Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Preliminary test results suggest 21% of NYC residents have Covid antibodies

6sqft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 679 posts

Re: Preliminary test results suggest 21% of NYC residents have Covid antibodies

#181

Post by mlthoughts2018 »

ccleve wrote: post #17

This study doesn't appear to suffer from the same methodology problems as the Stanford study of a few days ago. In that study, they recruited people through Facebook, and reported an infection rate that was low enough that it could have been caused by false positives. Here, it's closer to a random sample, but more importantly it shows really high rates. Those rates overwhelm any error due to false positives. Also, it…

The rates being this high actually casts doubt on the study. It’s very very implausible, and suggests almost surely a selection bias in the sample towards a population much more likely to have contracted it.

Re: Preliminary test results suggest 21% of NYC residents have Covid antibodies

#182

Post by CodeWriter23 »

ineedasername wrote: post #98
ccleve wrote: post #17

This study doesn't appear to suffer from the same methodology problems as the Stanford study of a few days ago. In that study, they recruited people through Facebook, and reported an infection rate that was low enough that it could have been caused by false positives. Here, it's closer to a random sample, but more importantly it shows really high rates. Those rates overwhelm any error due to false positives. Also, it…

I couldn't find any detailed write up about their selection methods for participants, only the basics of where they found them. Without that, it is very hard to determine whether or not there's some flavor of selection bias: If it is voluntary, and they do not screen out people who report having had cold/flu symptoms, then they run the risk of attracting a disproportionate number of people who volunteer because they'…

I argue there is inherently less sampling bias in this study than testing people at the hospital who have shown up due to severe symptoms.

Re: Preliminary test results suggest 21% of NYC residents have Covid antibodies

#183

Post by mrb »

If this study is accurate, then 1.8 million NYC resident are infected. So 15 411 deaths (as of today, including 5 121 probable deaths) suggests COVID-19 has a fatality rate of MINIMUM 0.9% which is in line with previous estimates (between 0.5 and 1.6%) and this is MINIMUM 9 times more fatal than the flu (0.1%).

Edited to add "MINIMUM", as there is a lag between case detection and death (I should have known better to mention it, as I blogged about it: https://blog.zorinaq.com/case-fatality-ratio-ncov/)

Re: Preliminary test results suggest 21% of NYC residents have Covid antibodies

#184

Post by AznHisoka »

jonas21 wrote: post #175
WrtCdEvrydy wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately, unless you go door to door knocking... you're gonna get biased data.

Even with door to door knocking, you're going to introduce a bias -- toward people who are around to answer the door, which would tend to undersample essential workers.

Or people who will try to talk to you from their balcony rather than answering the door.

Re: Preliminary test results suggest 21% of NYC residents have Covid antibodies

#185

Post by outworlder »

TechBro8615 wrote: post #96

So, at what point can we declare the lockdown to be a harmful overreaction and start opening countries up? Will we hold anyone accountable for models which proved to be pessimistic by orders of magnitude, causing implosion of economies around the world?

Sure, let's ignore the hospitals getting overloaded.

Re: Preliminary test results suggest 21% of NYC residents have Covid antibodies

#186

Post by luckylion »

cycrutchfield wrote: post #172
luckylion wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a different argument. I'm saying that "lockdown until we have a vaccine or great treatment" might mean "lockdown until 2030". We already see heavy economic damages, civil unrest and riots after 4-8 weeks. Make that 40, 80 or 200 weeks and the world will be very different.

[flagged]

Are you suggesting the riots in the banlieus in France are done by "astroturf protestors"?

And "flattening the curve" to buy time until we get a vaccine or a very successful treatment was literally in the comment I replied to. Not as in "we must lockdown until then", but as a goal we may reach if we continue with strict measures.

It's fine to want that, we just have to be aware that it might not happen (or might not happen soon) and that it isn't free.

Re: Preliminary test results suggest 21% of NYC residents have Covid antibodies

#187

Post by laurencerowe »

credit_guy wrote: post #122
ccleve wrote: post #17

This study doesn't appear to suffer from the same methodology problems as the Stanford study of a few days ago. In that study, they recruited people through Facebook, and reported an infection rate that was low enough that it could have been caused by false positives. Here, it's closer to a random sample, but more importantly it shows really high rates. Those rates overwhelm any error due to false positives. Also, it…

Yes, the study is really good news for NYC. My thinking is that the state of emergency, currently in place until 5/15, will be extended at most once to 6/15. After that we'll be somewhat open for business. I imagine everyone will be advised to wear mask/gloves, to keep the social distance and to keep washing hands. Lots of people will continue to work from home, others will bike to work. Being summer, the virus will…

It's really difficult to compare the currently reported fatality rates between different countries and regions since the amount of testing varies so greatly.

Compared to many other countries, Germany has likely confirmed through testing a higher proportion of its total number of cases in the country, lowering the reported fatality rate.

In countries where testing is less widely available only those already showing severe symptoms get tested disproportionately, so confirmed cases are more likely to be fatal even if they get good hospital care.

Re: Preliminary test results suggest 21% of NYC residents have Covid antibodies

#188

Post by ferzul »

glofish wrote: post #60
cma wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exaggerated in that the California study predicted a flu like IFR (Ioannidis, one of the authors, has been pushing that as his pet theory for over a month). This shows it is more likely several times that.

it doesn't contradic Ioannidis at all. He might be right in the end, and that would be an incredibly bitter pill to many. We are getting closer and closer to the flu fatality rate. from 5% to 3%, then 1% now 0.5% - smart money (and common sense) would bet that the rate will continue to drop, I would expect that people living in healthier environment than NYC will fare even better. No way NYC IFR is the upper bound fo…

0.1% is the flu cfr. 0.6ish% seems to be the corona ifr. these are comparing chalk and cheese. how many people who get the flu never rock up to a doctor? the ifr for flu is closer to 0.01%.

the worst case scenarios are disproven it is true - but so is the idea that it's just a flu.

let us be grateful this trial run of a deadly global pandemic was only moderately bad.

Re: Preliminary test results suggest 21% of NYC residents have Covid antibodies

#189

Post by easytiger »

cryoshon wrote: post #155
taeric wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This feels like fear talking. As more data comes in, we are seeing more people with no affects. Not just mild, but nigh non existent. It is agreed that something gives people severe cases. Severe includes death and recovered with damage. We don't seem to have data letting you know who or what would land there.

we have absolutely no clue regarding the long-term impacts of exposure to this virus for asymptomatic people or otherwise. we cannot gamble with our future so carelessly on the basis of preliminary data. here is a vignette to explain why. once someone is infected with HIV, most people experience flu-like symptoms for a week or two which then resolve either with or without treatment. in some people, the virus is clear…

> hasn't given us any indication of similar activity. but we know so very little that we can't take the risk

There's little reason to believe it's significantly different to any other Coronavirus. Speculating that's it's suddenly going to be aids++ is pointless scaremongering.

The main* reason it was a "big deal" was the lack of common immunity thus leading to potentially rapid spread. Deaths in the vulnerable from the side effects of this kind of thing are perfectly normal and perfectly well understood and there is very little treatment

Re: Preliminary test results suggest 21% of NYC residents have Covid antibodies

#190

Post by kgwgk »

taeric wrote: post #165
jdm2212 wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NYC is younger and healthier than the US average so these are lower bounds for national average outcomes.

A datum that is hard to square when the deaths are still dominated by the older population. If you had convinced everyone over seventy to move out of NYC last year, their CFR would be a fraction of what it is now.

So the IFR will be lower in the rest of the country than in NYC because... they are going to send everyone over seventy to the Moon or something?
Post reply on HN