NYC and surrounding areas had essentially one full month of unmitigated spread of the virus with zero social distancing etc. Hospitals were pushed to the limit, but not in excess as the Javits Center and the Navy ship were barely used. Clearly it was a bad situation, but never out of control.

Now, with 20% of NYC testing positive for antibodies (I know, I know there is some variation) plus the fact that <20 is not really affected by this, could it get any worse anywhere else in the US, including NYC?

There is a large portion of the US population freaked out by this virus and will take social distancing seriously for quite a while.

My honest question is then, if we reopen, could anywhere in the US approach what we saw in NYC?

Smithfield pork plant in SD is the next case study.

You might see the raw totals approach the same as NYC, but the rate won't be close.

Nowhere else has the population density and total dependency on mass transit. It can only spread *that fast* in that sort of environment.

NYC is the worst case scenario in the US

Maybe depends on what you mean by "reopen."

Quote:

---

NYC and surrounding areas had essentially one full month of unmitigated spread of the virus with zero social distancing etc. Hospitals were pushed to the limit, but not in excess as the Javits Center and the Navy ship were barely used. Clearly it was a bad situation, but never out of control.

---

New York banned large gatherings on March 12, and other things gradually closed down until the stay-at-home on March 22. The situation in New York was worsening up until March 22, and indeed, kept getting worse for a few weeks.

The point isn't to argue about how long the virus was circulating, but to say we didn't see the worst case scenario in New York City. Things would have gotten nastier if NYC "stayed open."

Also, they made masks mandatory when out shopping , subways, etc....one day after Austin (to give you an idea of how ridiculously slow NYC's reaction was)

The Texas panhandle data is a bit meaningless. As are some of the other areas in the South. They suffer from a small denominator problem, where a few instances of intra-family spread can juice a number. Or one nursing home or similar facility.

The clear exception on the map is NOLA, which has a small area - the French Quarter - that is super dense on a nightly basis.

You're also citing a Twitter account of a guy that is professionally committed to mass transit and increasing urban density. He's not going to present an objective view.

I was about to say the same thing. All it would take is a single person picking up the virus in DFW then traveling back to the panhandle and infecting their immediate social circle before they knew they had it. One or two scenarios just like that and you're already looking at 6-10 infections per 1,000 residents.

hatchback said:

---

Keegan99 said:

---

You might see the raw totals approach the same as NYC, but the rate won't be close.

Nowhere else has the population density and total dependency on mass transit. It can only spread *that fast* in that sort of environment.

---

While density and transit played a role, it wasn't the only factor. Take a look at the county by county infections across the south and in Texas. (figures shown are number of cases per 1,000 residents.)

---

Super interesting maps thanks for sharing.

The German data seems to point to "super spreader" events. These are currently thought to be situations where large groups of people in closed spaces spending lots of time together shouting. Mardi Gras, Concerts, bars, etc.

I am sure public transportation is an issues as well but these super spreader events seem to be significant in starting outbreaks. Again this is based on German data where they rapidly tested all contacts then locked those people down instead of the entire country. Similar to how SK managed it.

A few of the red counties in the panhandle:

Sherman - population 1700
Roberts - population 850
Donley - population 3300

TXAggie2011 said:

---

Maybe depends on what you mean by "reopen."

Quote:

---

NYC and surrounding areas had essentially one full month of unmitigated spread of the virus with zero social distancing etc. Hospitals were pushed to the limit, but not in excess as the Javits Center and the Navy ship were barely used. Clearly it was a bad situation, but never out of control.

---

New York banned large gatherings on March 12, and other things gradually closed down until the stay-at-home on March 22. The situation in New York was worsening up until March 22, and indeed, kept getting worse for a few weeks.

The point isn't to argue about how long the virus was circulating, but to say we didn't see the worst case scenario in New York City. Things would have gotten nastier if NYC "stayed open."

---

With the subway still in operation, it's a stretch to say that NY shut down. I'm not faulting them for doing that, but it does rather undercut the argument that loosening restrictions elsewhere is risky. If NY can survive with the subway acting as the perfect machine for spreading the virus, some relaxation of social distancing elsewhere ought to be manageable.

Definitely a denominator problem. I also would stay away from cases and try to focus on deaths and hospitalizations. Deaths and/or hospitalizations per 100,000 population is probably a good start for a useful point of comparison with large enough denominators.

twk said:

---

TXAggie2011 said:

---

Maybe depends on what you mean by "reopen."

Quote:

---

NYC and surrounding areas had essentially one full month of unmitigated spread of the virus with zero social distancing etc. Hospitals were pushed to the limit, but not in excess as the Javits Center and the Navy ship were barely used. Clearly it was a bad situation, but never out of control.

---

New York banned large gatherings on March 12, and other things gradually closed down until the stay-at-home on March 22. The situation in New York was worsening up until March 22, and indeed, kept getting worse for a few weeks.

The point isn't to argue about how long the virus was circulating, but to say we didn't see the worst case scenario in New York City. Things would have gotten nastier if NYC "stayed open."

---

With the subway still in operation, it's a stretch to say that NY shut down. I'm not faulting them for doing that, but it does rather undercut the argument that loosening restrictions elsewhere is risky. If NY can survive with the subway acting as the perfect machine for spreading the virus, some relaxation of social distancing elsewhere ought to be manageable.

---

To an extent. Subway ridership plummeted in mid-March. It was down by 75% by the time the shut down started. https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2020/03/23/the-subway-ridership-collapse-in-three-charts/.

Subway ridership has been down over 90% in New York City in April, it was down at least 87% by the end of March. The LIRR has been down over 95%.

I think the panhandle cases stem from meatpacking plants. I grew up in Amarillo, and still have a lot of friends up there. I asked my buddy (who is from Dumas) what was going on in Moore county and he reminded me of the meatpacking plant up there and said all the cases he knows of have come from there.

My family has owned a vacation home in Southwest Florida for over 30 years, so I keep up with what's going on there. To be honest, based on the amount of people emailing and trying to rent our vacation home for this summer, it wouldn't shock me if Vegas traffic picked up quickly.

AnScAggie said:

---

Pumpkinhead said:

---

You could argue that Las Vegas would potentially be a notable issue as a 'super spreader' center. You'd possibly have a lot of people, touching things, handling chips, in close promity to each other...possibly infecting each other and then those folks would fly back to where ever they live.

Different sort of situation than NYC, but you'd have to think carefully about how to re-open Vegas.

That is of course, without taking into account that even if they did re-open Vegas, how much would the tourist traffic be down compared to pre-COVID. Obviously, they'd have significantly reduced visitors to Vegas, but how much reduced would be a question.

---

I think Vegas, cruises, and Disney die a slow death or are drastically changed after this event is over.

---

If they do then it'll be a shame we allowed that to happen.

Shumba said:

---

I think the panhandle cases stem from meatpacking plants. I grew up in Amarillo, and still have a lot of friends up there. I asked my buddy (who is from Dumas) what was going on in Moore county and he reminded me of the meatpacking plant up there and said all the cases he knows of have come from there.

---

Yes one of those dark red counties in the northern panhandle is Moore county, home to a jbs beef packing house. We currently have the highest infection rate in the state, with most of them associated with the packing plant.

The red county in East Texas is Shelby County. There is a large Tyson meat packing plant that is the source of the vast majority of cases.