Latest Coronavirus - Yikes

#77,403
#77,403
evillawyer said:
How are my numbers made up? The population is accurate (roughly 330 million). Most things I've seen say herd immunity is obtained when there's about 70% infection rate (some highly contagious diseases like measles require a higher threshold in the 90s). Until you have herd immunity, spread will still happen (assuming we go on living as freedumb loving Americans). And then the 1% death rate was provided by the person I was responding to. Put those numbers together you get 2.3 million deaths before herd immunity is obtained.
Click to expand...
Because you are missing a couple of very important numbers:

1) there is most certainly some level of background immunity, as has also been discussed ad nauseum. Common knowledge now. That means that likely 40-60+% of people are not susceptible to infection.

2) a large percentage of people are infected and never know it, proven conclusively by antibody studies. In many early studies, the seroconversion rate was 5-10x the known positive/PCR rate. This does two things: reduces the true mortality by a decimal point (prob around 0.1%) and reduces the threshold of "known" positives (relative to the overall/unknown/asymptomatic) required to get to HIT.

WHAT DOES THIS LOOK LIKE IN THE REAL WORLD? In many areas, once around 2% or so are known to be infected, herd immunity appears to emerge and the disease disappears. (2x10 = 20% actually infected) + 50% background immunity = 70%. Voila!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Carl Pickens
#77,404
#77,404
kiddiedoc said:
Because you are missing a couple of very important numbers:

1) there is most certainly some level of background immunity, as has also been discussed ad nauseum. Common knowledge now. That means that likely 40-60+% of people are not susceptible to infection.

2) a large percentage of people are infected and never know it, proven conclusively by antibody studies. In many early studies, the seroconversion rate was 5-10x the known positive/PCR rate. This does two things: reduces the true mortality by a decimal point (prob around 0.1%) and reduces the threshold of "known" positives (relative to the overall/unknown/asymptomatic) required to get to HIT.

WHAT DOES THIS LOOK LIKE IN THE REAL WORLD? In many areas, once around 2% or so are known to be infected, herd immunity appears to emerge and the disease disappears. (2x10 = 20% actually infected) + 50% background immunity = 70%. Voila!
Click to expand...

So, on the record, are you predicting no second wave in NYC this fall? And how do you explain neighborhoods with over 50% antibody rates, which would show actual infection?
 
#77,406
#77,406
evillawyer said:
So if you believe herd immunity has been obtained in nyc, do you believe there will be no second wave in NYC this fall? Or, as a weaker proposition, that it will only occur in certain neighborhoods (Corona in queens has an over 50% antibody positivity rate, Tribeca and some of the whiter enclaves are in the low teens)? And how do you explain Corona having a 50% antibody rate if herd immunity is obtained at a lower threshold? (Serious question, not asking in my typical smartass way)
Click to expand...
I do not think a large "second wave" in NYC is likely, UNLESS immunity is short-lived. Only time will tell on the latter, but natural immunity is usually more durable than that achieved by inactivated viral vaccines.

The variability of seroconversion is most likely explained by differences in the nebulous background immunity, which would depend on patterns of prior circulating viruses.

Thanks for your tone, it's much more pleasant conversing with someone who shows a modicum of respect and decency.
 
  • Like
Reactions: davethevol and LouderVol
#77,407
#77,407
kiddiedoc said:
Because you are missing a couple of very important numbers:

1) there is most certainly some level of background immunity, as has also been discussed ad nauseum. Common knowledge now. That means that likely 40-60+% of people are not susceptible to infection.

2) a large percentage of people are infected and never know it, proven conclusively by antibody studies. In many early studies, the seroconversion rate was 5-10x the known positive/PCR rate. This does two things: reduces the true mortality by a decimal point (prob around 0.1%) and reduces the threshold of "known" positives (relative to the overall/unknown/asymptomatic) required to get to HIT.

WHAT DOES THIS LOOK LIKE IN THE REAL WORLD? In many areas, once around 2% or so are known to be infected, herd immunity appears to emerge and the disease disappears. (2x10 = 20% actually infected) + 50% background immunity = 70%. Voila!
Click to expand...

Can you prove the antibodies remain viable after an infection? If so, for how long? If you can’t prove either of those things then your scenario above means nothing.
 
#77,411
#77,411
kiddiedoc said:
I do not think a large "second wave" in NYC is likely, UNLESS immunity is short-lived. Only time will tell on the latter, but natural immunity is usually more durable than that achieved by inactivated viral vaccines.

The variability of seroconversion is most likely explained by differences in the nebulous background immunity, which would depend on patterns of prior circulating viruses.

Thanks for your tone, it's much more pleasant conversing with someone who shows a modicum of respect and decency.
Click to expand...

So NYC has been humming along at about 300 cases per day for going on two months (see the link). Wouldn't the numbers be decreasing if herd immunity had been obtained or was being approached?
Coronavirus in New York City
 
#77,413
#77,413
evillawyer said:
So NYC has been humming along at about 300 cases per day for going on two months (see the link). Wouldn't the numbers be decreasing if herd immunity had been obtained or was being approached?
Coronavirus in New York City
Click to expand...
No, that's about what I would expect, as there will be pockets and areas where it hasn't spread sufficiently. I certainly hope and pray this is right.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Carl Pickens
#77,416
#77,416
Mick said:
In America their dying in the streets as we speak? Not going to happen because there are enough liberal minded people in America where we can feed our own.
Click to expand...
You may realize hunger isn't an instant killer. It also causes lots of more issues down the line

But hey, keep believing this virus will kill millions in the US
 
  • Like
Reactions: Carl Pickens
#77,418
#77,418
kiddiedoc said:
No, that's about what I would expect, as there will be pockets and areas where it hasn't spread sufficiently. I certainly hope and pray this is right.
Click to expand...
But I think most of the spread is still occuring in Queens, Brooklyn, and the Bronx. Those areas were already hard hit in March and April, and we should not be seeing roughly the same number of new daily cases coming from those boroughs if they've obtained or are approaching herd immunity, as the R-naught would be dipping below 1. But that doesn't appear to be the case.
 
#77,420
#77,420
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top