Well, the ballot box stuffing continues here in Orange County. 11 Deaths reported today... 6 of which are 27 days ago or older. One death they reported today had an actual date of death of 5/26!
Pretty much the same story in Texas. The sunbelt has survived the non-crisis. But we should lock down for 10 years until we understand the possible long term effects, it might be grim.
Pretty much the same story in Texas. The sunbelt has survived the non-crisis. But we should lock down for 10 years until we understand the possible long term effects, it might be grim.
Pretty much the same story in Texas. The sunbelt has survived the non-crisis. But we should lock down for 10 years until we understand the possible long term effects, it might be grim.
Pretty much the same story in Texas. The sunbelt has survived the non-crisis. But we should lock down for 10 years until we understand the possible long term effects, it might be grim.
Pretty much the same story in Texas. The sunbelt has survived the non-crisis. But we should lock down for 10 years until we understand the possible long term effects, it might be grim.
If you think the spin about New York’s alleged “success” in managing the pandemic is insufferable now, wait until it turns out that NYC has herd immunity because the virus was allowed to rip through the city unchecked in early March while Cuomo pulled his chin and wondered what to do.
The media will be looking to give him a Nobel prize for medicine.
He’s been posting daily updates of New York State’s latest case count every morning for months. And every time he does, I look at this curve, rub my eyes, and think, “This can’t be luck.” There has to be an explanation:
Day after day after day after day, for two months, New York’s postivity rate is one percent or less. Granted, schools and many businesses there are still shut down. Granted, after their horrific ordeal this past spring, New Yorkers are probably more diligent about wearing masks, washing their hands, and keeping their distance than the average American is. Even so — not a single outbreak. Not one little blip at the tail end of that curve even though surely there are many younger New Yorkers who are partying, socializing, and otherwise bending or breaking the rules about proper pandemic behavior. Not one brief rough patch in two months.
Is the city immune? The Times reports today that scientists are asking themselves this same question, and not just about New York. London and Mumbai are under the microscope too. Large dense metropolises that have experienced ferocious outbreaks may have turned the corner on COVID-19.
In interviews with The New York Times, more than a dozen scientists said that the threshold is likely to be much lower: just 50 percent, perhaps even less. If that’s true, then it may be possible to turn back the coronavirus more quickly than once thought…
Assuming the virus ferrets out the most outgoing and most susceptible in the first wave, immunity following a wave of infection is distributed more efficiently than with a vaccination campaign that seeks to protect everyone, said Tom Britton, a mathematician at Stockholm University.
His model puts the threshold for herd immunity at 43 percent — that is, the virus cannot hang on in a community after that percentage of residents has been infected and recovered…
Researchers in Mumbai conducted … a random household survey, knocking on every fourth door — or, if it was locked, the fifth — and took blood for antibody testing. They found a startling disparity between the city’s poorest neighborhoods and its more affluent enclaves. Between 51 and 58 percent of residents in poor areas had antibodies, versus 11 to 17 percent elsewhere in the city.
The point about efficient distribution is important. Other research has suggested that “superspreader events” are responsible for a huge number of COVID transmissions, with one estimate claiming that just 10 percent of infected people are responsible for 80 percent(!) of transmissions. Logically, one would think that many/most people who are likely to attend a superspreader event are getting infected early in the epidemic, precisely because they’re more willing to take risks, e.g., going to crowded bars. Once most of that group has gotten infected and either died or recovered and gained immunity, suddenly the “freeways” of transmission are no longer available to the virus. It has to take side streets instead, where spread is slower and less efficient.
If you think the spin about New York’s alleged “success” in managing the pandemic is insufferable now, wait until it turns out that NYC has herd immunity because the virus was allowed to rip through the city unchecked in early March while Cuomo pulled his chin and wondered what to do.
The media will be looking to give him a Nobel prize for medicine.
He’s been posting daily updates of New York State’s latest case count every morning for months. And every time he does, I look at this curve, rub my eyes, and think, “This can’t be luck.” There has to be an explanation:
Day after day after day after day, for two months, New York’s postivity rate is one percent or less. Granted, schools and many businesses there are still shut down. Granted, after their horrific ordeal this past spring, New Yorkers are probably more diligent about wearing masks, washing their hands, and keeping their distance than the average American is. Even so — not a single outbreak. Not one little blip at the tail end of that curve even though surely there are many younger New Yorkers who are partying, socializing, and otherwise bending or breaking the rules about proper pandemic behavior. Not one brief rough patch in two months.
Is the city immune? The Times reports today that scientists are asking themselves this same question, and not just about New York. London and Mumbai are under the microscope too. Large dense metropolises that have experienced ferocious outbreaks may have turned the corner on COVID-19.
In interviews with The New York Times, more than a dozen scientists said that the threshold is likely to be much lower: just 50 percent, perhaps even less. If that’s true, then it may be possible to turn back the coronavirus more quickly than once thought…
Assuming the virus ferrets out the most outgoing and most susceptible in the first wave, immunity following a wave of infection is distributed more efficiently than with a vaccination campaign that seeks to protect everyone, said Tom Britton, a mathematician at Stockholm University.
His model puts the threshold for herd immunity at 43 percent — that is, the virus cannot hang on in a community after that percentage of residents has been infected and recovered…
Researchers in Mumbai conducted … a random household survey, knocking on every fourth door — or, if it was locked, the fifth — and took blood for antibody testing. They found a startling disparity between the city’s poorest neighborhoods and its more affluent enclaves. Between 51 and 58 percent of residents in poor areas had antibodies, versus 11 to 17 percent elsewhere in the city.
The point about efficient distribution is important. Other research has suggested that “superspreader events” are responsible for a huge number of COVID transmissions, with one estimate claiming that just 10 percent of infected people are responsible for 80 percent(!) of transmissions. Logically, one would think that many/most people who are likely to attend a superspreader event are getting infected early in the epidemic, precisely because they’re more willing to take risks, e.g., going to crowded bars. Once most of that group has gotten infected and either died or recovered and gained immunity, suddenly the “freeways” of transmission are no longer available to the virus. It has to take side streets instead, where spread is slower and less efficient.
Why is NYC herd immunity even framed as a question?
NYC antibody test back in march returned 20-30% antibody prevalence...
Antibody prevalence is a trailing indicator of spread through the population.
5 fucking months ago, 20-30%.
The city should have easily achieved herd immunity by now, if it hasn't then there is a larger problem with the well published doubling rate and the virus' transmissibility.
The Vid has almost completed its Government imposed agenda - looking like every thing is falling into place for a November 4th recovery. Tired of counting masses of cordwood we now can start counting dead businesses
Comments
This kid GETS it.
The media will be looking to give him a Nobel prize for medicine.
He’s been posting daily updates of New York State’s latest case count every morning for months. And every time he does, I look at this curve, rub my eyes, and think, “This can’t be luck.” There has to be an explanation:
Day after day after day after day, for two months, New York’s postivity rate is one percent or less. Granted, schools and many businesses there are still shut down. Granted, after their horrific ordeal this past spring, New Yorkers are probably more diligent about wearing masks, washing their hands, and keeping their distance than the average American is. Even so — not a single outbreak. Not one little blip at the tail end of that curve even though surely there are many younger New Yorkers who are partying, socializing, and otherwise bending or breaking the rules about proper pandemic behavior. Not one brief rough patch in two months.
Assuming the virus ferrets out the most outgoing and most susceptible in the first wave, immunity following a wave of infection is distributed more efficiently than with a vaccination campaign that seeks to protect everyone, said Tom Britton, a mathematician at Stockholm University.
His model puts the threshold for herd immunity at 43 percent — that is, the virus cannot hang on in a community after that percentage of residents has been infected and recovered…
Researchers in Mumbai conducted … a random household survey, knocking on every fourth door — or, if it was locked, the fifth — and took blood for antibody testing. They found a startling disparity between the city’s poorest neighborhoods and its more affluent enclaves. Between 51 and 58 percent of residents in poor areas had antibodies, versus 11 to 17 percent elsewhere in the city.
The point about efficient distribution is important. Other research has suggested that “superspreader events” are responsible for a huge number of COVID transmissions, with one estimate claiming that just 10 percent of infected people are responsible for 80 percent(!) of transmissions. Logically, one would think that many/most people who are likely to attend a superspreader event are getting infected early in the epidemic, precisely because they’re more willing to take risks, e.g., going to crowded bars. Once most of that group has gotten infected and either died or recovered and gained immunity, suddenly the “freeways” of transmission are no longer available to the virus. It has to take side streets instead, where spread is slower and less efficient.
NYC antibody test back in march returned 20-30% antibody prevalence...
Antibody prevalence is a trailing indicator of spread through the population.
5 fucking months ago, 20-30%.
The city should have easily achieved herd immunity by now, if it hasn't then there is a larger problem with the well published doubling rate and the virus' transmissibility.
The science should be settled on NYC...
See if your favorite is on it - 4 pages worth
@Swaye