71–72 of 72 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m getting a paywall on NYT article. But my first thought is, I bet this correlates strongly to property values/density. I don’t know how to build that viz but if anyone is bored with the know how please post it.
https://archive.vn/czNKW
Worth noting the limitations listed at the bottom. > The accuracy of antibody testing varies widely. Moreover, most antibody tests were done for people seeking them out, which means that those who got tested are a self-selecting group and not a random sample. > It also appears that New Yorkers in some neighborhoods with lower infection rates were more likely to seek antibody testing. > In some wealthy and largely whi…
30% and "less than a quarter" ... that actually seems rather homogenous. Variations in testing of 10-15% across very different neighborhoods seems rather reasonable. Given the disparity in impact that a positive test means to one's working life, I was expecting something more like 1% and 30%.
The reality is probably just that these people didn't have damn time or energy to go to a testing center for a blood draw, or were already concerned about spending so much time in public and didn't want to travel more than they needed to. Being working-class in NYC is hard nowadays due to the very long commutes (caused in turn by people fleeing excessively high rental prices).