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

Initial Covid-19 infection rate may be 80 times greater than originally reported

news.psu.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 210 posts

Re: Initial Covid-19 infection rate may be 80 times greater than originally reported

#11

Post by ben_w »

fsiefken wrote: post #4
baxtr wrote: post #2

> “The findings suggest an alternative way of thinking about the COVID-19 pandemic. Our results suggest that the overwhelming effects of COVID-19 may have less to do with the virus’ lethality and more to do with how quickly it was able to spread through communities initially,” Silverman explained. “A lower fatality rate coupled with a higher prevalence of disease and rapid growth of regional epidemics provides an alt…

yes, but the flatten the curve crowd assumes a higher lethality

Not high lethality, high hospitalisation rate.

Re: Initial Covid-19 infection rate may be 80 times greater than originally reported

#12

Post by ManlyBread »

I became numb to news like this because it doesn't seem to have any reflection in the reality around me. The numbers are supposed to be huge yet hospitals are nearly empty and no one I asked knows anyone who was infected. The 80x number looks like science fiction to me.

Re: Initial Covid-19 infection rate may be 80 times greater than originally reported

#13

Post by planetmechanic »

gvjddbnvdrbv wrote: post #3

How does this reconcile with the actual data we have on total infection rate in e.g. Spain where a representative poll was done?

It works well: from the article, "In New York, for example, the researchers’ model suggested that at least 9% of the state’s entire population was infected by the end of March. After the state conducted antibody testing on 3,000 residents, they found a 13.9% infection rate, or 2.7 million New Yorkers."

Re: Initial Covid-19 infection rate may be 80 times greater than originally reported

#14

Post by cm2187 »

christkv wrote: post #9
gvjddbnvdrbv wrote: post #3

How does this reconcile with the actual data we have on total infection rate in e.g. Spain where a representative poll was done?

We now know a significant amount of people have no symptoms or very light symptoms and no antibody response. An anecdote. My friend and his wife got tested when giving birth. She was positive for antibodies he was not. It is quite possible that for ever person who had antibodies there is some unknown x of people who got it and never developed antibodies.

I have seen Dr Raoult in France suggesting there was likely significant cross immunity from other coronaviruses. If it is the case, would the person develop covid19-specific antibodies after getting it?

Re: Initial Covid-19 infection rate may be 80 times greater than originally reported

#15

Post by jjjensen90 »

gvjddbnvdrbv wrote: post #3

How does this reconcile with the actual data we have on total infection rate in e.g. Spain where a representative poll was done?

Because it's possible that there are many, many infected who don't seroconvert or ever manifest symptoms, and therefore would not have been tested with a PCR test, and would have a negative antibody test. We can see this in effect in studies of household attack rates and seroconversion. See this recent preprint and interesting thread (/r/covid19 is a strict science sub, not to be confused with /r/coronavirus) https://www.reddit.com/r/COVID19/comments/hdxwf5/intrafamili...

Re: Initial Covid-19 infection rate may be 80 times greater than originally reported

#16

Post by martin_bech »

qeternity wrote: post #10

History books will not be kind to our past and present handling of covid-19. Incurring incredible economic and social damage without fully understanding the threat. It’s been very clear for some time that covid is not nearly as lethal as once feared AND even more clear that we over quarantined. In the UK we have hospitals built specifically for covid that are completely unused. This isn’t flattening the curve, it’s c…

You are aware that despite the world very best efforts, almost 500.000 people have already died, and in many parts of the world, its actually not slowing down, but speeding up?

Re: Initial Covid-19 infection rate may be 80 times greater than originally reported

#17

Post by amanaplanacanal »

qeternity wrote: post #10

History books will not be kind to our past and present handling of covid-19. Incurring incredible economic and social damage without fully understanding the threat. It’s been very clear for some time that covid is not nearly as lethal as once feared AND even more clear that we over quarantined. In the UK we have hospitals built specifically for covid that are completely unused. This isn’t flattening the curve, it’s c…

Maybe. New Zealand took a different path and managed the problem with far fewer deaths.

Re: Initial Covid-19 infection rate may be 80 times greater than originally reported

#18

Post by crooked-v »

ManlyBread wrote: post #12

I became numb to news like this because it doesn't seem to have any reflection in the reality around me. The numbers are supposed to be huge yet hospitals are nearly empty and no one I asked knows anyone who was infected. The 80x number looks like science fiction to me.

Well, that obviously depends on where 'around you' is.

Compare to New York City, where there have been an estimated 17,000 deaths (and even that's probably undercounted, going by some studies of excess deaths compared to previous years), and at the peak there were hundreds of unclaimed bodies per week being buried in mass graves.

Re: Initial Covid-19 infection rate may be 80 times greater than originally reported

#19

Post by cube2222 »

christkv wrote: post #9
gvjddbnvdrbv wrote: post #3

How does this reconcile with the actual data we have on total infection rate in e.g. Spain where a representative poll was done?

We now know a significant amount of people have no symptoms or very light symptoms and no antibody response. An anecdote. My friend and his wife got tested when giving birth. She was positive for antibodies he was not. It is quite possible that for ever person who had antibodies there is some unknown x of people who got it and never developed antibodies.

IANAD, but you can have similar antibodies (which test positive) from previous infections with similar coronaviruses, not this one specifically.

So somebody who had no exposure to COVID-19 could test positive.

Afaik that's the main drawback of the antibody test.

Re: Initial Covid-19 infection rate may be 80 times greater than originally reported

#20

Post by Hermel »

gvjddbnvdrbv wrote: post #3

How does this reconcile with the actual data we have on total infection rate in e.g. Spain where a representative poll was done?

The usual tests (including the anti-body tests) only detect the more severe cases.
Post reply on HN