by hand is limited, necessitating more than one trip a week out of his building.

    Also, like in many residential high-rises in that city, laundry facilities are communal-buildings have a few washer-dryers in a laundry room on each floor, or, in his building, more than a dozen in a basement laundry room. He inevitably has contact with neighbors down there, and his clothing goes in the same machines that others have used.

    I'm not surprised so many people in New York City have antibodies to Covid-19. Despite the lockdown, they've likely been exposed to each others germs in many ways that would likely not be possible in the living arrangements typical in most of the rest of America.

    Why didn’t he leave NYC and go to upstate NY or other less crowded place? (This is before shutdown started) . I am guessing, since he is in a Manhattan high rise, that he can afford to do that.

    • Replies: @PiltdownMan

    I am guessing, since he is in a Manhattan high rise, that he can afford to do that.
     
    He can't.
    , @Peterike
    “ I am guessing, since he is in a Manhattan high rise, that he can afford to do that.”

    New Yorkers spend an excessive portion of their income on rent. There’s not always much left over.
    , @R.G. Camara

    I am guessing, since he is in a Manhattan high rise, that he can afford to do that.
     
    Nope. Wrong. Most NYers spend a lot higher percentage of income on rent than people outside NY.

    I lived in NYC for more than a few years. I even snagged a couple of rent controlled/rent subsidized apartments---which means rents far below market value. But I had middle class jobs, as most people do in NYC (or below-middle class). I was paying more than 40-50% of my take home in rent.

    I remember a few relatives from outside NYC commenting that I spent more in rent than they did in mortgage and property taxes---and they lived in prosperous, high-income places.

    Most NYCers are very house-poor folks, especially compared to people outside the city. They spent a ton on rent. But NYC has a lot of free, cheap, or low-cost things you can do if you're smart or just observant, which is why a lot of young 20-something SWPL folks like living there, since they don't think about savings and can find those things to do. The parks are extensive and have a lot to do, the many, MANY museums can be found cheap or free, and lots of free concerts and movies in the park and parades to keep you occupied, as well as hipster bars with very cheap PBR/well whiskey deals.
    , @Inverness
    There are tons of public housing high-rises in NYC. Some low-income, some moderate income, etc. And if you didn't already own a second home, it was next to impossible to procure one in the region this year. Even if you had the money. Many other relevant issues have been covered in the media.
    , @ipc
    Why would you assume that he can just up and move to some other part of the country? What planet do you live on?
  12. @leterip
    A couple comments based on what I learned from reading about Sweden.

    First, the herd immunity is, is as people know, dependent on Ro which is importantly dependent on suppression measures. Therefore, it is possible to drive down Ro substantially, but not less than 1.0, by minimal and sustainable social distancing ala Sweden. So NYC may be much closer to a sustainable herd immunity as long as the Ro is kept down by mild social distancing.

    Also the Swedish feel that the IFR for the first cohort of fatalities will be much greater than future cohorts simply because the most vulnerable will tend to die first. Therefore, they believe the IFR will keep decreasing as time goes on. Based on this reasoning, you can't just multiply the number of deaths times the remaining gap to achieve herd immunity to estimate total deaths to achieve herd immunity. It may be much less than that.That is why Sweden accepts that their current death rate is a bit higher, at this time, than other Scandinavian countries.

    The more I understand what Sweden is trying to do, the more impressed I become. They have come up with a brilliant approach (that would work with any western country) that does not require new medicines or vaccine, tracking programs, massive testing of virus or antibodies etc. And importantly limits damage to their freedom and economy.

    “Also the Swedish feel that the IFR for the first cohort of fatalities will be much greater than future cohorts simply because the most vulnerable will tend to die first.”

    Why?

    • Replies: @utu
    Obviously this an utter nonsense. Only possible if you kept PFR higher for old people or you could just kill them all first and then certainly the IFR would be lower down the road. Are Swedes being fed such fairytales by their chief epidemiologist? I would not be surprised as he is desperate. 'leterip' is not the first Swede I have heard it from. The term front loading was used. Perhaps it comes from a Nordic Saga where bribing a dragon with a young virgin stops it from coming to town?
    , @Jamie12
    Sweden had several of its early outbreak concentrated to nursing homes for the elderly. If they can keep those institutions safe their death rate will probably start to flatten.
    , @leterip
    Steve, sorry I don't know the answer to your question. In the attached video of Sweden's semi-retired chief epidemiologist you will hear him state this at 10:00. Jamie12 might have a partial answer in that protection of people in nursing homes should get better as time goes on. But I think the Swede's have other basis for this belief as well.

    https://unherd.com/thepost/coming-up-epidemiologist-prof-johan-giesecke-shares-lessons-from-sweden/
  13. As of yesterday, New York City was at 15,740 official CV deaths, which include 5,000 who weren’t tested for CV. The population of New York City was 8.4 million people in 2018, so 15,740/(.21)*8,400,000 = 0.9% Infection Fatality Rate in NYC if this 21% Infection Rate is representative.

    Actually, the NYC “excess deaths” in just a recent six week period were over 19K, so the implied IFR from that naive calculation would probably be considerably north of 1.0%:

    https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/21/world/coronavirus-missing-deaths.html

    But as you emphasize, there are lots of complicating factors in the calculation.

    However, I think the methodology of this infection estimate in NYC is far superior to those ridiculous Santa Clara and LA studies associated with those Stanford people, and unsurprisingly, the results are vastly more plausible. After all, it looks like probably around 20K people have already died of the virus in NYC, so you’d expect high infection rates. The corresponding deaths in LA or Santa Clara are close to an order-of-magnitude too low for their supposed infection rates.

    • Replies: @newrouter
    >Actually, the NYC “excess deaths” in just a recent five week period were over 19K,<

    "Excessive deaths" now are reduced deaths in 6 months. A numbers game if you will. Because in 6 months you have to add in traffic deaths et al.

    , @Lowe
    Hey, where are all the NY deaths you said were likely? You said at one point there might be 10k per week.
    , @Hail
    Most of the excess deaths are now known to be deaths caused by the Panic itself and not by the virus. One example, as the Guardian recently reported, is the thousands of heart attack excess deaths that have been registered in London alone, all of whom they would have been able to save, all of whom were too terrified to seek treatment.

    This was a catastrophically bad reaction, laughably poor policy making, almost as if the leadership caste had all morphed into misanthropes. The Corona Reaction has already caused more deaths than it was supposed to prevent (to a historically unremarkable flu strain). And the worst is yet to come for the rest of us (recession, ongoing top-down disruption of lives, media-led hysteria ongoing bad for mental health of the whole).

  14. Nationwide: where is the corana chan outbreak amongst grocery workers?

    >There are few high-traffic businesses more densely populated than grocery stores. In fact, within the U.S. economy retail supermarkets have the highest foot traffic of any business sector in the entire economy; that’s just an empirical fact…. and the coronavirus impact increased that foot traffic by an average of 40 percent. Now, stop and think about this logically & apply a large dose of common sense. Think about human-to-human interface.<

    https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2020/04/20/common-sense-and-human-interface-georgia-governor-brian-kemp-announces-phased-reopening-of-business-starting-this-week/

    • Thanks: Hippopotamusdrome
    • Replies: @Hippopotamusdrome

    COVID-19 has killed roughly 30 grocery workers

    April 15, 2020

    the union had estimated at least 30 UFCW members had died from COVID-19

    The UFCW, which represents more than 900,000 members

     

    Apr 15 alleged Covid dead total USA: 28,596
    Apr 15 alleged Covid dead UFCW members: 30

    USA population: 329,559,000
    UFCW members: 900,000

    Apr 15 USA Covid death % = 00.0087%
    Apr 15 UFCW Covid death % = 00.0033%

  15. @Ron Unz

    As of yesterday, New York City was at 15,740 official CV deaths, which include 5,000 who weren’t tested for CV. The population of New York City was 8.4 million people in 2018, so 15,740/(.21)*8,400,000 = 0.9% Infection Fatality Rate in NYC if this 21% Infection Rate is representative.
     
    Actually, the NYC "excess deaths" in just a recent six week period were over 19K, so the implied IFR from that naive calculation would probably be considerably north of 1.0%:

    https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/21/world/coronavirus-missing-deaths.html

    But as you emphasize, there are lots of complicating factors in the calculation.

    However, I think the methodology of this infection estimate in NYC is far superior to those ridiculous Santa Clara and LA studies associated with those Stanford people, and unsurprisingly, the results are vastly more plausible. After all, it looks like probably around 20K people have already died of the virus in NYC, so you'd expect high infection rates. The corresponding deaths in LA or Santa Clara are close to an order-of-magnitude too low for their supposed infection rates.

    >Actually, the NYC “excess deaths” in just a recent five week period were over 19K,<

    "Excessive deaths" now are reduced deaths in 6 months. A numbers game if you will. Because in 6 months you have to add in traffic deaths et al.

    • Replies: @Hail

    "Excessive deaths" now are reduced deaths in 6 months
     
    "I am convinced that Corona mortality rate will not even show up as a peak in annual mortality." -- Dr Klaus Püschel, head of forensic medicine, Hamburg, early April
  16. Really ? When since the distance prehistoric past has there been any greater threat to the survival of our species than the scum that we have that have always elevated to the priesthood ? We have always had the option to be free but too fearful to grasp it .

  17. “Excessive deaths” now are reduced deaths in 6 months. A numbers game if you will. Because in 6 months you have to add in traffic deaths et al.

    Those tend to be low in NYC, for obvious reasons.

    Well, maybe not pedestrians. And squeegee men.

    And it’s not DC:

    • Replies: @Gary in Gramercy
    That woman is now the front-runner to be Joe Biden's running mate.
  18. In New York City, about 21 percent tested positive for coronavirus antibodies during the state survey…

    …less than 4 percent in the rest of the state.

    I was about to say that upstate’s rate is the square root of the city’s. But that would have been a schoolboy error. It’s actually the square– 1/25 to 1/5.

  19. “Plasma treatment is quite promising, although I’m not aware of it being proven yet to work in this case. The challenging logistics of it are easier to make work later in an epidemic when there are large numbers of recovered blood donors.”

    The plasma treatment seems to work pretty well, but again there is no open medical data. I have only seen several anecdotal reports from Europe. I imagine it is not easy to get in the States, you must be lucky or very well-connected. Given the reigning confusion everywhere I would not count on getting this cure, unfortunately. Easier to take up smoking as a proven prophylaxis.

  20. @Steve Sailer
    "Also the Swedish feel that the IFR for the first cohort of fatalities will be much greater than future cohorts simply because the most vulnerable will tend to die first."

    Why?

    Obviously this an utter nonsense. Only possible if you kept PFR higher for old people or you could just kill them all first and then certainly the IFR would be lower down the road. Are Swedes being fed such fairytales by their chief epidemiologist? I would not be surprised as he is desperate. ‘leterip’ is not the first Swede I have heard it from. The term front loading was used. Perhaps it comes from a Nordic Saga where bribing a dragon with a young virgin stops it from coming to town?

    • Disagree: LondonBob
    • Replies: @Mehen
    I’ve seen it referred to as the “Harvesting Hypothesis” among scientific types.
    , @gcochran
    Of course it is nonsense.
    , @TomSchmidt
    "or you could just kill them all first and then certainly the IFR would be lower down the road. "

    Data from NYC indicate most of the people who've died have been over 60, and >90% had co-morbidities (other iSteve post). This would seem to be the most vulnerable group. And the death rates there are high. But those would seem to be the easy kills for the virus. Since the original population had, say, 10% of people being old and with co-morbidities, and a larger percentage of those died, say 20% of them, then the new population might look something like this:
    If it was originally 1,000,000 people, it now has 975,000 people. 80,000 of them are the 10% from earlier, minus the 20% who died, and 895,000 of them survived of the 900,000 in population who weren't in the 10% old and comorbid group.

    If the same percentage of people die this time, you lose 4972 of the non-old, and 16,000 of the old. That works out to 2.15% of the population dying in the second round; you'd have to expect that the death number in the "old" group would be lower, because some number of them are already immune.

    Well, this is confused. I apologize for that. I guess the point remains: if a group with a higher death rate is killed off more in the first round, the second round will have fewer of those people available to kill, so their higher death rate will extend over a smaller number of people; a higher percentage of the people being infected in the second round will come from the smaller death rate group, so it HAS to drop the IFR for the second round, assuming the same percentages of both groups die in round #2.
  21. @epebble
    Why didn't he leave NYC and go to upstate NY or other less crowded place? (This is before shutdown started) . I am guessing, since he is in a Manhattan high rise, that he can afford to do that.

    I am guessing, since he is in a Manhattan high rise, that he can afford to do that.

    He can’t.

  22. @utu
    Obviously this an utter nonsense. Only possible if you kept PFR higher for old people or you could just kill them all first and then certainly the IFR would be lower down the road. Are Swedes being fed such fairytales by their chief epidemiologist? I would not be surprised as he is desperate. 'leterip' is not the first Swede I have heard it from. The term front loading was used. Perhaps it comes from a Nordic Saga where bribing a dragon with a young virgin stops it from coming to town?

    I’ve seen it referred to as the “Harvesting Hypothesis” among scientific types.

    • Replies: @utu
    Thanks. Harvesting hypothesis seems too be related but it is different to what Swedes call the "front loading". Harvesting hypothesis applies to when, say, pollution event may kill vulnerable people so during the next pollution event less people may die. It was observed during the 2003 heat wave in France when the following year they had lower mortality in summer then average. This idea or analogy does not apply to a single ongoing epidemic where "front loading" hypothesis postulates that IFR decreases with time because. If Sweden gets hit with another but similar epidemic next year the IFR could be lower because the subpopulation of vulnerable people was depleted by the previous epidemic.

    During single ongoing epidemic IFR could decrease with time only if infections rate for the vulnerable people would be increasing at higher speed than infection rate for less vulnerable people. One can imagine such a scenario if Ro in nursing homes would be higher than for the rest of population. But if this is the case what Swede's "hope for" and if it is what they telling their people that things going to be better because down the road the IFR will be lower because the epidemic is "front loaded" and blah blah blah, it an indication of the most blatant and cynical dereliction of duty that they are allowing it to happen, that they are letting the most vulnerable people die prematurely .
  23. @PiltdownMan
    PiltdownBrother2 lives alone in a Manhattan high rise apartment and is in his eighth decade.

    He says it has been almost impossible for him to avoid contact with other New York City residents for more than a couple of days at a time, even though he hasn't used public transportation in six weeks and has tried to be very careful.

    In the City, not all supermarkets and grocery stores deliver. The amount of groceries and supplies he can carry home in shopping bags by hand is limited, necessitating more than one trip a week out of his building.

    Also, like in many residential high-rises in that city, laundry facilities are communal-buildings have a few washer-dryers in a laundry room on each floor, or, in his building, more than a dozen in a basement laundry room. He inevitably has contact with neighbors down there, and his clothing goes in the same machines that others have used.

    I'm not surprised so many people in New York City have antibodies to Covid-19. Despite the lockdown, they've likely been exposed to each others germs in many ways that would likely not be possible in the living arrangements typical in most of the rest of America.

    I’ve had very limited contact. I’m in Washington Heights in northern Manhattan. I take two long walks (or one walk and one run) a day. We grocery shop in Jersey once a week. Not hard to maintain social distances. I feel pretty safe.

    • Replies: @PiltdownMan

    I’ve had very limited contact. I’m in Washington Heights in northern Manhattan. I take two long walks (or one walk and one run) a day. We grocery shop in Jersey once a week. Not hard to maintain social distances. I feel pretty safe.
     
    How do you get over to Jersey?

    My brother doesn't have a car and lives in Yorkville. If he did, and had a washing machine in his apartment, he'd could isolate himself perfectly. Which was his point. That, for many people in the city, the kind of isolation a suburbanite could practice, is very difficult, if not impossible.

    Even so, all the best to you over there!

  24. @epebble
    Why didn't he leave NYC and go to upstate NY or other less crowded place? (This is before shutdown started) . I am guessing, since he is in a Manhattan high rise, that he can afford to do that.

    “ I am guessing, since he is in a Manhattan high rise, that he can afford to do that.”

    New Yorkers spend an excessive portion of their income on rent. There’s not always much left over.

  25. anon[206] • Disclaimer says:

    I think the sample size is more than large enough and representative of the active population. Which is where you care about the R value. It is the population that is spreading this thing. The problem with the Santa Clara study was the impact of even a small positive rate when the infected rate is small and that participants were self selected.

    As far as the what constitutes heard immunity, it’s just the inverse of R(0) in a naive population. If R(0) was 3.0 and 50% of the population is immune, R(T=50%)= 1.5, before any behavior mitigation.

    Meanwhile, most medical staff who treated the first wave of patients will be immune. Maybe.

  26. I think a LOT of people have been exposed, been asymptomatic, and developed antibodies. What follows is anecdotal, I know, but here goes:

    Wife works in hospital, has a co-worker. Co-worker’s husband works in different healthcare facility. Co-worker’s husband gets flu-like symptoms, tests positive for COVID, spends two weeks at home with what is basically the flu, recovers, goes back to work. Co-worker is completely asymptomatic despite living with a man who tested positive and had symptoms.

    Co-worker continues to work normally in hospital the entire time and is told she does not need to be tested because she is asymptomatic.

    • Replies: @Travis
    I agree , many people have been exposed and are able to fight off Coronavirus without even creating antibodies. If you have a strong immune system you could defeat this CV with your innate, or non-specific, immune response. The innate immune response consists of physical, chemical and cellular defenses against pathogens. The main purpose of the innate immune response is to immediately prevent the spread and movement of foreign pathogens throughout the body. Your Natural killer cells, macrophages, neutrophils, dendritic cells, mast cells, basophils, eosinophils can defeat coronavirus before your body ever creates antibodies. This is why most people under the age of 50 will never get sick from CV. A significant number of CV patients never develop antibodies , even those hospitalized for CV and recovered will never develop antibodies, since they can cure themselves with their first line of defense.
  27. @Keypusher
    I’ve had very limited contact. I’m in Washington Heights in northern Manhattan. I take two long walks (or one walk and one run) a day. We grocery shop in Jersey once a week. Not hard to maintain social distances. I feel pretty safe.

    I’ve had very limited contact. I’m in Washington Heights in northern Manhattan. I take two long walks (or one walk and one run) a day. We grocery shop in Jersey once a week. Not hard to maintain social distances. I feel pretty safe.

    How do you get over to Jersey?

    My brother doesn’t have a car and lives in Yorkville. If he did, and had a washing machine in his apartment, he’d could isolate himself perfectly. Which was his point. That, for many people in the city, the kind of isolation a suburbanite could practice, is very difficult, if not impossible.

    Even so, all the best to you over there!

    • Replies: @Keypusher
    Thanks! We drive over the GW Bridge...they haven’t closed it yet. And we have a washer/dryer in the apartment, so we’re lucky that way too.
  28. @Anonymous
    The final accepted official death rate for the Witch Corona will be right down there with influenza.

    Also look for the patient zero date in America to keep getting pushed backward on the calendar.

    Also look for the final SARS2 (covid19) CDC website info page to be filled with weasle words ----- just like SARS1.

    “Also look for the patient zero date in America to keep getting pushed backward on the calendar.”

    #105, this poor woman was the 1st known victim of SARS-CoV-2 in the US. She was 57, and had not traveled outside the US for quite a while. She worked at LAM Research, a semiconductor equipment manufacturer; located across the freeway from the Tesla auto factory in Fremont California:

    1st

    • Replies: @epebble
    Going by this https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/23/health/us-coronavirus-thursday/index.html (Coronavirus spread 'under the radar' in US major cities since January, researchers say), the earliest victim may even be someone in 2019. That combined with https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-8204255/There-THREE-separate-types-coronavirus.html (There are THREE distinct strains of the novel coronavirus in the world and while China's epidemic was driven by an early mutation that quickly spread in the UK, the US is suffering from an original variation ), it is even possible that genesis of Covid may even be U.S. (or Australia) and it went to China and became virulent there first. I hope they have tissue samples of people who died of atypical pneumonias in 2019 (and even 2018 and before) because one can never guess how far back this might have existed. Imagine the wholesale upside down in our understanding if a tissue sample from 2018 shows up with proto Covid genome.
    , @Inverness
    Somehow, her story is bringing out the natural skeptic in me. It suits too many of the preferred narratives of the ruling class.
    , @XYZ (no Mr.)
    She hadn't traveled outside the US in a while.
    She worked for a Silicon Valley tech company. Hardware even.
    Everyone knows they get all their employees from Iowa.

    Where could this mysterious community transmission have come from.....so strange...
  29. @Anonymous
    The final accepted official death rate for the Witch Corona will be right down there with influenza.

    Also look for the patient zero date in America to keep getting pushed backward on the calendar.

    Also look for the final SARS2 (covid19) CDC website info page to be filled with weasle words ----- just like SARS1.

    “The final accepted official death rate for the Witch Corona will be right down there with influenza.”

    #105, could be, but doesn’t appear likely. In Sweden last year 505 people succumbed to influenza. So far SARS-CoV-2 has taken over 2000 there.

    • Replies: @Twinkie

    In Sweden last year 505 people succumbed to influenza. So far SARS-CoV-2 has taken over 2000 there.
     
    Do you have a citation?
    , @Bill Jones
    " So far SARS-CoV-2 has taken over 2000 there"

    You can't say that.

    The definition of dying from the WuFlu has been conflated of dying with the Wuflu.

    The joke in London is that it is a miracle cure: It's been 6 weeks since anybody has died from a heart attack,
  30. 21% of NYC Grocery Shoppers Have Antibodies

    I bet they all have antibodies. But which ones?!

    Also…

    21% of NYC Grocery Shoppers Have Antibodies

    I bet it’s closer to 50%. And 50% have probodies. Antibodies and probodies. That’s life in 2020 America!!

    • Replies: @Stan Adams
    And all GoodThinkers are problackbodies and antiwhitebodies.
  31. @Mehen
    I’ve seen it referred to as the “Harvesting Hypothesis” among scientific types.

    Thanks. Harvesting hypothesis seems too be related but it is different to what Swedes call the “front loading”. Harvesting hypothesis applies to when, say, pollution event may kill vulnerable people so during the next pollution event less people may die. It was observed during the 2003 heat wave in France when the following year they had lower mortality in summer then average. This idea or analogy does not apply to a single ongoing epidemic where “front loading” hypothesis postulates that IFR decreases with time because. If Sweden gets hit with another but similar epidemic next year the IFR could be lower because the subpopulation of vulnerable people was depleted by the previous epidemic.

    During single ongoing epidemic IFR could decrease with time only if infections rate for the vulnerable people would be increasing at higher speed than infection rate for less vulnerable people. One can imagine such a scenario if Ro in nursing homes would be higher than for the rest of population. But if this is the case what Swede’s “hope for” and if it is what they telling their people that things going to be better because down the road the IFR will be lower because the epidemic is “front loaded” and blah blah blah, it an indication of the most blatant and cynical dereliction of duty that they are allowing it to happen, that they are letting the most vulnerable people die prematurely .

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    IFR for a new epidemic could improve over the course of the first wave if medical care gets smarter, which I hope is happening, but haven't seen any statistical analysis to validate my optimism.
    , @Thatgirl
    Utu,

    A sincere question: How (and when) do you foresee this pandemic coming to an end?

    For me, Sweden's response is only "cynical" if one has a plausible alternative. Otherwise, their response can be seen as resolute and clear-sighted.

    I don't know the answer to this.

  32. @Kaz
    Do shutins exist in NYC? Kind of a bad place to be a shut in.

    Part of me hates NYC. But to be honest, I love it every time I go there.

  33. @Black-hole creator
    If the virus is as contagious as claimed, all those high-rise apartment buildings are perfect incubators through ventilation vents. AFAIK, it was claimed that was how some high rises in Hong Kong were centers of infection.

    Nah.

    They talked about fecal plumes and apartment building spread in Hong Kong during the first SARS epidemic, but the living situation in Hong Kong is quite different from New York. You have people living on top of each other in Hong Kong and sharing the same bathrooms and kitchen spaces. New York is crowded, and I have only been a couple New York apartments, but I have never heard of people sharing kitchens and bathrooms in New York.

  34. @epebble
    Why didn't he leave NYC and go to upstate NY or other less crowded place? (This is before shutdown started) . I am guessing, since he is in a Manhattan high rise, that he can afford to do that.

    I am guessing, since he is in a Manhattan high rise, that he can afford to do that.

    Nope. Wrong. Most NYers spend a lot higher percentage of income on rent than people outside NY.

    I lived in NYC for more than a few years. I even snagged a couple of rent controlled/rent subsidized apartments—which means rents far below market value. But I had middle class jobs, as most people do in NYC (or below-middle class). I was paying more than 40-50% of my take home in rent.

    I remember a few relatives from outside NYC commenting that I spent more in rent than they did in mortgage and property taxes—and they lived in prosperous, high-income places.

    Most NYCers are very house-poor folks, especially compared to people outside the city. They spent a ton on rent. But NYC has a lot of free, cheap, or low-cost things you can do if you’re smart or just observant, which is why a lot of young 20-something SWPL folks like living there, since they don’t think about savings and can find those things to do. The parks are extensive and have a lot to do, the many, MANY museums can be found cheap or free, and lots of free concerts and movies in the park and parades to keep you occupied, as well as hipster bars with very cheap PBR/well whiskey deals.

    • Replies: @Ed
    On one hand NYC is a decent place for the elderly. Cheap transport that doesn’t require driving. Services such as grocery shopping are often within walking distance. Living space is often on one floor so no stairs to climb up or down.

    Still I lived in NYC for 7 years in my 20s. I had a great time but I’m glad it’s in my last.
  35. @utu
    Obviously this an utter nonsense. Only possible if you kept PFR higher for old people or you could just kill them all first and then certainly the IFR would be lower down the road. Are Swedes being fed such fairytales by their chief epidemiologist? I would not be surprised as he is desperate. 'leterip' is not the first Swede I have heard it from. The term front loading was used. Perhaps it comes from a Nordic Saga where bribing a dragon with a young virgin stops it from coming to town?

    Of course it is nonsense.

    • Disagree: LondonBob
    • Replies: @UK
    Hospitals are the main vector. They are also where dying people congregate.

    Indeed, if you're dying at hospital of just about anything then you're almost certainly going to be infected by Covid as well. Naturally, the death certificate will say Coronachan did it.

    Furthermore, the correlation between being vulnerable to dying of a pathogen and being vulnerable to being infected by it is well-established.

    That is, those who are identified backwards from case profiles of most likely to succumb once infected may also be predicted to be most likely to get it in the first place; although that will change over time with human action based on this fact.

    Anyway, this is all moot. It will spread through the population unless we remain more locked down than we already are and remain so indefinitely.

    It is a pandemic and will not go away, or will just come back again and again if stamped out even with the required grim authoritarian action. It may also evolve as pressured by the lockdown.

    The lockdown itself will do more damage than the virus ever could and no cure nor vaccine may ever be found.

    In other words, what's your plan? Indefinite home arrest for the entire population? Is there a time limit in years or even decades for this?

    Or are you hoping that track and trace will do it? Given that people are contagious before symptoms, this isn't actually very effective. The societies that have done it have also lockdowned far stronger than Sweden. So it is just back to a slightly lighter form of indefinite home arrest for everyone for years or even decades.

    "Stay at home (indefinitely...maybe until you die of old age or, more understandably, drink yourself to death)."

    Control freaks are generally old men who have spent their lives so emotionally repressed that they can't even tell how their feelings are affecting their thoughts anymore.

    Hystericals are generally women who have never learnt to get their feelings into perspective.

    Neither has any perspective (sight) on how they feel and become remarkably similar.

    If members of either group wants to stay at home then that's fine with me. Their company will not be missed. But since both are desperate for everyone else to be similarly miserable forever (and that's the real truth), I can't be bothered to hide my disdain anymore. Beneath contempt.

    Unless they are below 35, then I can sort of live with people just needing to grow up.
  36. Grocery stores probably overrepresented infectees. I do most of my family’s grocery shopping, and shop at least twice a week. I go often enough that I’ve made friendly acquaintances of a few of the workers, so I got the inside scoop on the local grocery store.

    Apparently, right about when this panic started, a bunch of employees were got sick. One 20-something checker told me she was sicker than she’d ever been in mid March and had to use four sick days. Her fiance didn’t get it from her, and she’s fine now. Another checker told me today that a number of employees got sick and a lot of people quit out of fear, so they’re now short-staffed.

    I’m shopping without a mask, because I figure the longer I wait to get infected, the older I’ll be when it happens, and I like my chances better now than later. Anyway, I was almost certainly exposed at work before we shut down. Today I thought back to the weeks before this dawned on us, and I remember some people I dealt with who were quite ill, one Chinese lady in particular. She was wearing a mask and coughing violently, but I did my best to rationalize it away and do my job. However, I distinctly remember the guilty look on her friends’/family’s faces when I cast an inquisitive eye their way. I bet she had it, and she was in bad shape. Couldn’t even walk to her car, so I had to babysit her while she hacked away.

    I want an antibody test. I had some weird symptoms of something right around then, including a sore throat and these spots that came out of nowhere. Something about it felt a bit Chinese to me, and I would know.

    • Thanks: Inverness
    • Replies: @Black-hole creator
    Why would you have to shop twice a week ? Pretty much everything can be stored for at least two weeks, except maybe for bananas and artisanal breads. I am maintaining a once a 3-week shopping pace without much strain on my diet, although I might go tomorrow to stock up on fresh meat before it is too late.

    I also had a sore throat bout about a month ago with some chills if I remember correctly, right when the corona-panic started in SoCal. But I am not counting myself on being lucky, that was probably a regular sore throat thing. The confirmation bias is a dangerous effect. I would continue wearing mask if were you, if only out of respect for other shoppers. Two weeks ago everybody wearing masks at my local Vons and most were wearing gloves, except for one black dude and he looked creepy without a mask on.

    , @Redneck farmer
    Did those sores have black spots on top of them? If so, Father Nurgle has truly blessed you!
    , @danand

    “I’m shopping without a mask, because I figure the longer I wait to get infected, the older I’ll be when it happens, and I like my chances better now than later.”
     
    Bill, it may be more prudent to wear the mask. Surviving the virus now will, at best, provide one with immunity for roughly a year at the outside. You’ll be just as vulnerable for next years round. Barring development of a successful, relatively safe, vaccine for SARS-VoC-2, there is little reason we will not be just as vulnerable to becoming infected next year; unless we continue to wear masks, social distance, etc... Large scale testing, and isolating the infected, is the only realistic “solution” currently available (presuming enough testing capacity).
    , @Bill Jones
    If you find yourself yearning for a nice fricassee of bat consider it a clue.
  37. @Paleo Liberal
    Interesting.

    My in-laws live in NYC.
    Some of them haven’t left their apartment in over a month. They get food delivered. They are of the opinion that avoiding crowded elevators and streets and markets decreases their chances of getting Coronavirus.

    If 1/5 of the shoppers in markets are positive, they may be correct.

    That also tends to cast doubt as to whether 1/5 of NYC residents have Coronavirus. Shutins weren’t tested.

    You sound rather asperger effected. No offense.

  38. @PiltdownMan
    PiltdownBrother2 lives alone in a Manhattan high rise apartment and is in his eighth decade.

    He says it has been almost impossible for him to avoid contact with other New York City residents for more than a couple of days at a time, even though he hasn't used public transportation in six weeks and has tried to be very careful.

    In the City, not all supermarkets and grocery stores deliver. The amount of groceries and supplies he can carry home in shopping bags by hand is limited, necessitating more than one trip a week out of his building.

    Also, like in many residential high-rises in that city, laundry facilities are communal-buildings have a few washer-dryers in a laundry room on each floor, or, in his building, more than a dozen in a basement laundry room. He inevitably has contact with neighbors down there, and his clothing goes in the same machines that others have used.

    I'm not surprised so many people in New York City have antibodies to Covid-19. Despite the lockdown, they've likely been exposed to each others germs in many ways that would likely not be possible in the living arrangements typical in most of the rest of America.

    Absolutely. I got the CV on 3/10 and my 78 y/o father who lives on the UWS got it a few days later. Folks in NY have been cagey for a month. It’s not like we’re all Tom Hanks. People here have it but aren’t about to brag about it. It’s all on the down low.

    If you live in LA it’s probably something to crow about because it’s so rare. But not here in NY. The rate of infection is likely much higher than what’s being reported. New Yorkers rarely vote and there ain’t no way they’re volunteering for blood tests. So just assume infection rates are a lot higher than reported.

  39. https://www.wsj.com/articles/rikers-island-jail-guards-are-dying-in-one-of-the-worst-coronavirus-outbreaks-11587547801

    Paywalled article on some dead Rikers Island guards.

    We had a cruise ship, aircraft carriers, and now prisons as natural experiments. The prisons should give us lots of sample populations to collect statistics on.

  40. @Bill P
    Grocery stores probably overrepresented infectees. I do most of my family's grocery shopping, and shop at least twice a week. I go often enough that I've made friendly acquaintances of a few of the workers, so I got the inside scoop on the local grocery store.

    Apparently, right about when this panic started, a bunch of employees were got sick. One 20-something checker told me she was sicker than she'd ever been in mid March and had to use four sick days. Her fiance didn't get it from her, and she's fine now. Another checker told me today that a number of employees got sick and a lot of people quit out of fear, so they're now short-staffed.

    I'm shopping without a mask, because I figure the longer I wait to get infected, the older I'll be when it happens, and I like my chances better now than later. Anyway, I was almost certainly exposed at work before we shut down. Today I thought back to the weeks before this dawned on us, and I remember some people I dealt with who were quite ill, one Chinese lady in particular. She was wearing a mask and coughing violently, but I did my best to rationalize it away and do my job. However, I distinctly remember the guilty look on her friends'/family's faces when I cast an inquisitive eye their way. I bet she had it, and she was in bad shape. Couldn't even walk to her car, so I had to babysit her while she hacked away.

    I want an antibody test. I had some weird symptoms of something right around then, including a sore throat and these spots that came out of nowhere. Something about it felt a bit Chinese to me, and I would know.

    Why would you have to shop twice a week ? Pretty much everything can be stored for at least two weeks, except maybe for bananas and artisanal breads. I am maintaining a once a 3-week shopping pace without much strain on my diet, although I might go tomorrow to stock up on fresh meat before it is too late.

    I also had a sore throat bout about a month ago with some chills if I remember correctly, right when the corona-panic started in SoCal. But I am not counting myself on being lucky, that was probably a regular sore throat thing. The confirmation bias is a dangerous effect. I would continue wearing mask if were you, if only out of respect for other shoppers. Two weeks ago everybody wearing masks at my local Vons and most were wearing gloves, except for one black dude and he looked creepy without a mask on.

    • Replies: @Bill P
    I used to shop almost every day. I like to cook with fresh vegetables, I don't have a big fridge, and I have kids, so three weeks would be too long to go without a trip to the store. I could probably get by with once every ten days, but good, home-cooked food is one of the few luxuries left to us now, so I'm not going to take that away from my family.

    I get your point about the confirmation bias, and I'm aware that my chances of having already contracted this bug are far from certain. But I really don't think I can successfully avoid it over the long run, either. As far as the masks are concerned, I'll wear one if the grocery store employees start doing so as well, but most of them still don't. I think taking my cues from the "essential workers" is probably the right choice, because they are in the middle of it and have a more accurate sense of the risk than the media.

    I've said over and over again here that I take this virus seriously and that it scares me, but I have to obey reason rather than blind fear. And reason tells me that my chance of death in this pandemic is well under one percent. That doesn't mean there's no way I'll die, but rather that there may be something like a 50% higher chance (probably a gross overestimate) I'll die this year than last, and I can live with that. Actually, I have to live with that, so why not carry on?

    Also, I believe on a philosophical basis in an immortal soul. That helps put it all in perspective.
  41. @danand

    "Also look for the patient zero date in America to keep getting pushed backward on the calendar."
     
    #105, this poor woman was the 1st known victim of SARS-CoV-2 in the US. She was 57, and had not traveled outside the US for quite a while. She worked at LAM Research, a semiconductor equipment manufacturer; located across the freeway from the Tesla auto factory in Fremont California:

    https://flic.kr/p/2iTJFia

    Going by this https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/23/health/us-coronavirus-thursday/index.html (Coronavirus spread ‘under the radar’ in US major cities since January, researchers say), the earliest victim may even be someone in 2019. That combined with https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-8204255/There-THREE-separate-types-coronavirus.html (There are THREE distinct strains of the novel coronavirus in the world and while China’s epidemic was driven by an early mutation that quickly spread in the UK, the US is suffering from an original variation ), it is even possible that genesis of Covid may even be U.S. (or Australia) and it went to China and became virulent there first. I hope they have tissue samples of people who died of atypical pneumonias in 2019 (and even 2018 and before) because one can never guess how far back this might have existed. Imagine the wholesale upside down in our understanding if a tissue sample from 2018 shows up with proto Covid genome.

  42. @Black-hole creator
    If the virus is as contagious as claimed, all those high-rise apartment buildings are perfect incubators through ventilation vents. AFAIK, it was claimed that was how some high rises in Hong Kong were centers of infection.

    Typically the (powered) ventilation in high-rise apartment buildings is exhaust-only. So it should actually help, not hurt. Elevators are another matter entirely. Along with laundry rooms, mail rooms, etc.

  43. @epebble
    Why didn't he leave NYC and go to upstate NY or other less crowded place? (This is before shutdown started) . I am guessing, since he is in a Manhattan high rise, that he can afford to do that.

    There are tons of public housing high-rises in NYC. Some low-income, some moderate income, etc. And if you didn’t already own a second home, it was next to impossible to procure one in the region this year. Even if you had the money. Many other relevant issues have been covered in the media.

  44. @epebble
    Why didn't he leave NYC and go to upstate NY or other less crowded place? (This is before shutdown started) . I am guessing, since he is in a Manhattan high rise, that he can afford to do that.

    Why would you assume that he can just up and move to some other part of the country? What planet do you live on?

  45. @Bill P
    Grocery stores probably overrepresented infectees. I do most of my family's grocery shopping, and shop at least twice a week. I go often enough that I've made friendly acquaintances of a few of the workers, so I got the inside scoop on the local grocery store.

    Apparently, right about when this panic started, a bunch of employees were got sick. One 20-something checker told me she was sicker than she'd ever been in mid March and had to use four sick days. Her fiance didn't get it from her, and she's fine now. Another checker told me today that a number of employees got sick and a lot of people quit out of fear, so they're now short-staffed.

    I'm shopping without a mask, because I figure the longer I wait to get infected, the older I'll be when it happens, and I like my chances better now than later. Anyway, I was almost certainly exposed at work before we shut down. Today I thought back to the weeks before this dawned on us, and I remember some people I dealt with who were quite ill, one Chinese lady in particular. She was wearing a mask and coughing violently, but I did my best to rationalize it away and do my job. However, I distinctly remember the guilty look on her friends'/family's faces when I cast an inquisitive eye their way. I bet she had it, and she was in bad shape. Couldn't even walk to her car, so I had to babysit her while she hacked away.

    I want an antibody test. I had some weird symptoms of something right around then, including a sore throat and these spots that came out of nowhere. Something about it felt a bit Chinese to me, and I would know.

    Did those sores have black spots on top of them? If so, Father Nurgle has truly blessed you!

  46. @danand

    "Also look for the patient zero date in America to keep getting pushed backward on the calendar."
     
    #105, this poor woman was the 1st known victim of SARS-CoV-2 in the US. She was 57, and had not traveled outside the US for quite a while. She worked at LAM Research, a semiconductor equipment manufacturer; located across the freeway from the Tesla auto factory in Fremont California:

    https://flic.kr/p/2iTJFia

    Somehow, her story is bringing out the natural skeptic in me. It suits too many of the preferred narratives of the ruling class.

  47. “It would miss children, teenagers and older adults who may be sheltering in place.”

    An important point would be children and teenagers are effectively immune anyway so a large percentage of the population already have immunity. I don’t know if they have quite figured out what is going on with children, whether they do actually spread it even if it has such minimal impact on them.

    • Replies: @miss marple
    I've noticed most people assume the children are evil vectors of diseases they carry but don't fall ill themselves. I wonder why this instinctive fear of other peoples' children
    , @The Last Real Calvinist

    An important point would be children and teenagers are effectively immune anyway so a large percentage of the population already have immunity. I don’t know if they have quite figured out what is going on with children, whether they do actually spread it even if it has such minimal impact on them.
     
    It's interesting to monitor the narrative massaging going on in high-view media outlets such as the Daily Mail.

    Today they posted a story that seems directly aimed at undermining the broad assumption that kids aren't seriously affected by COVID-19:

    'Mama, I'm not gonna go home': Doctor shares shocking video of her four-year-old son struggling to breathe after contracting coronavirus as she warns parents to take the virus seriously

    The story is odd. The headline obviously implies the boy died, but that's not the case; he recovered after a week or so in hospital.

    The boy's diagnosis with COVID-19 is also presented in a roundabout way:


    [the boy's mother] said even though his labs and X- Ray didn't look like coronavirus, the doctor confirmed on his second night in hospital that he had COVID-19.
     
    So does that mean his test indicated he didn't have it, and it's only on a doctor's suspicion that he was 'confirmed' to have had it? Or did his distraught mother misunderstand the doctor's words?

    Anyway, the DM is now suddenly excoriating the dancing nurses in under-utilized NHS hospitals, even as they continue to post the 'anybody can get it bad' stories they've been pushing for weeks.

  48. @Steve Sailer
    "Also the Swedish feel that the IFR for the first cohort of fatalities will be much greater than future cohorts simply because the most vulnerable will tend to die first."

    Why?

    Sweden had several of its early outbreak concentrated to nursing homes for the elderly. If they can keep those institutions safe their death rate will probably start to flatten.

    • Agree: Polynikes
  49. New Yorkers reacted very differently to quarantines in the 19th century:

    How arsonists burned down Staten Island’s hated Quarantine hospital in the 19th century with little resistance

    This led to the construction of Hoffman and Swinburne Islands, described in 90 seconds of the video below. Many immigrants didn’t make it to Ellis Island, or Castle Garden before that.

    If you watch the entire video, you’ll see Typhoid Mary in her gurney on North Brother Island, early typhoid colony Rat Island, and the poor man’s cemetery on Hart Island.

    • Replies: @Clifford Brown
    New York City has a hardcore pandemic history. There are several islands in New York City that were set aside to deal with the infected of generations past. This is something largely forgotten now, but Roosevelt Island still features the ruins of the old Small Pox hospital.

    https://www.atlasobscura.com/places/roosevelt-island-smallpox-hospital-ruins

    Hart Island has been New York City's Potter's Field since the 1860's.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hO5EJe2bPcI
  50. @danand

    "Also look for the patient zero date in America to keep getting pushed backward on the calendar."
     
    #105, this poor woman was the 1st known victim of SARS-CoV-2 in the US. She was 57, and had not traveled outside the US for quite a while. She worked at LAM Research, a semiconductor equipment manufacturer; located across the freeway from the Tesla auto factory in Fremont California:

    https://flic.kr/p/2iTJFia

    She hadn’t traveled outside the US in a while.
    She worked for a Silicon Valley tech company. Hardware even.
    Everyone knows they get all their employees from Iowa.

    Where could this mysterious community transmission have come from…..so strange…

    • LOL: Mr Mox
  51. you would think seeing the numbers of daily dead plateau, even when miscounted, even when in widely differing treatments in countries like US/Italy/Sweden, even when numbers of “with covid” keep going up with the tests – it must mean that the number of asymptomatic is ever-bigger, and of potential dead is running out. herd immunity, and/or the virus mutating away, may be reached faster, and the IFR ever lower than what it already was save in few locations.

    so please, enough, there is no rain of death. if still afraid, stay inside. it is time for the young to play golf.

  52. Someone needs to coin a phrase for whatever the inverse of whistling past the graveyard is. We really need a shorthand for the insistence on intoning doom in a portentous and self serious fashion despite the overwhelming and ever increasing evidence that everything was fine all along.

    We’ve also run out of easy ways of describing increasing one’s rhetorical investment in an already disproven narrative… we’ve exceeded mere doubling down and even the rarer tripling down and moved on to quintupling and even septupling down… stronger stuff is needed.

    Either a lot of people will need to be forcefully reacquainted with reality soon or our language will need significant updates. Certainly a few hundred billion dollars can be printed for this purpose while we safely netflicks at home away from this horrible deadly virus!

    As we know this is costless with the economy helpfully humming along autonomously in the meantime.

    • Agree: Federalist
    • Replies: @Known Fact
    "Intoning doom in a portentious and self-serious fashion?" I nominate TV/radio correspondent Aaron Katersky, a man quietly but perpetually in search of an exploding zeppelin.
    , @Mark G.

    Someone needs to coin a phrase for whatever the inverse of whistling past the graveyard is. We really need a shorthand for the insistence on intoning doom in a portentous and self serious fashion despite the overwhelming and ever increasing evidence that everything was fine all along.

     

    As a child fifty years ago I heard a person something like this called a "Henny Penny". Wikipedia says it comes from an old English folk tale and "has passed into the English language as a common idiom indicating a hysterical or mistaken belief that disaster is imminent. Similar stories go back more than 25 centuries".
    , @Intelligent Dasein
    Did somebody rip the "Chicken Little" story out of all your nursery books?
  53. @Steve Sailer
    Thanks.

    “…Plasma treatment is quite promising, although I’m not aware of it being proven yet to work in this case..”

    Yesterday there was an article in an Austrian newspaper about how antibody serum worked on a 36 year old male who, due to an immune deficiency, could not produce antibodies which sounds like a hard case. Nevertheless, after 1 week he recovered.
    But it is odd that you do not read more about it…

  54. @danand

    "The final accepted official death rate for the Witch Corona will be right down there with influenza."
     
    #105, could be, but doesn't appear likely. In Sweden last year 505 people succumbed to influenza. So far SARS-CoV-2 has taken over 2000 there.

    In Sweden last year 505 people succumbed to influenza. So far SARS-CoV-2 has taken over 2000 there.

    Do you have a citation?

    • Replies: @danand

    “Among patients who received a laboratory-confirmed flu diagnosis, 505 (3.8 percent) had died within 30 days. In total, 88 percent of deaths were among people aged 65 years and older.”
     
    https://www.folkhalsomyndigheten.se/publicerat-material/publikationsarkiv/i/influenza-in-sweden/?pub=63511

    https://flic.kr/p/2iTMtAw
  55. Clearly more than 60,000 covid deaths will occur by June but what will happen in the fall?

  56. @LondonBob
    "It would miss children, teenagers and older adults who may be sheltering in place."

    An important point would be children and teenagers are effectively immune anyway so a large percentage of the population already have immunity. I don't know if they have quite figured out what is going on with children, whether they do actually spread it even if it has such minimal impact on them.

    I’ve noticed most people assume the children are evil vectors of diseases they carry but don’t fall ill themselves. I wonder why this instinctive fear of other peoples’ children

  57. @Black-hole creator
    If the virus is as contagious as claimed, all those high-rise apartment buildings are perfect incubators through ventilation vents. AFAIK, it was claimed that was how some high rises in Hong Kong were centers of infection.

    AFAIK, it was claimed that was how some high rises in Hong Kong were centers of infection.

    Where did you get this idea? I live in Hong Kong, and I’ve heard nothing like this.

    Back in 2003 SARS spread in one residential tower because sewage from a leaking pipe was dripping into a fan, got aerosolized, and spread to other flats. (Yes, very disgusting.)

    But so far as I know, for COVID-19 there have been no such incidents.

  58. @LondonBob
    "It would miss children, teenagers and older adults who may be sheltering in place."

    An important point would be children and teenagers are effectively immune anyway so a large percentage of the population already have immunity. I don't know if they have quite figured out what is going on with children, whether they do actually spread it even if it has such minimal impact on them.

    An important point would be children and teenagers are effectively immune anyway so a large percentage of the population already have immunity. I don’t know if they have quite figured out what is going on with children, whether they do actually spread it even if it has such minimal impact on them.

    It’s interesting to monitor the narrative massaging going on in high-view media outlets such as the Daily Mail.

    Today they posted a story that seems directly aimed at undermining the broad assumption that kids aren’t seriously affected by COVID-19:

    ‘Mama, I’m not gonna go home’: Doctor shares shocking video of her four-year-old son struggling to breathe after contracting coronavirus as she warns parents to take the virus seriously

    The story is odd. The headline obviously implies the boy died, but that’s not the case; he recovered after a week or so in hospital.

    The boy’s diagnosis with COVID-19 is also presented in a roundabout way:

    [the boy’s mother] said even though his labs and X- Ray didn’t look like coronavirus, the doctor confirmed on his second night in hospital that he had COVID-19.

    So does that mean his test indicated he didn’t have it, and it’s only on a doctor’s suspicion that he was ‘confirmed’ to have had it? Or did his distraught mother misunderstand the doctor’s words?

    Anyway, the DM is now suddenly excoriating the dancing nurses in under-utilized NHS hospitals, even as they continue to post the ‘anybody can get it bad’ stories they’ve been pushing for weeks.

  59. @utu
    Thanks. Harvesting hypothesis seems too be related but it is different to what Swedes call the "front loading". Harvesting hypothesis applies to when, say, pollution event may kill vulnerable people so during the next pollution event less people may die. It was observed during the 2003 heat wave in France when the following year they had lower mortality in summer then average. This idea or analogy does not apply to a single ongoing epidemic where "front loading" hypothesis postulates that IFR decreases with time because. If Sweden gets hit with another but similar epidemic next year the IFR could be lower because the subpopulation of vulnerable people was depleted by the previous epidemic.

    During single ongoing epidemic IFR could decrease with time only if infections rate for the vulnerable people would be increasing at higher speed than infection rate for less vulnerable people. One can imagine such a scenario if Ro in nursing homes would be higher than for the rest of population. But if this is the case what Swede's "hope for" and if it is what they telling their people that things going to be better because down the road the IFR will be lower because the epidemic is "front loaded" and blah blah blah, it an indication of the most blatant and cynical dereliction of duty that they are allowing it to happen, that they are letting the most vulnerable people die prematurely .

    IFR for a new epidemic could improve over the course of the first wave if medical care gets smarter, which I hope is happening, but haven’t seen any statistical analysis to validate my optimism.

    • Agree: utu
    • Replies: @The one
    I'm seeing a very normal curve here, which is what you would see if you allowed the virus to run its natural course

    https://www.statista.com/statistics/1105753/cumulative-coronavirus-deaths-in-sweden/
  60. The radioactive micro particle dust clouds

    produced by the mini nukes used to bring down the towers on 9/11

    may also be a major contributory factor to the New York death rates

    among the aging population.

    • Replies: @anon
    Worst haiku ever.
  61. Conceptually the “antibody test to work” concept makes sense (*) but how will this actually be implemented?

    Are we going to say everyone who doesn’t have antibodies is disabled? Will they be on disability?

    Are we going to start suing under ADA for reasonable accommodations like company provided hazmat suits?

    *) it actually makes NO sense for Covid-19 outside of maybe direct elder care workers, but it would make sense for say a MERS level virus

  62. @Twinkie

    In Sweden last year 505 people succumbed to influenza. So far SARS-CoV-2 has taken over 2000 there.
     
    Do you have a citation?

    “Among patients who received a laboratory-confirmed flu diagnosis, 505 (3.8 percent) had died within 30 days. In total, 88 percent of deaths were among people aged 65 years and older.”

    https://www.folkhalsomyndigheten.se/publicerat-material/publikationsarkiv/i/influenza-in-sweden/?pub=63511

    729A5505-1027-4F50-A4C2-44925FAF6B49

    • Thanks: Twinkie
  63. “Mr. Cuomo also said that such wide infection might mean that the death rate was far lower than believed.”

    Believed by whom?

    sb
    “Mr. Cuomo also said that such wide infection might mean that the death rate was far lower than he had claimed.”

  64. @Bill P
    Grocery stores probably overrepresented infectees. I do most of my family's grocery shopping, and shop at least twice a week. I go often enough that I've made friendly acquaintances of a few of the workers, so I got the inside scoop on the local grocery store.

    Apparently, right about when this panic started, a bunch of employees were got sick. One 20-something checker told me she was sicker than she'd ever been in mid March and had to use four sick days. Her fiance didn't get it from her, and she's fine now. Another checker told me today that a number of employees got sick and a lot of people quit out of fear, so they're now short-staffed.

    I'm shopping without a mask, because I figure the longer I wait to get infected, the older I'll be when it happens, and I like my chances better now than later. Anyway, I was almost certainly exposed at work before we shut down. Today I thought back to the weeks before this dawned on us, and I remember some people I dealt with who were quite ill, one Chinese lady in particular. She was wearing a mask and coughing violently, but I did my best to rationalize it away and do my job. However, I distinctly remember the guilty look on her friends'/family's faces when I cast an inquisitive eye their way. I bet she had it, and she was in bad shape. Couldn't even walk to her car, so I had to babysit her while she hacked away.

    I want an antibody test. I had some weird symptoms of something right around then, including a sore throat and these spots that came out of nowhere. Something about it felt a bit Chinese to me, and I would know.

    “I’m shopping without a mask, because I figure the longer I wait to get infected, the older I’ll be when it happens, and I like my chances better now than later.”

    Bill, it may be more prudent to wear the mask. Surviving the virus now will, at best, provide one with immunity for roughly a year at the outside. You’ll be just as vulnerable for next years round. Barring development of a successful, relatively safe, vaccine for SARS-VoC-2, there is little reason we will not be just as vulnerable to becoming infected next year; unless we continue to wear masks, social distance, etc… Large scale testing, and isolating the infected, is the only realistic “solution” currently available (presuming enough testing capacity).

    • Replies: @vhrm

    Surviving the virus now will, at best, provide one with immunity for roughly a year at the outside.
     
    There's no reason to believe that it'll be this short. Also immunity isn't all or nothing... it fades over time so you can have a lesser course on subsequent reinfections.

    For original SARS, immunity level antibodies (in people who had severe illness) averaged 3 years

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2851497/

    It's certainly possible that new sars behaves very differently but it's more likely to be similar.
    , @Anonymous

    Surviving the virus now will, at best, provide one with immunity for roughly a year at the outside.
     
    That seems to be the conventional wisdom - but what does it mean? Does it mean:

    (1) Immunity to the self-same virus wears off after about a year?

    OR:

    (2) Immunity is likely NOT effective against a related virus of the same general type (e.g. flu virus) that may come along in a year or two?
  65. @Bill P
    Grocery stores probably overrepresented infectees. I do most of my family's grocery shopping, and shop at least twice a week. I go often enough that I've made friendly acquaintances of a few of the workers, so I got the inside scoop on the local grocery store.

    Apparently, right about when this panic started, a bunch of employees were got sick. One 20-something checker told me she was sicker than she'd ever been in mid March and had to use four sick days. Her fiance didn't get it from her, and she's fine now. Another checker told me today that a number of employees got sick and a lot of people quit out of fear, so they're now short-staffed.

    I'm shopping without a mask, because I figure the longer I wait to get infected, the older I'll be when it happens, and I like my chances better now than later. Anyway, I was almost certainly exposed at work before we shut down. Today I thought back to the weeks before this dawned on us, and I remember some people I dealt with who were quite ill, one Chinese lady in particular. She was wearing a mask and coughing violently, but I did my best to rationalize it away and do my job. However, I distinctly remember the guilty look on her friends'/family's faces when I cast an inquisitive eye their way. I bet she had it, and she was in bad shape. Couldn't even walk to her car, so I had to babysit her while she hacked away.

    I want an antibody test. I had some weird symptoms of something right around then, including a sore throat and these spots that came out of nowhere. Something about it felt a bit Chinese to me, and I would know.

    If you find yourself yearning for a nice fricassee of bat consider it a clue.

  66. @newrouter
    Nationwide: where is the corana chan outbreak amongst grocery workers?

    >There are few high-traffic businesses more densely populated than grocery stores. In fact, within the U.S. economy retail supermarkets have the highest foot traffic of any business sector in the entire economy; that’s just an empirical fact…. and the coronavirus impact increased that foot traffic by an average of 40 percent. Now, stop and think about this logically & apply a large dose of common sense. Think about human-to-human interface.<

    https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2020/04/20/common-sense-and-human-interface-georgia-governor-brian-kemp-announces-phased-reopening-of-business-starting-this-week/

    COVID-19 has killed roughly 30 grocery workers

    April 15, 2020

    the union had estimated at least 30 UFCW members had died from COVID-19

    The UFCW, which represents more than 900,000 members

    Apr 15 alleged Covid dead total USA: 28,596
    Apr 15 alleged Covid dead UFCW members: 30

    USA population: 329,559,000
    UFCW members: 900,000

    Apr 15 USA Covid death % = 00.0087%
    Apr 15 UFCW Covid death % = 00.0033%

    • Replies: @The one
    Etc etc etc, rinse and repeat
  67. @Steve Sailer
    IFR for a new epidemic could improve over the course of the first wave if medical care gets smarter, which I hope is happening, but haven't seen any statistical analysis to validate my optimism.

    I’m seeing a very normal curve here, which is what you would see if you allowed the virus to run its natural course

    https://www.statista.com/statistics/1105753/cumulative-coronavirus-deaths-in-sweden/

  68. @Reg Cæsar

    "Excessive deaths" now are reduced deaths in 6 months. A numbers game if you will. Because in 6 months you have to add in traffic deaths et al.

     

    Those tend to be low in NYC, for obvious reasons.

    Well, maybe not pedestrians. And squeegee men.

    And it's not DC:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iS95dZYmFEA

    That woman is now the front-runner to be Joe Biden’s running mate.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    Is that Tim Kaine? He's not just in the 'hood, he's on it!
  69. @Hippopotamusdrome

    COVID-19 has killed roughly 30 grocery workers

    April 15, 2020

    the union had estimated at least 30 UFCW members had died from COVID-19

    The UFCW, which represents more than 900,000 members

     

    Apr 15 alleged Covid dead total USA: 28,596
    Apr 15 alleged Covid dead UFCW members: 30

    USA population: 329,559,000
    UFCW members: 900,000

    Apr 15 USA Covid death % = 00.0087%
    Apr 15 UFCW Covid death % = 00.0033%

    Etc etc etc, rinse and repeat

  70. @Kaz
    Do shutins exist in NYC? Kind of a bad place to be a shut in.

    Shutins exist everywhere.

    Normally my in-laws aren’t shutins. In normal times they are out and about every day. But these are not normal times. They have some children and grandchildren living in their apartment with them, so they don’t get too lonely.

  71. @R.G. Camara

    I am guessing, since he is in a Manhattan high rise, that he can afford to do that.
     
    Nope. Wrong. Most NYers spend a lot higher percentage of income on rent than people outside NY.

    I lived in NYC for more than a few years. I even snagged a couple of rent controlled/rent subsidized apartments---which means rents far below market value. But I had middle class jobs, as most people do in NYC (or below-middle class). I was paying more than 40-50% of my take home in rent.

    I remember a few relatives from outside NYC commenting that I spent more in rent than they did in mortgage and property taxes---and they lived in prosperous, high-income places.

    Most NYCers are very house-poor folks, especially compared to people outside the city. They spent a ton on rent. But NYC has a lot of free, cheap, or low-cost things you can do if you're smart or just observant, which is why a lot of young 20-something SWPL folks like living there, since they don't think about savings and can find those things to do. The parks are extensive and have a lot to do, the many, MANY museums can be found cheap or free, and lots of free concerts and movies in the park and parades to keep you occupied, as well as hipster bars with very cheap PBR/well whiskey deals.

    On one hand NYC is a decent place for the elderly. Cheap transport that doesn’t require driving. Services such as grocery shopping are often within walking distance. Living space is often on one floor so no stairs to climb up or down.

    Still I lived in NYC for 7 years in my 20s. I had a great time but I’m glad it’s in my last.

  72. @gcochran
    Of course it is nonsense.

    Hospitals are the main vector. They are also where dying people congregate.

    Indeed, if you’re dying at hospital of just about anything then you’re almost certainly going to be infected by Covid as well. Naturally, the death certificate will say Coronachan did it.

    Furthermore, the correlation between being vulnerable to dying of a pathogen and being vulnerable to being infected by it is well-established.

    That is, those who are identified backwards from case profiles of most likely to succumb once infected may also be predicted to be most likely to get it in the first place; although that will change over time with human action based on this fact.

    Anyway, this is all moot. It will spread through the population unless we remain more locked down than we already are and remain so indefinitely.

    It is a pandemic and will not go away, or will just come back again and again if stamped out even with the required grim authoritarian action. It may also evolve as pressured by the lockdown.

    The lockdown itself will do more damage than the virus ever could and no cure nor vaccine may ever be found.

    In other words, what’s your plan? Indefinite home arrest for the entire population? Is there a time limit in years or even decades for this?

    Or are you hoping that track and trace will do it? Given that people are contagious before symptoms, this isn’t actually very effective. The societies that have done it have also lockdowned far stronger than Sweden. So it is just back to a slightly lighter form of indefinite home arrest for everyone for years or even decades.

    “Stay at home (indefinitely…maybe until you die of old age or, more understandably, drink yourself to death).”

    Control freaks are generally old men who have spent their lives so emotionally repressed that they can’t even tell how their feelings are affecting their thoughts anymore.

    Hystericals are generally women who have never learnt to get their feelings into perspective.

    Neither has any perspective (sight) on how they feel and become remarkably similar.

    If members of either group wants to stay at home then that’s fine with me. Their company will not be missed. But since both are desperate for everyone else to be similarly miserable forever (and that’s the real truth), I can’t be bothered to hide my disdain anymore. Beneath contempt.

    Unless they are below 35, then I can sort of live with people just needing to grow up.

    • Replies: @gcochran
    All nonsense. It's a new disease in humans: except for the small fraction that has recently has had it, everybody susceptible to it. And so on: all your 'facts" are made up.
  73. I’m seeing a great deal of disagreement about the value of Ro and thus the herd immunity level. One study says it’s about 2.2, another 1.4, another 5.7. I’m not seeing the logic of your contention about community spread. Even in the 19 counties around Manhattan, the vast majority present at any one time are going to be local residents, not travelers from out of town.

  74. Do they have antibodies to coronavirus, or are they actually testing for antibodies to COVID-19, whatever that is? Since no one seems to know exactly, or at least to admit, what COVID-19 really is, I’m guessing the former. Just a wild guess.

    We’re hearing ad nauseam about the number of tests, the number of companies that are making the tests, the number of tests given, the number of tests needed, the desperate necessity of the tests before we can “re-open” the ruined local, state, national, and global economy.

    Here’s what I want to hear asked and answered: Are the “tests” accurate? How do we know? Who says so? And WHAT DO THEY TEST FOR?

    When will someone take an interest in those questions? They seem pretty interesting to me. When will someone stand up and ask? And always keeping in mind cui bono, why should we trust the answer?

    • Replies: @Mehen


    Do they have antibodies to coronavirus, or are they actually testing for antibodies to COVID-19, whatever that is? Since no one seems to know exactly, or at least to admit, what COVID-19 really is, I’m guessing the former. Just a wild guess.

    We’re hearing ad nauseam about the number of tests, the number of companies that are making the tests, the number of tests given, the number of tests needed, the desperate necessity of the tests before we can “re-open” the ruined local, state, national, and global economy.

    Here’s what I want to hear asked and answered: Are the “tests” accurate? How do we know? Who says so? And WHAT DO THEY TEST FOR?

    When will someone take an interest in those questions? They seem pretty interesting to me. When will someone stand up and ask? And always keeping in mind cui bono, why should we trust the answer?
     
    Reposted for agreement and emphasis.
  75. As you mentioned, your calculation of 15,740/(.21)*8,400,000 = 0.9% includes presumptive cases.

    As of April 22 at 6pm, confirmed cases was 10,290. Therefore, the upper limit of fatality is 0.6%. Early intubation strategy seems to have contributed to a significant portion of these deaths. Additionally, when we consider dying with vs. dying from (homicide victim tests positive for covid-19), deaths directly attributable to COVID-19 is much much lower. We must keep in mind that only 47/10,290 of the dead were without underlying conditions.

    In Singapore, there are currently 12 deaths, with more than 12,000 cases. That is a fatality rate of 0.1%. In Qatar, there are 10 deaths, with more than 8,500 cases, so 0.12%.

    It’s clear that this disease is not as deadly as what the WHO was advertising.

  76. Two warnings: I made up all these numbers and I did the arithmetic in my head.

    In other words, standard COVID-19 modelling. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised to hear Dr. Fauci refer to the Sailer Model in a future briefing as he grasps further and further for straws to justify destroying the US economy.

  77. And in the too perfect to be fake category of news:

    In a daily report dedicated to news updates and guidance for county employees fighting the coronavirus, an Oregon county in the Portland area said it was creating a safe “grounding space” for minority staff to escape a predominant “whiteness.”

    Clownworld!

    https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/coronavirus/amid-coronavirus-crisis-oregon-county-creates-segregated-safe-space

  78. @Ron Unz

    As of yesterday, New York City was at 15,740 official CV deaths, which include 5,000 who weren’t tested for CV. The population of New York City was 8.4 million people in 2018, so 15,740/(.21)*8,400,000 = 0.9% Infection Fatality Rate in NYC if this 21% Infection Rate is representative.
     
    Actually, the NYC "excess deaths" in just a recent six week period were over 19K, so the implied IFR from that naive calculation would probably be considerably north of 1.0%:

    https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/21/world/coronavirus-missing-deaths.html

    But as you emphasize, there are lots of complicating factors in the calculation.

    However, I think the methodology of this infection estimate in NYC is far superior to those ridiculous Santa Clara and LA studies associated with those Stanford people, and unsurprisingly, the results are vastly more plausible. After all, it looks like probably around 20K people have already died of the virus in NYC, so you'd expect high infection rates. The corresponding deaths in LA or Santa Clara are close to an order-of-magnitude too low for their supposed infection rates.

    Hey, where are all the NY deaths you said were likely? You said at one point there might be 10k per week.

  79. @danand

    "The final accepted official death rate for the Witch Corona will be right down there with influenza."
     
    #105, could be, but doesn't appear likely. In Sweden last year 505 people succumbed to influenza. So far SARS-CoV-2 has taken over 2000 there.

    ” So far SARS-CoV-2 has taken over 2000 there”

    You can’t say that.

    The definition of dying from the WuFlu has been conflated of dying with the Wuflu.

    The joke in London is that it is a miracle cure: It’s been 6 weeks since anybody has died from a heart attack,

    • Replies: @TomSchmidt
    Yes, well, that'S why I look at excess death rates. there have been a lot of above-baseline deaths in the time of COVID. If it's a high but narrow spike, it might kill fewer people than the flu, but I wouldn't place that bet now.

    The UK has a LOT of excess deaths. Some of them must be the virus, no?
  80. If NYC is 1/3rd of the way to herd immunity, then 3 times the current 15,740 deaths would be about 47,000 deaths in NYC

    To put that number into perspective, that’s more than the total estimated number of Americans who died across the whole country of seasonal flu in 7 of the past 10 years … in one city. There was no “hysteria” here. The public was right to be afraid. The virus is just as deadly as many assumed it would be, but less so that the extremes claimed it might end up. I suspect that after Trump loses to Biden this November, there is going to be some soul-searching among the Dissident Right crowd who downplayed the virus and continued doing so even after it was clear they were wrong. That’s a lot of reputational damage to endure just to prop up a reality tv show host who can’t even keep his immigration promises during a national emergency (see Trump’s fake immigration moratorium that doesn’t cover the majority of cases). Even if there is /was a case for not imposing any kind of lockdown, these guys made it next to impossible to credibly make that case because they discredited themselves as reliable opinion sources at the outset. Also, urging your twitter followers to laugh at and socially shame face-mask wearers as “soy boys” in contravention to CDC advice when a deadly pathogen is floating about is thoroughly autistic.

    2018/2019 – 34,200 deaths
    2017/2018 – 61,000 deaths
    2016/2017 – 38,000 deaths
    2015/2016 – 23,000 deaths
    2014/2015 – 51,000 deaths
    2013/2014 – 38,000 deaths
    2012/2013 – 43,000 deaths
    2011/2012 – 12,000 deaths
    2010/2011 – 37,000 deaths

    https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/2018-2019.html

    • Agree: Big Dick Bandit
    • Replies: @peterike

    To put that number into perspective, that’s more than the total estimated number of Americans who died across the whole country of seasonal flu in 7 of the past 10 years … in one city.
     
    But NOT as much as in three of the past 10 years. It's almost like these flu epidemics vary in strength from year to year or something. And you're using a total conjecture (3x deaths) to even get close to the scare number you want. To say nothing of the fact that a ten year period isn't indicative of much anyway, as there were much worse spikes in the 60s and 70s and earlier. So yeah, maybe this is a bad flu year, but there have been many, many other bad flu years and the world didn't shut down.
    , @Anon

    If NYC is 1/3rd of the way to herd immunity, then 3 times the current 15,740 deaths would be about 47,000 deaths in NYC

    To put that number into perspective, that’s more than the total estimated number of Americans who died across the whole country of seasonal flu in 7 of the past 10 years … in one city.
     

    The actual number is 15,740, even with juiced stats. So now you're using theoretical numbers to prop up your argument. Then you cherry pick years and cherry pick US cities to try and further bolster your POS argument. SCIENCE!!!!!!11111111!!!!

    And I just want to clear something up for people who are too dumb to understand nuance. There is a difference between being anti politically motivated scientific consensus, and being "anti-science." Just look how that French doctor is being received, because his study on hydroxychloroquine supported a Trump narrative. Nope, can't have that. Can't have any scientists cast doubt on global warming. Not allowed. Political consensus is anti-science. There is nothing wrong with empiricism, limited as it is, but when you worship science then you get 5' 1" bitter beta Fauci ruling over you because he never got the chicks. This guy should be running a pizza joint at most.

    That’s a lot of reputational damage to endure just to prop up a reality tv show host who can’t even keep his immigration promises during a national emergency (see Trump’s fake immigration moratorium that doesn’t cover the majority of cases).
     

    You don't even believe in what Trump stood for in the first place because you're a leftist. Thanks for jamming your already ubiquitous and tired MSNBC views down everyone's throats. Because if there's one thing people are clamoring for, it's MOAR LEFTIST PROPAGANDA.
  81. @Anonymousse
    Someone needs to coin a phrase for whatever the inverse of whistling past the graveyard is. We really need a shorthand for the insistence on intoning doom in a portentous and self serious fashion despite the overwhelming and ever increasing evidence that everything was fine all along.

    We’ve also run out of easy ways of describing increasing one’s rhetorical investment in an already disproven narrative... we’ve exceeded mere doubling down and even the rarer tripling down and moved on to quintupling and even septupling down... stronger stuff is needed.

    Either a lot of people will need to be forcefully reacquainted with reality soon or our language will need significant updates. Certainly a few hundred billion dollars can be printed for this purpose while we safely netflicks at home away from this horrible deadly virus!

    As we know this is costless with the economy helpfully humming along autonomously in the meantime.

    “Intoning doom in a portentious and self-serious fashion?” I nominate TV/radio correspondent Aaron Katersky, a man quietly but perpetually in search of an exploding zeppelin.

  82. 21% of NYC Grocery Shoppers Have Antibodies

    59% of Alabama grocery shoppers have disgusting fatbodies.

  83. jb says:

    I shop at one of those NYC grocery stores, and I just missed being tested. Damn! I got there at 5:30pm last Monday and I noticed a table on the sidewalk outside the store with a bunch of nice ladies who seemed to be doing a lot of paperwork. I asked what they were doing and they said they had been doing antibody tests, but they had finished at 5:00. They said they might come back tomorrow, but it rained and they weren’t there. Damn!

    I would really have liked to have been tested. I visited a crowded exhibition at the Museum of Modern Art on March 6 with a friend, and two days later she came down with a rather bad cold that stuck with her for a little over two weeks. She still doesn’t think it was Coronavirus, because she doesn’t think the symptoms were right (sore throat, no fever or chest tightness), but I’m thinking more and more it probably was. My fantasy is that I got it too and was a lucky winner of the asymptomatic lottery. Man that would simplify my life!

  84. @Anonymousse
    Someone needs to coin a phrase for whatever the inverse of whistling past the graveyard is. We really need a shorthand for the insistence on intoning doom in a portentous and self serious fashion despite the overwhelming and ever increasing evidence that everything was fine all along.

    We’ve also run out of easy ways of describing increasing one’s rhetorical investment in an already disproven narrative... we’ve exceeded mere doubling down and even the rarer tripling down and moved on to quintupling and even septupling down... stronger stuff is needed.

    Either a lot of people will need to be forcefully reacquainted with reality soon or our language will need significant updates. Certainly a few hundred billion dollars can be printed for this purpose while we safely netflicks at home away from this horrible deadly virus!

    As we know this is costless with the economy helpfully humming along autonomously in the meantime.

    Someone needs to coin a phrase for whatever the inverse of whistling past the graveyard is. We really need a shorthand for the insistence on intoning doom in a portentous and self serious fashion despite the overwhelming and ever increasing evidence that everything was fine all along.

    As a child fifty years ago I heard a person something like this called a “Henny Penny”. Wikipedia says it comes from an old English folk tale and “has passed into the English language as a common idiom indicating a hysterical or mistaken belief that disaster is imminent. Similar stories go back more than 25 centuries”.

    • Replies: @Joe Stalin
    "Nervous Nellie?"

    nervous Nellie (plural nervous Nellies)

    (informal) A person whose personality and behavior are characterized by worry, insecurity, and timidity.

    https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/nervous_Nellie

     

  85. 40% – 60% of CV patients did not produce any detectable antibodies….
    https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/covid19/86084
    Teams at Columbia University have pushed hard to boost the sensitivity of their in-house COVID-19 antibody testing….After weeks of tweaking their own ELISA assay, Columbia researchers say they’ve managed to bring its sensitivity to 85% — higher than the 50% to 60% they achieved with a commercial assay…his team originally tried an antibody test from Biomedomics, collecting about 5,000 specimens and testing patients at various time points in their disease…

    40%-50% of the patients who were confirmed infected with COVID-19 by molecular testing were negative by this assay 2 to 3 weeks later

    many tests available now are not accurate enough at identifying people who have had the disease, a property called test sensitivity…One unknown that affects both kinds of test is the interplay between timing and accuracy. If a test is done too soon after a person is infected and the body hasn’t had time to develop the antibodies the test is designed to detect, it could miss an infection.

    So if 21% of new Yorkers had detectable antibodies last week many more will have antibodies today, since it may take 2 weeks to develop antibodies. Many CV infected people will never create antibodies. So we should expect closer to 25% of New Yorkers have already been infected with CV , probably closer to 30%. Depends on which antibody test they used for the NY study…

    • Agree: LondonBob
  86. @utu
    Thanks. Harvesting hypothesis seems too be related but it is different to what Swedes call the "front loading". Harvesting hypothesis applies to when, say, pollution event may kill vulnerable people so during the next pollution event less people may die. It was observed during the 2003 heat wave in France when the following year they had lower mortality in summer then average. This idea or analogy does not apply to a single ongoing epidemic where "front loading" hypothesis postulates that IFR decreases with time because. If Sweden gets hit with another but similar epidemic next year the IFR could be lower because the subpopulation of vulnerable people was depleted by the previous epidemic.

    During single ongoing epidemic IFR could decrease with time only if infections rate for the vulnerable people would be increasing at higher speed than infection rate for less vulnerable people. One can imagine such a scenario if Ro in nursing homes would be higher than for the rest of population. But if this is the case what Swede's "hope for" and if it is what they telling their people that things going to be better because down the road the IFR will be lower because the epidemic is "front loaded" and blah blah blah, it an indication of the most blatant and cynical dereliction of duty that they are allowing it to happen, that they are letting the most vulnerable people die prematurely .

    Utu,

    A sincere question: How (and when) do you foresee this pandemic coming to an end?

    For me, Sweden’s response is only “cynical” if one has a plausible alternative. Otherwise, their response can be seen as resolute and clear-sighted.

    I don’t know the answer to this.

    • Agree: vhrm
    • Replies: @utu
    I believe that the epidemic can be extinguished below the prevalence level of herd immunity with some behavioral adjustments, however Sweden's chief epidemiologist claims that this is not possible and that everybody eventually will go to where Sweden is going now. Only Sweden will be there sooner and at a lower cost. In his mind the only difference is that people in Sweden will die sooner than in countries that have countermeasures. So he is OK with letting people in Sweden die sooner because prolonging their lives for another six or twelve month would cost too much I guess. But what if in six months a treatment is developed that would reduce IFR by factor of five or a vaccine? Like everything it comes down to the moral values and one can bring a utilitarian calculate into it. Personally I am very much put off by Sweden's attitude of not trying to save human lives because there is no will to sacrifice anything there.
  87. @Black-hole creator
    If the virus is as contagious as claimed, all those high-rise apartment buildings are perfect incubators through ventilation vents. AFAIK, it was claimed that was how some high rises in Hong Kong were centers of infection.

    A high percentage of NYC apartment buildings, being vintage structures, do not have the kind of air-recirculating central HVAC systems that you are picturing. Heating is provided via steam rising through pipes and venting through cast-iron radiators. Air conditioning is provided by the individual-room-size units mounted in windows, like the AC installed by Marilyn Monroe’s smitten, single-for-the-summer downstairs neighbor in “The Seven-Year Itch.”

  88. @Dr. X
    I think a LOT of people have been exposed, been asymptomatic, and developed antibodies. What follows is anecdotal, I know, but here goes:

    Wife works in hospital, has a co-worker. Co-worker's husband works in different healthcare facility. Co-worker's husband gets flu-like symptoms, tests positive for COVID, spends two weeks at home with what is basically the flu, recovers, goes back to work. Co-worker is completely asymptomatic despite living with a man who tested positive and had symptoms.

    Co-worker continues to work normally in hospital the entire time and is told she does not need to be tested because she is asymptomatic.

    I agree , many people have been exposed and are able to fight off Coronavirus without even creating antibodies. If you have a strong immune system you could defeat this CV with your innate, or non-specific, immune response. The innate immune response consists of physical, chemical and cellular defenses against pathogens. The main purpose of the innate immune response is to immediately prevent the spread and movement of foreign pathogens throughout the body. Your Natural killer cells, macrophages, neutrophils, dendritic cells, mast cells, basophils, eosinophils can defeat coronavirus before your body ever creates antibodies. This is why most people under the age of 50 will never get sick from CV. A significant number of CV patients never develop antibodies , even those hospitalized for CV and recovered will never develop antibodies, since they can cure themselves with their first line of defense.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    Nonspecific immunity has no immunological memory - it doesn’t protect you against subsequent (or different types of) exposures.
  89. @Steve Sailer
    "Also the Swedish feel that the IFR for the first cohort of fatalities will be much greater than future cohorts simply because the most vulnerable will tend to die first."

    Why?

    Steve, sorry I don’t know the answer to your question. In the attached video of Sweden’s semi-retired chief epidemiologist you will hear him state this at 10:00. Jamie12 might have a partial answer in that protection of people in nursing homes should get better as time goes on. But I think the Swede’s have other basis for this belief as well.

    https://unherd.com/thepost/coming-up-epidemiologist-prof-johan-giesecke-shares-lessons-from-sweden/

  90. @Divine Right

    If NYC is 1/3rd of the way to herd immunity, then 3 times the current 15,740 deaths would be about 47,000 deaths in NYC
     
    To put that number into perspective, that's more than the total estimated number of Americans who died across the whole country of seasonal flu in 7 of the past 10 years ... in one city. There was no "hysteria" here. The public was right to be afraid. The virus is just as deadly as many assumed it would be, but less so that the extremes claimed it might end up. I suspect that after Trump loses to Biden this November, there is going to be some soul-searching among the Dissident Right crowd who downplayed the virus and continued doing so even after it was clear they were wrong. That's a lot of reputational damage to endure just to prop up a reality tv show host who can't even keep his immigration promises during a national emergency (see Trump's fake immigration moratorium that doesn't cover the majority of cases). Even if there is /was a case for not imposing any kind of lockdown, these guys made it next to impossible to credibly make that case because they discredited themselves as reliable opinion sources at the outset. Also, urging your twitter followers to laugh at and socially shame face-mask wearers as "soy boys" in contravention to CDC advice when a deadly pathogen is floating about is thoroughly autistic.

    2018/2019 – 34,200 deaths
    2017/2018 – 61,000 deaths
    2016/2017 – 38,000 deaths
    2015/2016 – 23,000 deaths
    2014/2015 – 51,000 deaths
    2013/2014 – 38,000 deaths
    2012/2013 – 43,000 deaths
    2011/2012 – 12,000 deaths
    2010/2011 – 37,000 deaths

    https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/2018-2019.html
     

    To put that number into perspective, that’s more than the total estimated number of Americans who died across the whole country of seasonal flu in 7 of the past 10 years … in one city.

    But NOT as much as in three of the past 10 years. It’s almost like these flu epidemics vary in strength from year to year or something. And you’re using a total conjecture (3x deaths) to even get close to the scare number you want. To say nothing of the fact that a ten year period isn’t indicative of much anyway, as there were much worse spikes in the 60s and 70s and earlier. So yeah, maybe this is a bad flu year, but there have been many, many other bad flu years and the world didn’t shut down.

  91. @journey80
    Do they have antibodies to coronavirus, or are they actually testing for antibodies to COVID-19, whatever that is? Since no one seems to know exactly, or at least to admit, what COVID-19 really is, I'm guessing the former. Just a wild guess.

    We're hearing ad nauseam about the number of tests, the number of companies that are making the tests, the number of tests given, the number of tests needed, the desperate necessity of the tests before we can "re-open" the ruined local, state, national, and global economy.

    Here's what I want to hear asked and answered: Are the "tests" accurate? How do we know? Who says so? And WHAT DO THEY TEST FOR?

    When will someone take an interest in those questions? They seem pretty interesting to me. When will someone stand up and ask? And always keeping in mind cui bono, why should we trust the answer?

    Do they have antibodies to coronavirus, or are they actually testing for antibodies to COVID-19, whatever that is? Since no one seems to know exactly, or at least to admit, what COVID-19 really is, I’m guessing the former. Just a wild guess.

    We’re hearing ad nauseam about the number of tests, the number of companies that are making the tests, the number of tests given, the number of tests needed, the desperate necessity of the tests before we can “re-open” the ruined local, state, national, and global economy.

    Here’s what I want to hear asked and answered: Are the “tests” accurate? How do we know? Who says so? And WHAT DO THEY TEST FOR?

    When will someone take an interest in those questions? They seem pretty interesting to me. When will someone stand up and ask? And always keeping in mind cui bono, why should we trust the answer?

    Reposted for agreement and emphasis.

    • Replies: @vhrm
    Everybody is in agreement that there's a specific virus in the coronavirus family that is causing the current outbreak of respiratory infections.

    The virus has been named SARS-CoV-2.
    The disease it's causing has been named Covid-19.
    (like HIV and AIDS)

    The Sars-cov-2 has been collected around the world and had its RNA sequenced hundreds of times in the past 4 months so there is no controversy about the identity of what we're fighting.

    The tests for active infections (with the swabs) use RT PCR to match specific pieces of the RNA of the virus. They generally work well and have no cross-reactivity with other human coronaviruses so they are accurate in that sense.

    With the anti-body tests there is currently more variation and we have to "read the fine print" about how specific and sensitive each one is, (and that's why everyone is arguing about them in these threads),
    BUT it is top of mind for anyone making or using these things to report how well they discriminate between Sars-cov-2 antibodies vs other coronavirus antibodies.

  92. @Anonymous
    What was the middle one again ?

    Who gives a fuck about New York grocery shoppers.

    Ditch this bs where copying vague stats, anaysid from your old marketing days is big data.

    This is not informative nor interesting.

    “Who gives a fuck about New York grocery shoppers.”

    Much attention is lavished on NYC by the media hive who live in NYC. It’s already been said: if the NYC death-rate occurred in the intermountain states the story would be second or third below how New Yorkers feel about the death-rates in the intermountain states. NYC ceased being interesting in the mid-1980s. It’s time to send NYC out on one of those Eskimo ice floes.

  93. @potemkin villiage bank
    The radioactive micro particle dust clouds

    produced by the mini nukes used to bring down the towers on 9/11

    may also be a major contributory factor to the New York death rates

    among the aging population.

    Worst haiku ever.

  94. @Anonymous
    The final accepted official death rate for the Witch Corona will be right down there with influenza.

    Also look for the patient zero date in America to keep getting pushed backward on the calendar.

    Also look for the final SARS2 (covid19) CDC website info page to be filled with weasle words ----- just like SARS1.

    The final accepted official death rate for the Witch Corona will be right down there with influenza.

    No it won’t.

    Unless a) you mean population death rate AND b) there is a vaccine before next winter’s flu season.

    This is the kind of abject stupidity you get from a few commenters here. The 50,000 odd US China virus deaths are indeed ballpark of a severe but not world beating flu year. But we’re only at 50,000 because we stomped on this thing. Duh.

    Anyplace–towns in Diamond Princess, Northern Italy, some towns in Germany, NYC–this thing has gotten traction and tests show significant infection rate, there are also a bunch of deaths. Enough in many cases to far surpass any recent flu already–with lots of people still not infected.

    Totally on board with the argument that a lot–perhaps even most–of what was done was misguided even ridiculous. But this idea that this deal isn’t considerably–maybe 10X–more lethal than recent flu doesn’t square with the data.

    • Agree: Big Dick Bandit, Twinkie
    • Replies: @Big Dick Bandit
    just had to say that i find that you are consistently the most reasonable person i'm seeing--at Unz or anywhere else--on this whole thing.

    is it possible that full-lockdowns were suboptimal? yes, very much so. is it possible that this was more widespread than we thought, so some of the crazier Fatality Rates were off? yep. does any of that mean that this is "just the flu, bro"? definitely not.

    when this thing gets traction, it's pretty bad. does that mean FULL LOCKDOWN FOREVER, WE WILL NEVER GO BACK TO NORMAL is right? no!

    it is possible to hold both ideas simultaneously, if you aren't a moron.
  95. Hail says: • Website

    There is no word in press reports about what date the test is pegged to: Results announced April 24, but date of testing was on April 20, according to the NY governor’s press release.

    One of every five New York City residents tested positive for antibodies to the coronavirus

    A. Current Positives
    — 1a.) “Confirmed positives” (reported in the media; a number that is garbage for statistical analysis but is useful to promoters of the Panic)
    — 1b.) Never Tested current-positives
    B. Past Positives (antibodies)
    C. Never Positives

    (We want to know A+B for the denominator.)

    D: Deaths fairly attributable to the virus (cause of death: respiratory disease while positive [not death by some other cause] is going to be how to get D).

    Solve for D/(A+B) = fatality rate.

    __________

    If ‘B’ is 21% in NYC proper and 17% in the NYC suburbs, what is ‘A’?

    We now know that up to 99% show no real symptoms detectable to a given individual above his baseline fluctuation in condition, so the best way to guess at this and placate the forces of destruction that continue to insist this is a uniquely dangerous virus is to make these estimates.

    In the early-April Gangelt study in Germany, it was iirc 6:1 Past:Present positives at their stage in the local flu-spread arc there. Using the same number, adding in Current Positives means “A+B” (above) could have reached 25% in the NYC metro area, if this study had sound methodology. We don’t know the type I and type II error rates.

    All the recent studies out of Europe suggest this is not higher than 0.1%, though may be slightly higher in localized hotspots.

    • Replies: @Hail

    All the recent studies out of Europe suggest this is not higher than 0.1%, though may be slightly higher in localized hotspots.
     
    While New York City is a hotspot, at least in the game of "Throw Big Numbers and Scary Stories at People," it is still probably in the 0.1% range in a fairly measured fatality rate attributable to the virus.

    See also: Against the Corona Panic Pt. IV: What about New York City? A Case Study in Hysteria Pandemic vs. Virus Pandemic.

  96. Hail says: • Website
    @Hail
    There is no word in press reports about what date the test is pegged to: Results announced April 24, but date of testing was on April 20, according to the NY governor's press release.

    One of every five New York City residents tested positive for antibodies to the coronavirus
     
    A. Current Positives
    -- 1a.) "Confirmed positives" (reported in the media; a number that is garbage for statistical analysis but is useful to promoters of the Panic)
    -- 1b.) Never Tested current-positives
    B. Past Positives (antibodies)
    C. Never Positives

    (We want to know A+B for the denominator.)

    D: Deaths fairly attributable to the virus (cause of death: respiratory disease while positive [not death by some other cause] is going to be how to get D).

    Solve for D/(A+B) = fatality rate.

    __________

    If 'B' is 21% in NYC proper and 17% in the NYC suburbs, what is 'A'?

    We now know that up to 99% show no real symptoms detectable to a given individual above his baseline fluctuation in condition, so the best way to guess at this and placate the forces of destruction that continue to insist this is a uniquely dangerous virus is to make these estimates.

    In the early-April Gangelt study in Germany, it was iirc 6:1 Past:Present positives at their stage in the local flu-spread arc there. Using the same number, adding in Current Positives means "A+B" (above) could have reached 25% in the NYC metro area, if this study had sound methodology. We don't know the type I and type II error rates.

    All the recent studies out of Europe suggest this is not higher than 0.1%, though may be slightly higher in localized hotspots.

    All the recent studies out of Europe suggest this is not higher than 0.1%, though may be slightly higher in localized hotspots.

    While New York City is a hotspot, at least in the game of “Throw Big Numbers and Scary Stories at People,” it is still probably in the 0.1% range in a fairly measured fatality rate attributable to the virus.

    See also: Against the Corona Panic Pt. IV: What about New York City? A Case Study in Hysteria Pandemic vs. Virus Pandemic.

    • Replies: @Clifford Brown

    While New York City is a hotspot, at least in the game of “Throw Big Numbers and Scary Stories at People,” it is still probably in the 0.1% range in a fairly measured fatality rate attributable to the virus.
     
    While the fatality rates are nowhere near the 5.9% that the media initially reported, the fatality rates are likely multiples of .1%. It looks like the issue is, can we live with .5% fatality rates which is 500% that of the ordinary flu. It is a brutal disease, but not as bad as feared.

    The other unknown variable is what is the long term impact of being infected. Do you ever actually fully recover? Does the virus stay in the body long term such as with herpes and HIV? Is there long term organ damage? We don't know.
    , @tjoe
    Got sick in January and given the severity, I now think it was the cov19.

    Now I huff Ever-clear (95% ethyl alcohol), the best anti-viral there is, after going in public or just once a day. Put the vapors where the virus grows...in the sinus and lungs. EA damages the virus protective shell and then YOUR antibodies can "see" it and attack.
  97. Hail says: • Website
    @Ron Unz

    As of yesterday, New York City was at 15,740 official CV deaths, which include 5,000 who weren’t tested for CV. The population of New York City was 8.4 million people in 2018, so 15,740/(.21)*8,400,000 = 0.9% Infection Fatality Rate in NYC if this 21% Infection Rate is representative.
     
    Actually, the NYC "excess deaths" in just a recent six week period were over 19K, so the implied IFR from that naive calculation would probably be considerably north of 1.0%:

    https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/21/world/coronavirus-missing-deaths.html

    But as you emphasize, there are lots of complicating factors in the calculation.

    However, I think the methodology of this infection estimate in NYC is far superior to those ridiculous Santa Clara and LA studies associated with those Stanford people, and unsurprisingly, the results are vastly more plausible. After all, it looks like probably around 20K people have already died of the virus in NYC, so you'd expect high infection rates. The corresponding deaths in LA or Santa Clara are close to an order-of-magnitude too low for their supposed infection rates.

    Most of the excess deaths are now known to be deaths caused by the Panic itself and not by the virus. One example, as the Guardian recently reported, is the thousands of heart attack excess deaths that have been registered in London alone, all of whom they would have been able to save, all of whom were too terrified to seek treatment.

    This was a catastrophically bad reaction, laughably poor policy making, almost as if the leadership caste had all morphed into misanthropes. The Corona Reaction has already caused more deaths than it was supposed to prevent (to a historically unremarkable flu strain). And the worst is yet to come for the rest of us (recession, ongoing top-down disruption of lives, media-led hysteria ongoing bad for mental health of the whole).

    • Thanks: Manfred Arcane
  98. @Thatgirl
    Utu,

    A sincere question: How (and when) do you foresee this pandemic coming to an end?

    For me, Sweden's response is only "cynical" if one has a plausible alternative. Otherwise, their response can be seen as resolute and clear-sighted.

    I don't know the answer to this.

    I believe that the epidemic can be extinguished below the prevalence level of herd immunity with some behavioral adjustments, however Sweden’s chief epidemiologist claims that this is not possible and that everybody eventually will go to where Sweden is going now. Only Sweden will be there sooner and at a lower cost. In his mind the only difference is that people in Sweden will die sooner than in countries that have countermeasures. So he is OK with letting people in Sweden die sooner because prolonging their lives for another six or twelve month would cost too much I guess. But what if in six months a treatment is developed that would reduce IFR by factor of five or a vaccine? Like everything it comes down to the moral values and one can bring a utilitarian calculate into it. Personally I am very much put off by Sweden’s attitude of not trying to save human lives because there is no will to sacrifice anything there.

    • Replies: @Keypusher

    I believe that the epidemic can be extinguished below the prevalence level of herd immunity with some behavioral adjustments, however Sweden’s chief epidemiologist claims that this is not possible and that everybody eventually will go to where Sweden is going now.

     

    Thanks for clearly expressing what I think is the critical public policy question that needs to be answered now.
  99. In the OpenCalifornia Facebook group a woman posted last night that Kaiser called her friend in to take an antibody test and it came out positive. She was sick in November. Malibu resident and big traveler. Anecdotal, but an interesting data point. Orange County is coming on board with antibody tests in the next two weeks. The results will be interesting.

  100. @Gary in Gramercy
    That woman is now the front-runner to be Joe Biden's running mate.

    Is that Tim Kaine? He’s not just in the ‘hood, he’s on it!

  101. @AnotherDad

    The final accepted official death rate for the Witch Corona will be right down there with influenza.

     

    No it won't.

    Unless a) you mean population death rate AND b) there is a vaccine before next winter's flu season.

    This is the kind of abject stupidity you get from a few commenters here. The 50,000 odd US China virus deaths are indeed ballpark of a severe but not world beating flu year. But we're only at 50,000 because we stomped on this thing. Duh.

    Anyplace--towns in Diamond Princess, Northern Italy, some towns in Germany, NYC--this thing has gotten traction and tests show significant infection rate, there are also a bunch of deaths. Enough in many cases to far surpass any recent flu already--with lots of people still not infected.

    Totally on board with the argument that a lot--perhaps even most--of what was done was misguided even ridiculous. But this idea that this deal isn't considerably--maybe 10X--more lethal than recent flu doesn't square with the data.

    just had to say that i find that you are consistently the most reasonable person i’m seeing–at Unz or anywhere else–on this whole thing.

    is it possible that full-lockdowns were suboptimal? yes, very much so. is it possible that this was more widespread than we thought, so some of the crazier Fatality Rates were off? yep. does any of that mean that this is “just the flu, bro”? definitely not.

    when this thing gets traction, it’s pretty bad. does that mean FULL LOCKDOWN FOREVER, WE WILL NEVER GO BACK TO NORMAL is right? no!

    it is possible to hold both ideas simultaneously, if you aren’t a moron.

  102. @Travis
    I agree , many people have been exposed and are able to fight off Coronavirus without even creating antibodies. If you have a strong immune system you could defeat this CV with your innate, or non-specific, immune response. The innate immune response consists of physical, chemical and cellular defenses against pathogens. The main purpose of the innate immune response is to immediately prevent the spread and movement of foreign pathogens throughout the body. Your Natural killer cells, macrophages, neutrophils, dendritic cells, mast cells, basophils, eosinophils can defeat coronavirus before your body ever creates antibodies. This is why most people under the age of 50 will never get sick from CV. A significant number of CV patients never develop antibodies , even those hospitalized for CV and recovered will never develop antibodies, since they can cure themselves with their first line of defense.

    Nonspecific immunity has no immunological memory – it doesn’t protect you against subsequent (or different types of) exposures.

    • Replies: @Travis
    true , which is why these recovered CV patients may not have immunity. It does demonstrate that some people were able to recover overcome COVID 19 without creating antibodies by using their innate immune system. This is why it is good to have a string innate immune system, helps us avoid getting sick from all the germs we encounter daily.
    , @peterike

    Nonspecific immunity has no immunological memory – it doesn’t protect you against subsequent (or different types of) exposures.
     
    Yeah, but if your immune system brushed it off effortlessly once, wouldn't it just do that again and again as needed, assuming no sudden drop in your immune system? Our bodies fight off loads of bacterial and viral invaders all the time.

    Mine must be pretty good because I'm pushing 60 and I haven't had the flu since I was about 10, and I have never gotten a flu shot. It's ludicrous to think that in all that time I've never been exposed to flu viruses. Who's to say I haven't had Covid-19 in and out of my system multiple times already, given I live in the ultimate hot spot of New York City?

  103. Anon[368] • Disclaimer says:
    @Divine Right

    If NYC is 1/3rd of the way to herd immunity, then 3 times the current 15,740 deaths would be about 47,000 deaths in NYC
     
    To put that number into perspective, that's more than the total estimated number of Americans who died across the whole country of seasonal flu in 7 of the past 10 years ... in one city. There was no "hysteria" here. The public was right to be afraid. The virus is just as deadly as many assumed it would be, but less so that the extremes claimed it might end up. I suspect that after Trump loses to Biden this November, there is going to be some soul-searching among the Dissident Right crowd who downplayed the virus and continued doing so even after it was clear they were wrong. That's a lot of reputational damage to endure just to prop up a reality tv show host who can't even keep his immigration promises during a national emergency (see Trump's fake immigration moratorium that doesn't cover the majority of cases). Even if there is /was a case for not imposing any kind of lockdown, these guys made it next to impossible to credibly make that case because they discredited themselves as reliable opinion sources at the outset. Also, urging your twitter followers to laugh at and socially shame face-mask wearers as "soy boys" in contravention to CDC advice when a deadly pathogen is floating about is thoroughly autistic.

    2018/2019 – 34,200 deaths
    2017/2018 – 61,000 deaths
    2016/2017 – 38,000 deaths
    2015/2016 – 23,000 deaths
    2014/2015 – 51,000 deaths
    2013/2014 – 38,000 deaths
    2012/2013 – 43,000 deaths
    2011/2012 – 12,000 deaths
    2010/2011 – 37,000 deaths

    https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/2018-2019.html
     

    If NYC is 1/3rd of the way to herd immunity, then 3 times the current 15,740 deaths would be about 47,000 deaths in NYC

    To put that number into perspective, that’s more than the total estimated number of Americans who died across the whole country of seasonal flu in 7 of the past 10 years … in one city.

    The actual number is 15,740, even with juiced stats. So now you’re using theoretical numbers to prop up your argument. Then you cherry pick years and cherry pick US cities to try and further bolster your POS argument. SCIENCE!!!!!!11111111!!!!

    And I just want to clear something up for people who are too dumb to understand nuance. There is a difference between being anti politically motivated scientific consensus, and being “anti-science.” Just look how that French doctor is being received, because his study on hydroxychloroquine supported a Trump narrative. Nope, can’t have that. Can’t have any scientists cast doubt on global warming. Not allowed. Political consensus is anti-science. There is nothing wrong with empiricism, limited as it is, but when you worship science then you get 5′ 1″ bitter beta Fauci ruling over you because he never got the chicks. This guy should be running a pizza joint at most.

    That’s a lot of reputational damage to endure just to prop up a reality tv show host who can’t even keep his immigration promises during a national emergency (see Trump’s fake immigration moratorium that doesn’t cover the majority of cases).

    You don’t even believe in what Trump stood for in the first place because you’re a leftist. Thanks for jamming your already ubiquitous and tired MSNBC views down everyone’s throats. Because if there’s one thing people are clamoring for, it’s MOAR LEFTIST PROPAGANDA.

  104. @danand

    “I’m shopping without a mask, because I figure the longer I wait to get infected, the older I’ll be when it happens, and I like my chances better now than later.”
     
    Bill, it may be more prudent to wear the mask. Surviving the virus now will, at best, provide one with immunity for roughly a year at the outside. You’ll be just as vulnerable for next years round. Barring development of a successful, relatively safe, vaccine for SARS-VoC-2, there is little reason we will not be just as vulnerable to becoming infected next year; unless we continue to wear masks, social distance, etc... Large scale testing, and isolating the infected, is the only realistic “solution” currently available (presuming enough testing capacity).

    Surviving the virus now will, at best, provide one with immunity for roughly a year at the outside.

    There’s no reason to believe that it’ll be this short. Also immunity isn’t all or nothing… it fades over time so you can have a lesser course on subsequent reinfections.

    For original SARS, immunity level antibodies (in people who had severe illness) averaged 3 years

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2851497/

    It’s certainly possible that new sars behaves very differently but it’s more likely to be similar.

    • Replies: @danand

    “There’s no reason to believe that it’ll be this short. Also immunity isn’t all or nothing… it fades over time so you can have a lesser course on subsequent reinfections.”
     
    Vhrm, let’s hope you’re correct, and that the immunity profile for SARS-Cov-2 and that of the “original strain” is similar; 2 or 3 years of immunity would be exceptional. And that the Shanxi Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention findings are solid.

    There is at least some reason to suggest a more limited duration of immunity:

    https://flic.kr/p/2iU8g3r
  105. @utu
    Obviously this an utter nonsense. Only possible if you kept PFR higher for old people or you could just kill them all first and then certainly the IFR would be lower down the road. Are Swedes being fed such fairytales by their chief epidemiologist? I would not be surprised as he is desperate. 'leterip' is not the first Swede I have heard it from. The term front loading was used. Perhaps it comes from a Nordic Saga where bribing a dragon with a young virgin stops it from coming to town?

    “or you could just kill them all first and then certainly the IFR would be lower down the road. ”

    Data from NYC indicate most of the people who’ve died have been over 60, and >90% had co-morbidities (other iSteve post). This would seem to be the most vulnerable group. And the death rates there are high. But those would seem to be the easy kills for the virus. Since the original population had, say, 10% of people being old and with co-morbidities, and a larger percentage of those died, say 20% of them, then the new population might look something like this:
    If it was originally 1,000,000 people, it now has 975,000 people. 80,000 of them are the 10% from earlier, minus the 20% who died, and 895,000 of them survived of the 900,000 in population who weren’t in the 10% old and comorbid group.

    If the same percentage of people die this time, you lose 4972 of the non-old, and 16,000 of the old. That works out to 2.15% of the population dying in the second round; you’d have to expect that the death number in the “old” group would be lower, because some number of them are already immune.

    Well, this is confused. I apologize for that. I guess the point remains: if a group with a higher death rate is killed off more in the first round, the second round will have fewer of those people available to kill, so their higher death rate will extend over a smaller number of people; a higher percentage of the people being infected in the second round will come from the smaller death rate group, so it HAS to drop the IFR for the second round, assuming the same percentages of both groups die in round #2.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Assume 21% of NYC population infected so far with IFR of 0.9%, with all 21% being immune for 2 years, with the infection rate being random in terms of likelihood to die: e.g., young triathletes and old fat people were equally likely to be infected, with the latter being more likely to die.

    Then the next 21% to be infected (randomly, under our assumption) will most likely have the same IFR (assuming no improvements in treatment for the infected). And so will the next 21% after that.

    On the other hand, if the virus comes back in, say, 5 years after all immunities from the 2020 Wave are lost, then the IFR would be expected to be lower in this 2025 Wave because NYC would have fewer but hardier New Yorkers due to the disproportionate deaths of the old and fat in 2020.

    On the other hand, if the infection rate is not random with respect to likelihood to die, then the IFR in the rest of this wave could be higher or lower. For example, if nursing home patients are particularly likely to have been infected, then maybe there would be fewer nursing home patients to be infected. But if 20-something skiers and dance clubbers were more likely to be infected so far than the old and the fat, then the IFR could go up as the infection rate grows among the less vigorous.

  106. @Mehen


    Do they have antibodies to coronavirus, or are they actually testing for antibodies to COVID-19, whatever that is? Since no one seems to know exactly, or at least to admit, what COVID-19 really is, I’m guessing the former. Just a wild guess.

    We’re hearing ad nauseam about the number of tests, the number of companies that are making the tests, the number of tests given, the number of tests needed, the desperate necessity of the tests before we can “re-open” the ruined local, state, national, and global economy.

    Here’s what I want to hear asked and answered: Are the “tests” accurate? How do we know? Who says so? And WHAT DO THEY TEST FOR?

    When will someone take an interest in those questions? They seem pretty interesting to me. When will someone stand up and ask? And always keeping in mind cui bono, why should we trust the answer?
     
    Reposted for agreement and emphasis.

    Everybody is in agreement that there’s a specific virus in the coronavirus family that is causing the current outbreak of respiratory infections.

    The virus has been named SARS-CoV-2.
    The disease it’s causing has been named Covid-19.
    (like HIV and AIDS)

    The Sars-cov-2 has been collected around the world and had its RNA sequenced hundreds of times in the past 4 months so there is no controversy about the identity of what we’re fighting.

    The tests for active infections (with the swabs) use RT PCR to match specific pieces of the RNA of the virus. They generally work well and have no cross-reactivity with other human coronaviruses so they are accurate in that sense.

    With the anti-body tests there is currently more variation and we have to “read the fine print” about how specific and sensitive each one is, (and that’s why everyone is arguing about them in these threads),
    BUT it is top of mind for anyone making or using these things to report how well they discriminate between Sars-cov-2 antibodies vs other coronavirus antibodies.

    • Replies: @Mehen
    Thanks but you gave me the conventional surface-level rationale that I was already aware of. I’m curious if you are aware of the technical criticisms made by folks who seem to know a bit more than the average bear. The following (now “old”) article by an anonymous “expert” was one of the first things I read that started turning me away from CoronaPanic. Please avoid the cheap-shot dig that the author is anonymous and just consider the internal logic of what he is saying. This is just one article but there are others.

    https://www.globalresearch.ca/manufactured-pandemic-testing-people-any-strain-coronavirus-not-specifically-covid-19/5707781
  107. @Twinkie
    Nonspecific immunity has no immunological memory - it doesn’t protect you against subsequent (or different types of) exposures.

    true , which is why these recovered CV patients may not have immunity. It does demonstrate that some people were able to recover overcome COVID 19 without creating antibodies by using their innate immune system. This is why it is good to have a string innate immune system, helps us avoid getting sick from all the germs we encounter daily.

  108. @Twinkie
    Nonspecific immunity has no immunological memory - it doesn’t protect you against subsequent (or different types of) exposures.

    Nonspecific immunity has no immunological memory – it doesn’t protect you against subsequent (or different types of) exposures.

    Yeah, but if your immune system brushed it off effortlessly once, wouldn’t it just do that again and again as needed, assuming no sudden drop in your immune system? Our bodies fight off loads of bacterial and viral invaders all the time.

    Mine must be pretty good because I’m pushing 60 and I haven’t had the flu since I was about 10, and I have never gotten a flu shot. It’s ludicrous to think that in all that time I’ve never been exposed to flu viruses. Who’s to say I haven’t had Covid-19 in and out of my system multiple times already, given I live in the ultimate hot spot of New York City?

    • Replies: @Twinkie

    Yeah, but if your immune system brushed it off effortlessly once, wouldn’t it just do that again and again as needed
     
    You are assuming subsequent exposures will be of the same intensity or of similarly favorable conditions. This is not necessarily true.

    Nonspecific immunity encompasses a whole host of bodily features and functions that resist foreign pathogens in general. These include physical and chemical barriers (skin, saliva, stomach acid, etc.) as well as inflammations, fever, phagocytes, and so on. So, for example, if you ingested a virus and the saliva and stomach acid broke it down harmlessly does not mean when you experience another form of exposure - respiratory into your lung - your body will be immune.

    In contrast, specific immunity provided by antibody production confers immunological memory and makes you immune to the specific virus (though not necessarily 100% and possibly of limited duration).
  109. @vhrm
    Everybody is in agreement that there's a specific virus in the coronavirus family that is causing the current outbreak of respiratory infections.

    The virus has been named SARS-CoV-2.
    The disease it's causing has been named Covid-19.
    (like HIV and AIDS)

    The Sars-cov-2 has been collected around the world and had its RNA sequenced hundreds of times in the past 4 months so there is no controversy about the identity of what we're fighting.

    The tests for active infections (with the swabs) use RT PCR to match specific pieces of the RNA of the virus. They generally work well and have no cross-reactivity with other human coronaviruses so they are accurate in that sense.

    With the anti-body tests there is currently more variation and we have to "read the fine print" about how specific and sensitive each one is, (and that's why everyone is arguing about them in these threads),
    BUT it is top of mind for anyone making or using these things to report how well they discriminate between Sars-cov-2 antibodies vs other coronavirus antibodies.

    Thanks but you gave me the conventional surface-level rationale that I was already aware of. I’m curious if you are aware of the technical criticisms made by folks who seem to know a bit more than the average bear. The following (now “old”) article by an anonymous “expert” was one of the first things I read that started turning me away from CoronaPanic. Please avoid the cheap-shot dig that the author is anonymous and just consider the internal logic of what he is saying. This is just one article but there are others.

    https://www.globalresearch.ca/manufactured-pandemic-testing-people-any-strain-coronavirus-not-specifically-covid-19/5707781

    • Replies: @vhrm
    The message you originally quoted for amplification asks if we know what Covid-19 is. And yes we do.

    As to that particular globalresearch .ca article: it came up around the time it was written and I'll say the same thing i said then:


    That article strikes me as BS.

    This pdf describes the LabCorp COVID-19 RT-PCR Test
    (https://www.fda.gov/media/136151/download )

    The test matches three specific pieces of the Sars-cov-2 RNA and reports them independently.

    There’s a table in there on cross-reactivity that tested it against ~30 other pathogens, including the other human coronaviruses and the test shows negative across the board except that the 3rd segment also matches , Sars-cov, the original SARS virus.

    There might be some problems with the tests but they’re not as basic as this guy makes them sound.
     

    (https://www.unz.com/isteve/california-public-school-campuses-wont-reopen-this-spring/#comment-3809260)
  110. @TomSchmidt
    "or you could just kill them all first and then certainly the IFR would be lower down the road. "

    Data from NYC indicate most of the people who've died have been over 60, and >90% had co-morbidities (other iSteve post). This would seem to be the most vulnerable group. And the death rates there are high. But those would seem to be the easy kills for the virus. Since the original population had, say, 10% of people being old and with co-morbidities, and a larger percentage of those died, say 20% of them, then the new population might look something like this:
    If it was originally 1,000,000 people, it now has 975,000 people. 80,000 of them are the 10% from earlier, minus the 20% who died, and 895,000 of them survived of the 900,000 in population who weren't in the 10% old and comorbid group.

    If the same percentage of people die this time, you lose 4972 of the non-old, and 16,000 of the old. That works out to 2.15% of the population dying in the second round; you'd have to expect that the death number in the "old" group would be lower, because some number of them are already immune.

    Well, this is confused. I apologize for that. I guess the point remains: if a group with a higher death rate is killed off more in the first round, the second round will have fewer of those people available to kill, so their higher death rate will extend over a smaller number of people; a higher percentage of the people being infected in the second round will come from the smaller death rate group, so it HAS to drop the IFR for the second round, assuming the same percentages of both groups die in round #2.

    Assume 21% of NYC population infected so far with IFR of 0.9%, with all 21% being immune for 2 years, with the infection rate being random in terms of likelihood to die: e.g., young triathletes and old fat people were equally likely to be infected, with the latter being more likely to die.

    Then the next 21% to be infected (randomly, under our assumption) will most likely have the same IFR (assuming no improvements in treatment for the infected). And so will the next 21% after that.

    On the other hand, if the virus comes back in, say, 5 years after all immunities from the 2020 Wave are lost, then the IFR would be expected to be lower in this 2025 Wave because NYC would have fewer but hardier New Yorkers due to the disproportionate deaths of the old and fat in 2020.

    On the other hand, if the infection rate is not random with respect to likelihood to die, then the IFR in the rest of this wave could be higher or lower. For example, if nursing home patients are particularly likely to have been infected, then maybe there would be fewer nursing home patients to be infected. But if 20-something skiers and dance clubbers were more likely to be infected so far than the old and the fat, then the IFR could go up as the infection rate grows among the less vigorous.

    • Replies: @TomSchmidt
    I think I've confused population fatality rate with IFR: the former must drop, ceteris paribus, while the latter, per your example, does not have to. You'll still kill the same percentage of the infected, but a lower percentage of the population because the population will have a higher percentage of less-vulnerable people. Thanks for the example; I knew I had missed something.
    , @Polynikes
    You don’t get better at treating it so much as you get better at protecting the vulnerable population while allowing others to get it. Like the flu.

    We know nursing homes are vulnerable. So unlike NYC where they put infected residents back in the nursing home (artificially pumping up the IFR) we separate them. Additionally as the portion of the health care workers with immunity rise, you can credibly shield most of the old and vulnerable.
  111. @Chrisnonymous

    21% of NYC Grocery Shoppers Have Antibodies
     
    I bet they all have antibodies. But which ones?!

    Also...

    21% of NYC Grocery Shoppers Have Antibodies
     
    I bet it's closer to 50%. And 50% have probodies. Antibodies and probodies. That's life in 2020 America!!

    And all GoodThinkers are problackbodies and antiwhitebodies.

  112. @Bill Jones
    " So far SARS-CoV-2 has taken over 2000 there"

    You can't say that.

    The definition of dying from the WuFlu has been conflated of dying with the Wuflu.

    The joke in London is that it is a miracle cure: It's been 6 weeks since anybody has died from a heart attack,

    Yes, well, that’S why I look at excess death rates. there have been a lot of above-baseline deaths in the time of COVID. If it’s a high but narrow spike, it might kill fewer people than the flu, but I wouldn’t place that bet now.

    The UK has a LOT of excess deaths. Some of them must be the virus, no?

  113. @Steve Sailer
    Assume 21% of NYC population infected so far with IFR of 0.9%, with all 21% being immune for 2 years, with the infection rate being random in terms of likelihood to die: e.g., young triathletes and old fat people were equally likely to be infected, with the latter being more likely to die.

    Then the next 21% to be infected (randomly, under our assumption) will most likely have the same IFR (assuming no improvements in treatment for the infected). And so will the next 21% after that.

    On the other hand, if the virus comes back in, say, 5 years after all immunities from the 2020 Wave are lost, then the IFR would be expected to be lower in this 2025 Wave because NYC would have fewer but hardier New Yorkers due to the disproportionate deaths of the old and fat in 2020.

    On the other hand, if the infection rate is not random with respect to likelihood to die, then the IFR in the rest of this wave could be higher or lower. For example, if nursing home patients are particularly likely to have been infected, then maybe there would be fewer nursing home patients to be infected. But if 20-something skiers and dance clubbers were more likely to be infected so far than the old and the fat, then the IFR could go up as the infection rate grows among the less vigorous.

    I think I’ve confused population fatality rate with IFR: the former must drop, ceteris paribus, while the latter, per your example, does not have to. You’ll still kill the same percentage of the infected, but a lower percentage of the population because the population will have a higher percentage of less-vulnerable people. Thanks for the example; I knew I had missed something.

  114. @PiltdownMan
    PiltdownBrother2 lives alone in a Manhattan high rise apartment and is in his eighth decade.

    He says it has been almost impossible for him to avoid contact with other New York City residents for more than a couple of days at a time, even though he hasn't used public transportation in six weeks and has tried to be very careful.

    In the City, not all supermarkets and grocery stores deliver. The amount of groceries and supplies he can carry home in shopping bags by hand is limited, necessitating more than one trip a week out of his building.

    Also, like in many residential high-rises in that city, laundry facilities are communal-buildings have a few washer-dryers in a laundry room on each floor, or, in his building, more than a dozen in a basement laundry room. He inevitably has contact with neighbors down there, and his clothing goes in the same machines that others have used.

    I'm not surprised so many people in New York City have antibodies to Covid-19. Despite the lockdown, they've likely been exposed to each others germs in many ways that would likely not be possible in the living arrangements typical in most of the rest of America.

    It is not at all surprising that NYC turned out to be the epicenter of this thing. It is the most densely populated city north of the Rio Grande. With 8.4 million people (probably more) living shoulder-to-shoulder (so to speak), many if not most of whom availing themselves of the largest mass transportation system in the Western Hemisphere, given how contagious the virus is the chances of mass infection are for all intents and purposes 100%. Thus, level of developmental immunity which appears to have followed comes as no surprise.

    Slightly OT but given the obvious connection with population density, I wonder if this phenomenon will eventually trigger mass movement to less densely populated environs. Could be interesting.

    • Replies: @epebble
    But much less impact in Tokyo, Seoul, Taipei, Hong Kong, Singapore, Jakarta, Manila, Delhi, Bombay, Mexico City, Sao Paulo ....

    Somewhat similar impact in London, Paris, Rome, Madrid, Amsterdam, Brussels.
  115. @Prester John
    It is not at all surprising that NYC turned out to be the epicenter of this thing. It is the most densely populated city north of the Rio Grande. With 8.4 million people (probably more) living shoulder-to-shoulder (so to speak), many if not most of whom availing themselves of the largest mass transportation system in the Western Hemisphere, given how contagious the virus is the chances of mass infection are for all intents and purposes 100%. Thus, level of developmental immunity which appears to have followed comes as no surprise.

    Slightly OT but given the obvious connection with population density, I wonder if this phenomenon will eventually trigger mass movement to less densely populated environs. Could be interesting.

    But much less impact in Tokyo, Seoul, Taipei, Hong Kong, Singapore, Jakarta, Manila, Delhi, Bombay, Mexico City, Sao Paulo ….

    Somewhat similar impact in London, Paris, Rome, Madrid, Amsterdam, Brussels.

  116. @UK
    Hospitals are the main vector. They are also where dying people congregate.

    Indeed, if you're dying at hospital of just about anything then you're almost certainly going to be infected by Covid as well. Naturally, the death certificate will say Coronachan did it.

    Furthermore, the correlation between being vulnerable to dying of a pathogen and being vulnerable to being infected by it is well-established.

    That is, those who are identified backwards from case profiles of most likely to succumb once infected may also be predicted to be most likely to get it in the first place; although that will change over time with human action based on this fact.

    Anyway, this is all moot. It will spread through the population unless we remain more locked down than we already are and remain so indefinitely.

    It is a pandemic and will not go away, or will just come back again and again if stamped out even with the required grim authoritarian action. It may also evolve as pressured by the lockdown.

    The lockdown itself will do more damage than the virus ever could and no cure nor vaccine may ever be found.

    In other words, what's your plan? Indefinite home arrest for the entire population? Is there a time limit in years or even decades for this?

    Or are you hoping that track and trace will do it? Given that people are contagious before symptoms, this isn't actually very effective. The societies that have done it have also lockdowned far stronger than Sweden. So it is just back to a slightly lighter form of indefinite home arrest for everyone for years or even decades.

    "Stay at home (indefinitely...maybe until you die of old age or, more understandably, drink yourself to death)."

    Control freaks are generally old men who have spent their lives so emotionally repressed that they can't even tell how their feelings are affecting their thoughts anymore.

    Hystericals are generally women who have never learnt to get their feelings into perspective.

    Neither has any perspective (sight) on how they feel and become remarkably similar.

    If members of either group wants to stay at home then that's fine with me. Their company will not be missed. But since both are desperate for everyone else to be similarly miserable forever (and that's the real truth), I can't be bothered to hide my disdain anymore. Beneath contempt.

    Unless they are below 35, then I can sort of live with people just needing to grow up.

    All nonsense. It’s a new disease in humans: except for the small fraction that has recently has had it, everybody susceptible to it. And so on: all your ‘facts” are made up.

    • LOL: UK
    • Replies: @shawfactor
    Stop being alarmist Greg.

    This virus is not that deadly, and it appears many have already had it (with zero symptoms) and could even be no more dangerous that the flu at 0.1% (As many so called corona virus deaths are mis classified).

    It is not mutating fast (other corona viruses don't ) and has peaked already. If it comes back we shall be ready, so level of immunity will exist, and we may have a vaccine.

    Your are starting to look silly and ruin your reputation for intelligence.

  117. Now this:

    https://www.miamiherald.com/news/coronavirus/article242260406.html

    and this:

    https://www.delawareonline.com/story/news/2020/04/23/new-castle-county-poop-suggests-higher-covid-19-infection-rate/3015643001/

    Add these to all of the antibody studies so far that are all pointing in the same direction: way more prevalence than case numbers indicate; way lower IFR than we were told to expect. And sewage testing doesn’t seem as liable to obvious bias issues that’ve been raised against the other tests.

    At the risk of exposing myself to yet more ridicule by my intellectual superiors, it can appear to a naif like myself that many of the more quantitatively gifted focus on the effects of this virus as an intrinsic function of its properties, governed by well worked and well formalized regularities.

    But it seems as if the virulence of this, or anything, is an extrinsic function of innumerable variables almost to the point of it resisting, in toto, any coherent modeling at all. To that, the response is, ‘yes; random seeding and then exponential growth; all very clean’. But is that all we’re seeing? San Francisco is the densest city on the West Coast; arguably got the first seedings (the first fatality worked in Fremont near Tesla and wasn’t a shut in); mass transit till mid March was packed and almost no masks were worn. Why so lucky? Too few nursing homes; too few ventilations?

    Sounds like understanding this is as much about psychology and sociology as it is about understanding differential equations.

    • Replies: @Mehen
    https://www.unz.com/announcement/open-thread-2/#comment-3832243


    It is becoming clearer day by day that the current medical crisis constitutes a multifactorial phenomenon of such complexity that only an appreciation of a varied number of inputs can begin to account for it.

    This notion is light-years away from the egg-heads who simplistically berated us over our supposed lack of understanding of “exponential growth”.

    Such a focus on “exponential growth” to the exclusion of all other concerns is probably an indicator of autism.
     
    Ya herd DAT Ronnie-Boy??
  118. For the last two months all I’m seeing is a combination of chickens and chicken littles

  119. @Deckin
    Now this:

    https://www.miamiherald.com/news/coronavirus/article242260406.html

    and this:

    https://www.delawareonline.com/story/news/2020/04/23/new-castle-county-poop-suggests-higher-covid-19-infection-rate/3015643001/

    Add these to all of the antibody studies so far that are all pointing in the same direction: way more prevalence than case numbers indicate; way lower IFR than we were told to expect. And sewage testing doesn't seem as liable to obvious bias issues that've been raised against the other tests.

    At the risk of exposing myself to yet more ridicule by my intellectual superiors, it can appear to a naif like myself that many of the more quantitatively gifted focus on the effects of this virus as an intrinsic function of its properties, governed by well worked and well formalized regularities.

    But it seems as if the virulence of this, or anything, is an extrinsic function of innumerable variables almost to the point of it resisting, in toto, any coherent modeling at all. To that, the response is, 'yes; random seeding and then exponential growth; all very clean'. But is that all we're seeing? San Francisco is the densest city on the West Coast; arguably got the first seedings (the first fatality worked in Fremont near Tesla and wasn't a shut in); mass transit till mid March was packed and almost no masks were worn. Why so lucky? Too few nursing homes; too few ventilations?

    Sounds like understanding this is as much about psychology and sociology as it is about understanding differential equations.

    https://www.unz.com/announcement/open-thread-2/#comment-3832243

    It is becoming clearer day by day that the current medical crisis constitutes a multifactorial phenomenon of such complexity that only an appreciation of a varied number of inputs can begin to account for it.

    This notion is light-years away from the egg-heads who simplistically berated us over our supposed lack of understanding of “exponential growth”.

    Such a focus on “exponential growth” to the exclusion of all other concerns is probably an indicator of autism.

    Ya herd DAT Ronnie-Boy??

  120. @Mehen
    Thanks but you gave me the conventional surface-level rationale that I was already aware of. I’m curious if you are aware of the technical criticisms made by folks who seem to know a bit more than the average bear. The following (now “old”) article by an anonymous “expert” was one of the first things I read that started turning me away from CoronaPanic. Please avoid the cheap-shot dig that the author is anonymous and just consider the internal logic of what he is saying. This is just one article but there are others.

    https://www.globalresearch.ca/manufactured-pandemic-testing-people-any-strain-coronavirus-not-specifically-covid-19/5707781

    The message you originally quoted for amplification asks if we know what Covid-19 is. And yes we do.

    As to that particular globalresearch .ca article: it came up around the time it was written and I’ll say the same thing i said then:

    That article strikes me as BS.

    This pdf describes the LabCorp COVID-19 RT-PCR Test
    (https://www.fda.gov/media/136151/download )

    The test matches three specific pieces of the Sars-cov-2 RNA and reports them independently.

    There’s a table in there on cross-reactivity that tested it against ~30 other pathogens, including the other human coronaviruses and the test shows negative across the board except that the 3rd segment also matches , Sars-cov, the original SARS virus.

    There might be some problems with the tests but they’re not as basic as this guy makes them sound.

    (https://www.unz.com/isteve/california-public-school-campuses-wont-reopen-this-spring/#comment-3809260)

    • Thanks: Mehen
  121. @Hail

    All the recent studies out of Europe suggest this is not higher than 0.1%, though may be slightly higher in localized hotspots.
     
    While New York City is a hotspot, at least in the game of "Throw Big Numbers and Scary Stories at People," it is still probably in the 0.1% range in a fairly measured fatality rate attributable to the virus.

    See also: Against the Corona Panic Pt. IV: What about New York City? A Case Study in Hysteria Pandemic vs. Virus Pandemic.

    While New York City is a hotspot, at least in the game of “Throw Big Numbers and Scary Stories at People,” it is still probably in the 0.1% range in a fairly measured fatality rate attributable to the virus.

    While the fatality rates are nowhere near the 5.9% that the media initially reported, the fatality rates are likely multiples of .1%. It looks like the issue is, can we live with .5% fatality rates which is 500% that of the ordinary flu. It is a brutal disease, but not as bad as feared.

    The other unknown variable is what is the long term impact of being infected. Do you ever actually fully recover? Does the virus stay in the body long term such as with herpes and HIV? Is there long term organ damage? We don’t know.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    The NYC infection fatality rate is higher than I expected.

    Other places have lower IFRs than NYC.

    I'm not sure what is going on.

  122. At this point, there are 30 strains of this disease. Does having antibodies for one strain mean you are immune to all? This is a big assumption and I doubt this is the case.

    Does the virus ever actually leave the body or can this develop into a lifelong disease that may reassert itself as the infected age or as their immune system becomes compromised. I think there is a real chance of reinfection that calls into question this reliance on antibody testing.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    AFAIK, they've identified two strains and some virologists dispute that, maintaining the two 'strains' are so similar, you can't call them separate strains.
  123. @Anonymousse
    Someone needs to coin a phrase for whatever the inverse of whistling past the graveyard is. We really need a shorthand for the insistence on intoning doom in a portentous and self serious fashion despite the overwhelming and ever increasing evidence that everything was fine all along.

    We’ve also run out of easy ways of describing increasing one’s rhetorical investment in an already disproven narrative... we’ve exceeded mere doubling down and even the rarer tripling down and moved on to quintupling and even septupling down... stronger stuff is needed.

    Either a lot of people will need to be forcefully reacquainted with reality soon or our language will need significant updates. Certainly a few hundred billion dollars can be printed for this purpose while we safely netflicks at home away from this horrible deadly virus!

    As we know this is costless with the economy helpfully humming along autonomously in the meantime.

    Did somebody rip the “Chicken Little” story out of all your nursery books?

  124. @Clifford Brown

    While New York City is a hotspot, at least in the game of “Throw Big Numbers and Scary Stories at People,” it is still probably in the 0.1% range in a fairly measured fatality rate attributable to the virus.
     
    While the fatality rates are nowhere near the 5.9% that the media initially reported, the fatality rates are likely multiples of .1%. It looks like the issue is, can we live with .5% fatality rates which is 500% that of the ordinary flu. It is a brutal disease, but not as bad as feared.

    The other unknown variable is what is the long term impact of being infected. Do you ever actually fully recover? Does the virus stay in the body long term such as with herpes and HIV? Is there long term organ damage? We don't know.

    The NYC infection fatality rate is higher than I expected.

    Other places have lower IFRs than NYC.

    I’m not sure what is going on.

    • Replies: @Mehen
    Perhaps the more dangerous strain in NYC was retaliation by the CCP for the U.S.’s preemptive strike in Wuhan?

    Does anyone else remember the two AIPAC attendees in NY who caught it? That would be a sensible target for the Chinese to aim for.
    , @Bill P
    A lot of people in a climate that doesn't jibe with their adaptations. It's the same reason darker people died more from respiratory disease in NY in the 18th century. This has been observed in Stockholm as well.
  125. @Steve Sailer
    The NYC infection fatality rate is higher than I expected.

    Other places have lower IFRs than NYC.

    I'm not sure what is going on.

    Perhaps the more dangerous strain in NYC was retaliation by the CCP for the U.S.’s preemptive strike in Wuhan?

    Does anyone else remember the two AIPAC attendees in NY who caught it? That would be a sensible target for the Chinese to aim for.

    • Replies: @Hail
    Is the idea of the same virus in one city as more dangerous than in another, is this based on evidence from lab work or the like? Or is it a conjecture based on reports of total coronavirus-positive deaths? If it's just numbers, there is a lot of room for error there.

    Numbers always deserve a close look, especially when something seems "off," as in one city having a supposedly much-higher fatality rate than another. I write about this here:

    Against the Corona Panic Pt. IV: What about New York City? A Case Study in Hysteria Pandemic vs. Virus Pandemic (April 23).

    We know with certainty now, for example, that the Panic has caused thousands of corona-negative excess deaths. If the population-penetration of the virus is as high as was reasonable to assume, the farcical scenario warned about by some, in which "theoretically if a virus goes to 100% in a population, ALL deaths will be 'coronavirus deaths'," comes true.

    All things considered, I think evidence points to the direct, virus-attributable fatality rate in the New York City area down at, or close to, 0.1%, plus an ongoing increase in total mortality attributable to the Panic conditions. This, I predict, will be the consensus view of experts when the smoke clears (and I imagine already is now; but it's not yet publicly sayable in explicit terms; very politically sensitive. It depends how long our the "media-run state" keeps up the Corona Panic).

  126. @Black-hole creator
    Why would you have to shop twice a week ? Pretty much everything can be stored for at least two weeks, except maybe for bananas and artisanal breads. I am maintaining a once a 3-week shopping pace without much strain on my diet, although I might go tomorrow to stock up on fresh meat before it is too late.

    I also had a sore throat bout about a month ago with some chills if I remember correctly, right when the corona-panic started in SoCal. But I am not counting myself on being lucky, that was probably a regular sore throat thing. The confirmation bias is a dangerous effect. I would continue wearing mask if were you, if only out of respect for other shoppers. Two weeks ago everybody wearing masks at my local Vons and most were wearing gloves, except for one black dude and he looked creepy without a mask on.

    I used to shop almost every day. I like to cook with fresh vegetables, I don’t have a big fridge, and I have kids, so three weeks would be too long to go without a trip to the store. I could probably get by with once every ten days, but good, home-cooked food is one of the few luxuries left to us now, so I’m not going to take that away from my family.

    I get your point about the confirmation bias, and I’m aware that my chances of having already contracted this bug are far from certain. But I really don’t think I can successfully avoid it over the long run, either. As far as the masks are concerned, I’ll wear one if the grocery store employees start doing so as well, but most of them still don’t. I think taking my cues from the “essential workers” is probably the right choice, because they are in the middle of it and have a more accurate sense of the risk than the media.

    I’ve said over and over again here that I take this virus seriously and that it scares me, but I have to obey reason rather than blind fear. And reason tells me that my chance of death in this pandemic is well under one percent. That doesn’t mean there’s no way I’ll die, but rather that there may be something like a 50% higher chance (probably a gross overestimate) I’ll die this year than last, and I can live with that. Actually, I have to live with that, so why not carry on?

    Also, I believe on a philosophical basis in an immortal soul. That helps put it all in perspective.

  127. @newrouter
    >Actually, the NYC “excess deaths” in just a recent five week period were over 19K,<

    "Excessive deaths" now are reduced deaths in 6 months. A numbers game if you will. Because in 6 months you have to add in traffic deaths et al.

    “Excessive deaths” now are reduced deaths in 6 months

    “I am convinced that Corona mortality rate will not even show up as a peak in annual mortality.” — Dr Klaus Püschel, head of forensic medicine, Hamburg, early April

  128. @Mark G.

    Someone needs to coin a phrase for whatever the inverse of whistling past the graveyard is. We really need a shorthand for the insistence on intoning doom in a portentous and self serious fashion despite the overwhelming and ever increasing evidence that everything was fine all along.

     

    As a child fifty years ago I heard a person something like this called a "Henny Penny". Wikipedia says it comes from an old English folk tale and "has passed into the English language as a common idiom indicating a hysterical or mistaken belief that disaster is imminent. Similar stories go back more than 25 centuries".

    “Nervous Nellie?”

    nervous Nellie (plural nervous Nellies)

    (informal) A person whose personality and behavior are characterized by worry, insecurity, and timidity.

    https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/nervous_Nellie

  129. Hail says: • Website
    @Mehen
    Perhaps the more dangerous strain in NYC was retaliation by the CCP for the U.S.’s preemptive strike in Wuhan?

    Does anyone else remember the two AIPAC attendees in NY who caught it? That would be a sensible target for the Chinese to aim for.

    Is the idea of the same virus in one city as more dangerous than in another, is this based on evidence from lab work or the like? Or is it a conjecture based on reports of total coronavirus-positive deaths? If it’s just numbers, there is a lot of room for error there.

    Numbers always deserve a close look, especially when something seems “off,” as in one city having a supposedly much-higher fatality rate than another. I write about this here:

    Against the Corona Panic Pt. IV: What about New York City? A Case Study in Hysteria Pandemic vs. Virus Pandemic (April 23).

    We know with certainty now, for example, that the Panic has caused thousands of corona-negative excess deaths. If the population-penetration of the virus is as high as was reasonable to assume, the farcical scenario warned about by some, in which “theoretically if a virus goes to 100% in a population, ALL deaths will be ‘coronavirus deaths’,” comes true.

    All things considered, I think evidence points to the direct, virus-attributable fatality rate in the New York City area down at, or close to, 0.1%, plus an ongoing increase in total mortality attributable to the Panic conditions. This, I predict, will be the consensus view of experts when the smoke clears (and I imagine already is now; but it’s not yet publicly sayable in explicit terms; very politically sensitive. It depends how long our the “media-run state” keeps up the Corona Panic).

    • Replies: @Mehen

    Is the idea of the same virus in one city as more dangerous than in another, is this based on evidence from lab work or the like?
     
    I asked your opinion about the “different strains” evidence a few days ago. So no, merely asserting they are all the same strain — or at least, that the different strains all have the same sequelae — is something very much in question.

    I believe the evidence is clear that there are different “strains”. Whether those differences are materially relevant is a question worthy of consideration. I’m confident you have considered this possibility.

  130. @Hail
    Is the idea of the same virus in one city as more dangerous than in another, is this based on evidence from lab work or the like? Or is it a conjecture based on reports of total coronavirus-positive deaths? If it's just numbers, there is a lot of room for error there.

    Numbers always deserve a close look, especially when something seems "off," as in one city having a supposedly much-higher fatality rate than another. I write about this here:

    Against the Corona Panic Pt. IV: What about New York City? A Case Study in Hysteria Pandemic vs. Virus Pandemic (April 23).

    We know with certainty now, for example, that the Panic has caused thousands of corona-negative excess deaths. If the population-penetration of the virus is as high as was reasonable to assume, the farcical scenario warned about by some, in which "theoretically if a virus goes to 100% in a population, ALL deaths will be 'coronavirus deaths'," comes true.

    All things considered, I think evidence points to the direct, virus-attributable fatality rate in the New York City area down at, or close to, 0.1%, plus an ongoing increase in total mortality attributable to the Panic conditions. This, I predict, will be the consensus view of experts when the smoke clears (and I imagine already is now; but it's not yet publicly sayable in explicit terms; very politically sensitive. It depends how long our the "media-run state" keeps up the Corona Panic).

    Is the idea of the same virus in one city as more dangerous than in another, is this based on evidence from lab work or the like?

    I asked your opinion about the “different strains” evidence a few days ago. So no, merely asserting they are all the same strain — or at least, that the different strains all have the same sequelae — is something very much in question.

    I believe the evidence is clear that there are different “strains”. Whether those differences are materially relevant is a question worthy of consideration. I’m confident you have considered this possibility.

  131. @utu
    I believe that the epidemic can be extinguished below the prevalence level of herd immunity with some behavioral adjustments, however Sweden's chief epidemiologist claims that this is not possible and that everybody eventually will go to where Sweden is going now. Only Sweden will be there sooner and at a lower cost. In his mind the only difference is that people in Sweden will die sooner than in countries that have countermeasures. So he is OK with letting people in Sweden die sooner because prolonging their lives for another six or twelve month would cost too much I guess. But what if in six months a treatment is developed that would reduce IFR by factor of five or a vaccine? Like everything it comes down to the moral values and one can bring a utilitarian calculate into it. Personally I am very much put off by Sweden's attitude of not trying to save human lives because there is no will to sacrifice anything there.

    I believe that the epidemic can be extinguished below the prevalence level of herd immunity with some behavioral adjustments, however Sweden’s chief epidemiologist claims that this is not possible and that everybody eventually will go to where Sweden is going now.

    Thanks for clearly expressing what I think is the critical public policy question that needs to be answered now.

  132. @PiltdownMan

    I’ve had very limited contact. I’m in Washington Heights in northern Manhattan. I take two long walks (or one walk and one run) a day. We grocery shop in Jersey once a week. Not hard to maintain social distances. I feel pretty safe.
     
    How do you get over to Jersey?

    My brother doesn't have a car and lives in Yorkville. If he did, and had a washing machine in his apartment, he'd could isolate himself perfectly. Which was his point. That, for many people in the city, the kind of isolation a suburbanite could practice, is very difficult, if not impossible.

    Even so, all the best to you over there!

    Thanks! We drive over the GW Bridge…they haven’t closed it yet. And we have a washer/dryer in the apartment, so we’re lucky that way too.

  133. @Steve Sailer
    Assume 21% of NYC population infected so far with IFR of 0.9%, with all 21% being immune for 2 years, with the infection rate being random in terms of likelihood to die: e.g., young triathletes and old fat people were equally likely to be infected, with the latter being more likely to die.

    Then the next 21% to be infected (randomly, under our assumption) will most likely have the same IFR (assuming no improvements in treatment for the infected). And so will the next 21% after that.

    On the other hand, if the virus comes back in, say, 5 years after all immunities from the 2020 Wave are lost, then the IFR would be expected to be lower in this 2025 Wave because NYC would have fewer but hardier New Yorkers due to the disproportionate deaths of the old and fat in 2020.

    On the other hand, if the infection rate is not random with respect to likelihood to die, then the IFR in the rest of this wave could be higher or lower. For example, if nursing home patients are particularly likely to have been infected, then maybe there would be fewer nursing home patients to be infected. But if 20-something skiers and dance clubbers were more likely to be infected so far than the old and the fat, then the IFR could go up as the infection rate grows among the less vigorous.

    You don’t get better at treating it so much as you get better at protecting the vulnerable population while allowing others to get it. Like the flu.

    We know nursing homes are vulnerable. So unlike NYC where they put infected residents back in the nursing home (artificially pumping up the IFR) we separate them. Additionally as the portion of the health care workers with immunity rise, you can credibly shield most of the old and vulnerable.

  134. @Anonymous
    What was the middle one again ?

    Who gives a fuck about New York grocery shoppers.

    Ditch this bs where copying vague stats, anaysid from your old marketing days is big data.

    This is not informative nor interesting.

    Who gives a fuck about New York grocery shoppers.

    I do, seeing that I am one. Who gives a fuck about you?

  135. @Steve Sailer
    The NYC infection fatality rate is higher than I expected.

    Other places have lower IFRs than NYC.

    I'm not sure what is going on.

    A lot of people in a climate that doesn’t jibe with their adaptations. It’s the same reason darker people died more from respiratory disease in NY in the 18th century. This has been observed in Stockholm as well.

  136. @Reg Cæsar
    New Yorkers reacted very differently to quarantines in the 19th century:


    How arsonists burned down Staten Island's hated Quarantine hospital in the 19th century with little resistance


    https://d279m997dpfwgl.cloudfront.net/wp/2020/04/GettyImages-2695697.jpg


    This led to the construction of Hoffman and Swinburne Islands, described in 90 seconds of the video below. Many immigrants didn't make it to Ellis Island, or Castle Garden before that.



    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=T-7jdM5H-IQ&t=3m24s


    If you watch the entire video, you'll see Typhoid Mary in her gurney on North Brother Island, early typhoid colony Rat Island, and the poor man's cemetery on Hart Island.

    New York City has a hardcore pandemic history. There are several islands in New York City that were set aside to deal with the infected of generations past. This is something largely forgotten now, but Roosevelt Island still features the ruins of the old Small Pox hospital.

    https://www.atlasobscura.com/places/roosevelt-island-smallpox-hospital-ruins

    Hart Island has been New York City’s Potter’s Field since the 1860’s.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    This is something largely forgotten now, but Roosevelt Island still features the ruins of the old Small Pox hospital.
     
    The nautical charts we used in the late 1970s still labeled it Welfare Island.

    https://i.pinimg.com/originals/94/67/c4/9467c4edeff05a9e117fc5b64ee5202a.jpg


    The many names given to Roosevelt Island

    That YouTube channel, All NYC, has another video about the small inhabited islands, including that one.

  137. @Clifford Brown
    New York City has a hardcore pandemic history. There are several islands in New York City that were set aside to deal with the infected of generations past. This is something largely forgotten now, but Roosevelt Island still features the ruins of the old Small Pox hospital.

    https://www.atlasobscura.com/places/roosevelt-island-smallpox-hospital-ruins

    Hart Island has been New York City's Potter's Field since the 1860's.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hO5EJe2bPcI

    This is something largely forgotten now, but Roosevelt Island still features the ruins of the old Small Pox hospital.

    The nautical charts we used in the late 1970s still labeled it Welfare Island.

    The many names given to Roosevelt Island

    That YouTube channel, All NYC, has another video about the small inhabited islands, including that one.

    • Replies: @Clifford Brown
    They should have kept the name Blackwell Island. I am using that name going forward!
  138. Anonymous[249] • Disclaimer says:
    @danand

    “I’m shopping without a mask, because I figure the longer I wait to get infected, the older I’ll be when it happens, and I like my chances better now than later.”
     
    Bill, it may be more prudent to wear the mask. Surviving the virus now will, at best, provide one with immunity for roughly a year at the outside. You’ll be just as vulnerable for next years round. Barring development of a successful, relatively safe, vaccine for SARS-VoC-2, there is little reason we will not be just as vulnerable to becoming infected next year; unless we continue to wear masks, social distance, etc... Large scale testing, and isolating the infected, is the only realistic “solution” currently available (presuming enough testing capacity).

    Surviving the virus now will, at best, provide one with immunity for roughly a year at the outside.

    That seems to be the conventional wisdom – but what does it mean? Does it mean:

    (1) Immunity to the self-same virus wears off after about a year?

    OR:

    (2) Immunity is likely NOT effective against a related virus of the same general type (e.g. flu virus) that may come along in a year or two?

  139. @peterike

    Nonspecific immunity has no immunological memory – it doesn’t protect you against subsequent (or different types of) exposures.
     
    Yeah, but if your immune system brushed it off effortlessly once, wouldn't it just do that again and again as needed, assuming no sudden drop in your immune system? Our bodies fight off loads of bacterial and viral invaders all the time.

    Mine must be pretty good because I'm pushing 60 and I haven't had the flu since I was about 10, and I have never gotten a flu shot. It's ludicrous to think that in all that time I've never been exposed to flu viruses. Who's to say I haven't had Covid-19 in and out of my system multiple times already, given I live in the ultimate hot spot of New York City?

    Yeah, but if your immune system brushed it off effortlessly once, wouldn’t it just do that again and again as needed

    You are assuming subsequent exposures will be of the same intensity or of similarly favorable conditions. This is not necessarily true.

    Nonspecific immunity encompasses a whole host of bodily features and functions that resist foreign pathogens in general. These include physical and chemical barriers (skin, saliva, stomach acid, etc.) as well as inflammations, fever, phagocytes, and so on. So, for example, if you ingested a virus and the saliva and stomach acid broke it down harmlessly does not mean when you experience another form of exposure – respiratory into your lung – your body will be immune.

    In contrast, specific immunity provided by antibody production confers immunological memory and makes you immune to the specific virus (though not necessarily 100% and possibly of limited duration).

  140. @vhrm

    Surviving the virus now will, at best, provide one with immunity for roughly a year at the outside.
     
    There's no reason to believe that it'll be this short. Also immunity isn't all or nothing... it fades over time so you can have a lesser course on subsequent reinfections.

    For original SARS, immunity level antibodies (in people who had severe illness) averaged 3 years

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2851497/

    It's certainly possible that new sars behaves very differently but it's more likely to be similar.

    “There’s no reason to believe that it’ll be this short. Also immunity isn’t all or nothing… it fades over time so you can have a lesser course on subsequent reinfections.”

    Vhrm, let’s hope you’re correct, and that the immunity profile for SARS-Cov-2 and that of the “original strain” is similar; 2 or 3 years of immunity would be exceptional. And that the Shanxi Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention findings are solid.

    There is at least some reason to suggest a more limited duration of immunity:

    61696EE8-93ED-4ACB-8924-D275829E70F0

    • Replies: @shawfactor
    Not relevant as someone with an actual flu will produce far more antibodies than someone who has received a vaccine. So immunity to an actual virus would likely last much longer.
  141. @Hail

    All the recent studies out of Europe suggest this is not higher than 0.1%, though may be slightly higher in localized hotspots.
     
    While New York City is a hotspot, at least in the game of "Throw Big Numbers and Scary Stories at People," it is still probably in the 0.1% range in a fairly measured fatality rate attributable to the virus.

    See also: Against the Corona Panic Pt. IV: What about New York City? A Case Study in Hysteria Pandemic vs. Virus Pandemic.

    Got sick in January and given the severity, I now think it was the cov19.

    Now I huff Ever-clear (95% ethyl alcohol), the best anti-viral there is, after going in public or just once a day. Put the vapors where the virus grows…in the sinus and lungs. EA damages the virus protective shell and then YOUR antibodies can “see” it and attack.

    • Replies: @vhrm

    Now I huff Ever-clear (95% ethyl alcohol), the best anti-viral there is, after going in public or just once a day. Put the vapors where the virus grows…in the sinus and lungs. EA damages the virus protective shell and then YOUR antibodies can “see” it and attack.
     
    This random on publish paper from wikipedia suggests a lower concentration of alcohol, and also heating it. He has a whole protocol on there. Worth a read of your into this.

    https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/2003/2003.12444.pdf
    (idk why it's in 2003, which i assume is a year, when it's from just march. Maybe there was some date order issue?)

    Independently of heard good things about salt water gargling and sinus rinsing. (but use distilled or boiled and cooled water so you're not the 1 in a million guy whose brain gets eaten by amoeba)
  142. @Reg Cæsar

    This is something largely forgotten now, but Roosevelt Island still features the ruins of the old Small Pox hospital.
     
    The nautical charts we used in the late 1970s still labeled it Welfare Island.

    https://i.pinimg.com/originals/94/67/c4/9467c4edeff05a9e117fc5b64ee5202a.jpg


    The many names given to Roosevelt Island

    That YouTube channel, All NYC, has another video about the small inhabited islands, including that one.

    They should have kept the name Blackwell Island. I am using that name going forward!

  143. @tjoe
    Got sick in January and given the severity, I now think it was the cov19.

    Now I huff Ever-clear (95% ethyl alcohol), the best anti-viral there is, after going in public or just once a day. Put the vapors where the virus grows...in the sinus and lungs. EA damages the virus protective shell and then YOUR antibodies can "see" it and attack.

    Now I huff Ever-clear (95% ethyl alcohol), the best anti-viral there is, after going in public or just once a day. Put the vapors where the virus grows…in the sinus and lungs. EA damages the virus protective shell and then YOUR antibodies can “see” it and attack.

    This random on publish paper from wikipedia suggests a lower concentration of alcohol, and also heating it. He has a whole protocol on there. Worth a read of your into this.

    https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/2003/2003.12444.pdf
    (idk why it’s in 2003, which i assume is a year, when it’s from just march. Maybe there was some date order issue?)

    Independently of heard good things about salt water gargling and sinus rinsing. (but use distilled or boiled and cooled water so you’re not the 1 in a million guy whose brain gets eaten by amoeba)

  144. @gcochran
    All nonsense. It's a new disease in humans: except for the small fraction that has recently has had it, everybody susceptible to it. And so on: all your 'facts" are made up.

    Stop being alarmist Greg.

    This virus is not that deadly, and it appears many have already had it (with zero symptoms) and could even be no more dangerous that the flu at 0.1% (As many so called corona virus deaths are mis classified).

    It is not mutating fast (other corona viruses don’t ) and has peaked already. If it comes back we shall be ready, so level of immunity will exist, and we may have a vaccine.

    Your are starting to look silly and ruin your reputation for intelligence.

    • Replies: @Art Deco
    The Diamond Princess data indicates that it kills about 5% of those over 60 who turn up with a symptomatic infection. It is that deadly for a certain subset.
  145. @danand

    “There’s no reason to believe that it’ll be this short. Also immunity isn’t all or nothing… it fades over time so you can have a lesser course on subsequent reinfections.”
     
    Vhrm, let’s hope you’re correct, and that the immunity profile for SARS-Cov-2 and that of the “original strain” is similar; 2 or 3 years of immunity would be exceptional. And that the Shanxi Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention findings are solid.

    There is at least some reason to suggest a more limited duration of immunity:

    https://flic.kr/p/2iU8g3r

    Not relevant as someone with an actual flu will produce far more antibodies than someone who has received a vaccine. So immunity to an actual virus would likely last much longer.

  146. @Clifford Brown
    At this point, there are 30 strains of this disease. Does having antibodies for one strain mean you are immune to all? This is a big assumption and I doubt this is the case.

    Does the virus ever actually leave the body or can this develop into a lifelong disease that may reassert itself as the infected age or as their immune system becomes compromised. I think there is a real chance of reinfection that calls into question this reliance on antibody testing.

    AFAIK, they’ve identified two strains and some virologists dispute that, maintaining the two ‘strains’ are so similar, you can’t call them separate strains.

  147. @shawfactor
    Stop being alarmist Greg.

    This virus is not that deadly, and it appears many have already had it (with zero symptoms) and could even be no more dangerous that the flu at 0.1% (As many so called corona virus deaths are mis classified).

    It is not mutating fast (other corona viruses don't ) and has peaked already. If it comes back we shall be ready, so level of immunity will exist, and we may have a vaccine.

    Your are starting to look silly and ruin your reputation for intelligence.

    The Diamond Princess data indicates that it kills about 5% of those over 60 who turn up with a symptomatic infection. It is that deadly for a certain subset.

    • Replies: @shawfactor
    The death rate on the diamond princess was 1% not 5%. And that was amongst a group that was very vulnerable (plenty of old people on board).

    The flu kills 0.1 % of those infected but that 0.1% is from the entire population. So yeah this might be deadlier than the flu but even that is questionable. And we don't shut down the world economy for the flu.
    , @Johann Ricke

    The Diamond Princess data indicates that it kills about 5% of those over 60 who turn up with a symptomatic infection. It is that deadly for a certain subset.
     
    That's actually about the same as the overall worldometer number:

    https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us
  148. @Art Deco
    The Diamond Princess data indicates that it kills about 5% of those over 60 who turn up with a symptomatic infection. It is that deadly for a certain subset.

    The death rate on the diamond princess was 1% not 5%. And that was amongst a group that was very vulnerable (plenty of old people on board).

    The flu kills 0.1 % of those infected but that 0.1% is from the entire population. So yeah this might be deadlier than the flu but even that is questionable. And we don’t shut down the world economy for the flu.

    • Agree: BB753
  149. @Art Deco
    The Diamond Princess data indicates that it kills about 5% of those over 60 who turn up with a symptomatic infection. It is that deadly for a certain subset.

    The Diamond Princess data indicates that it kills about 5% of those over 60 who turn up with a symptomatic infection. It is that deadly for a certain subset.

    That’s actually about the same as the overall worldometer number:

    https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us

    • Replies: @shawfactor
    14 deaths divided by 712 passengers infected is less than 2%.
  150. @Johann Ricke

    The Diamond Princess data indicates that it kills about 5% of those over 60 who turn up with a symptomatic infection. It is that deadly for a certain subset.
     
    That's actually about the same as the overall worldometer number:

    https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us

    14 deaths divided by 712 passengers infected is less than 2%.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?
How a Young Syndicate Lawyer from Chicago Earned a Fortune Looting the Property of the Japanese-Americans, then Lived...
Becker update V1.3.2