any fellow doomer travelers want to walk me back from this blue pill?

per the test results, an estimated 20% of NYC has got antibodies

assume the sero test results are half accurate - that the real number is 10%, assuming across all age/health status cohorts (random study)

NYC population is 8MM

10% of 8MM is 800,000

per NYC daily stats, they are at 40k total hospitalizations and tailing off on new incoming cases

so that suggests (with distrust of the sero test results), a hospitalization of ~5% across all ages (given a median age population of around 40)

i don't know - i've been thinking about it for the last day, but isn't this the biggest news we've seen yet with regard to how things can be opened without stressing resources and maintaining economic activity and productivity?

you want to avoid further outbreaks (because HC capacity is static, growth can be exponential and 5% isn't trivial), so all the milder layers of protections stay in place (masks, distancing, no large gatherings), but this broke paranoia for me personally. i still don't want to get it before a strong therapeutic is tested and i'm going to be paranoid in that respect, but not like before.

so where am I wrong and/or what did I miss?

IF the numbers prove to be true, this is really great news.

I take this back.

nYC is at 11,500 deaths. For between 400,00 and 800,000 infections

That is between 2.48% and 1.4%..scale that up to a population of 360mm and you are looking at millions of dead people.

This does sound like great news until you do the numbers.

If this was allowed to run its course based on these numbers, you would be looking at 50,000 to 110,000 deaths in NYC alone.

And millions through out the country. 360/8 x 50k = 2.2 million

I am not sure what to tell you if you don't think 2.2-4.4 million deaths would have on the economy over the long term

Duncan Idaho said:

---

This does sound like great news until you do the numbers.

If this was allowed to run its course based on these numbers, you would be looking at 50,000 to 110,000 deaths in NYC alone.

And millions through out the country. 360/8 x 50k = 2.2 million

I am not sure what to tell you if you don't think 2.2-4.4 million deaths would have on the economy over the long term

---

I am not sure what to tell you if you don't think 26 million new unemployment claims would have on the economy over the long term

26 mm unemployment claims for a few months. Would be less damaging than 4.4mm deaths.

If the serious containment, testing and tracing strategy were put in place, people would confidently return to work and the market.

If the bodies continue to build either quickly of trickle in, people will be less inclined to go back into the market.

You either have the choice of a U shaped recovery (real mitigation strategy) or a bathtub shaped recovery (opening too much too fast)

From the NYT article:

Quote:

---

State officials said the test had been calibrated to err on the side of producing false negatives to miss some who may have antibodies rather than false positives, which would suggest a person had coronavirus antibodies when they did not.

---

This suggests a high specificity.

They didn't release their actual numbers but only provided this information (I'm looking for the actual study, if anyone has a link please post it!):

About 3,000 tested. They only released percentages of the people who tested positive but did not release the actual numbers of people tested in each area, or at least I can't find it. I assume the NYC area received the most tests.

21% or so of NYC tested positive.
16.7% Long Island tested positive.
11.7% positive in Westchester/Rockland.

3.6% positive in the rest of the state. To me this is a big deal because the idea of this spreading like crazy everywhere isn't true and the NYC data can't be extrapolated to other areas. They had a truly large and fast outbreak whereas the rest of the state (and most of the rest of the country) have not had widespread asymptomatic cases.

Some math:
Let's assume 1,800 of those tests were in NYC (a guess) and the specificity of their test is 98% (a 2% false positive rate):

21% of 1,800 is 378 positive tests.
2% of the 1,800 would be false positives. That's 36 false positives.
378-36 = 348
348/1800 = 19% really are positive.

Odds are the "21%" figure might have already had the false positive guesstimate taken out.

The ratio of true positives to false positives is high enough in NYC at that point for the data to be considered reliable. I think far more reliable than "half accurate."

This is different from the Santa Clara County study where a much smaller percentage tested positive. The false positive number (even with a high specificity test) basically eats away everything.

Per the test results -20% of NYC has anti-bodies. 20% of NYC is 1.6 million. NYC deaths are currently at 11,544. That's a death rate of .007215 or 0.72% (In the worst case scenario city in the USA).

Even this death rate only holds up if there are no advances in medicine and if hospitals become similarly overrun like they were in NYC. A very good argument can be made that the death rate will continue to drop as our doctors continue to learn how best to treat those with the worst cases.

Either way this is great news. Instead of 25-30 million dead if everyone got it we're looking at 2.5-3 million tops. Yes sobering, but still much better than we were told even three weeks ago.

Wow. So the acceptable window has moved to 2-3 million. I am old enough to remember when 50k deaths was considered fear mongering and a liberal fantasy

and that 3 million matches the prediction of... the hated Imperial College Study that predicted what the human cost would be for herd immunity

but what that study seems to have overestimated was the hospitalization rate and beds required for the younger ages

but that's clearly not acceptable

and not required to keep the global economy from collapsing

the 45-64 CFR in NYC is 4.5% right now with a total 150k confirmed cases

85% of the 45-64 dead had an underlying condition (assume diabetic/obese)

so that becomes something like 0.7% CFR if you are "healthy"

then take that down an order of magnitude because of the sero test results - so 0.07% IFR for 45-64

carry that IFR (super conservative) as the upper end against the full American population under 65

65+ is 1 in 7 Americans. 350 MM * 6/7 = 300 MM

Assume 80% for herd immunity (since the seniors are walled off)

300 * 0.8 * 0.0007 = 168,000 people under 65, hopefully spread over 2 years

assume spillage (double the above) into the 65+ population (our firewall isn't airtight)

so maybe just maybe if the sero test is right, you're looking at 350k dead in two years of spread. and that's with no therapeutic advance. you might cut that down by an order of magnitude if the antibody treatment really hits.

anyways, that's my bull**** math

Duncan Idaho said:

---

26 mm unemployment claims for a few months. Would be less damaging than 4.4mm deaths.

If the serious containment, testing and tracing strategy were put in place, people would confidently return to work and the market.

If the bodies continue to build either quickly of trickle in, people will be less inclined to go back into the market.

You either have the choice of a U shaped recovery (real mitigation strategy) or a bathtub shaped recovery (opening too much too fast)

---

Well based on your very scientific calculations you had 2.2 MM. But just decided to double it to 4.4 MM just to make sure you had the fear mongering market corned.

We're at 50,000 deaths and that's too many for sure. But the grownups have to decide between deaths from COVID and economic ruin (which surprise, also results in death).

If reducing casualties was the only factor in life then we'd lower the speed limits to 10 mph, outlaw alcohol, tobacco, and fast food, and require everyone to submit to monthly wellness reviews that had punitive measures for failing to maintain a proper BMI.

I hate to break it to you, no one gets out of life alive. The numbers are telling.... the overall infection rates are many multiples higher than we initially thought. The fatality ratio is significantly lower than we initially thought. It's time to leave your house, go to work, eat at a restaurant, and play the same death lottery you do everyday you get in a car.

I'll probably still get take out

I think the thing most distressing about our economy is how it's propped up by people not wanting to cook for themselves. It's unsettling.

cone said:

---

I'll probably still get take out

I think the thing most distressing about our economy is how it's propped up by people not wanting to cook for themselves. It's unsettling.

---

You're thinking of it wrong. The economy is propped up by a free people who are allowed to make their own economic decisions with minimal intrusion by the government.

well yeah

but if everyone decided for two months to eat PBJ for lunch, this is the impact?

that seems super fragile to me. i know it's ridiculous, but the point i'm getting at is that sit-down restaurants are going to at elevated risk compared to most other forms of casual consumption

that we must patronize them or else risk economic catastrophe is perilous to me and doesn't feel like a stable status quo to return to

cone said:

---

well yeah

but if everyone decided for two months to eat PBJ for lunch, this is the impact?

that seems super fragile to me. i know it's ridiculous, but the point i'm getting at is that sit-down restaurants are going to at elevated risk compared to most other forms of casual consumption

that we must patronize them or else risk economic catastrophe is perilous to me and doesn't feel like a stable status quo to return to

---

I hate to break it to you but if the government hadn't forbid people from going to restaurants and retail shops right now, those places would still be packed. Have you been to a Home Depot on a Saturday morning? It's flooded with people. Government intervention has caused this economic collapse, not human behavior.

Disclaimer: The need for government intervention, and at what levels, is a different topic for discussion.

that's not what the data shows at all

people (not Texans, but Americans more broadly) stopped going out to eat in advance of the government shutdowns

you can complain that the paranoia was trumped up, but it was real and people were and are still scared

hopefully this data is real because it goes a long way to breaking paranoia into something more economically stable

you can't tell the productive and consumptive backbone of a region (25-65 year olds) to go out and consume if a novel bug spreading like crazy has a 20% chance of putting them in a hospital bed (not dead, but still laid up feeling like **** for weeks)

1-2% chance, still not great... but more caution, less fear

Ol_Ag_02 said:

---

cone said:

---

well yeah

but if everyone decided for two months to eat PBJ for lunch, this is the impact?

that seems super fragile to me. i know it's ridiculous, but the point i'm getting at is that sit-down restaurants are going to at elevated risk compared to most other forms of casual consumption

that we must patronize them or else risk economic catastrophe is perilous to me and doesn't feel like a stable status quo to return to

---

I hate to break it to you but if the government hadn't forbid people from going to restaurants and retail shops right now, those places would still be packed. Have you been to a Home Depot on a Saturday morning? It's flooded with people. Government intervention has caused this economic collapse, not human behavior.

Disclaimer: The need for government intervention, and at what levels, is a different topic for discussion.

---

Unknowns surrounding a novel virus caused this economic collapse. FTFY

Ol_Ag_02 said:

---

It's time to leave your house, go to work, eat at a restaurant, and play the same death lottery you do everyday you get in a car.

---

I can agree about "getting out" but stuff like going to a restaurant just isn't "critical" enough to me to roll the dice on.

I'd imagine for a decent % of society, movies, eating out, etc are going to be significantly down the road. I keep hearing those places aren't that risky from the open it all up crowd.

I'll personally wait and watch the canarys in the mine for awhile first.

Player To Be Named Later said:

---

Ol_Ag_02 said:

---

It's time to leave your house, go to work, eat at a restaurant, and play the same death lottery you do everyday you get in a car.

---

I can agree about "getting out" but stuff like going to a restaurant just isn't "critical" enough to me to roll the dice on.

I'd imagine for a decent % of society, movies, eating out, etc are going to be significantly down the road. I keep hearing those places aren't that risky from the open it all up crowd.

I'll personally wait and watch the canarys in the mine for awhile first.

---

Great. You're free to make that choice. Let's make sure others are free to make the opposite one.

Duncan Idaho said:

---

Wow. So the acceptable window has moved to 2-3 million. I am old enough to remember when 50k deaths was considered fear mongering and a liberal fantasy

---

50K? That's a normal flu season, which isn't "mongered" much by most of us. 2-3 million is eye opening for sure. But, why is your only solution not open back up? Or to not open back up too quick? No one wants that number to be reached, but also many feel that there has to be a point where we've reached our limit on this little "French vacation" period and have to get back to work and living. Heck, I don't care about the work as much as the living part. It's an interesting moral dilemma for sure, not disregarding that one bit. So I definitely take all of this with a grain of salt and respect the situation and your opinion as you very well may be right. I'm afraid no decision made to reopen or not will make all of us happy.

Me: I want to live and take the chance. I want to go to movies, eat popcorn, lift (actually lift-not walk on a tread mill or "go light") at the gym without a mask and let those around me decide to train themselves at that gym, have freaking football with 100K in the stands, no masks screaming at the top of our lungs, eat at restaurants publicly and get the economy rolling again. If 2 million die? It would absolutely suck. But just to me, we evolved to not shelter all day in a cave. Sure, at night to avoid night time predators. But we had to hunt and gather in the day. And there were just as scary daytime predators roaming around. We dealt with it. Some died. More lived. We have to take chances and not live on cave grubs forever. Our species will adapt and gain herd immunity. My 2 cents. And I am only an expert in having an opinion, no doubt. Again, it's a very tough call either way...

Hey, I have loved this time off. We have saved money since we don't shop much except for groceries, I have absolutely loved to spend this time uninterrupted with my wife and young children. In many ways that has been an absolute blessing.

Quote:

---

50K? That's a normal flu season, which isn't "mongered" much by most of us.

---

It's not normal for even a bad flu season to amass that body count in one month (March 24th we had less than 1,000 deaths, today we have 51,000), and that's something that has happened with the most strict anti-exposure restrictions we have seen in a century.

Capitol Ag said:

---

Duncan Idaho said:

---

Wow. So the acceptable window has moved to 2-3 million. I am old enough to remember when 50k deaths was considered fear mongering and a liberal fantasy

---

50K? That's a normal flu season, which isn't "mongered" much by most of us. 2-3 million is eye opening for sure. But, why is your only solution not open back up? Or to not open back up too quick? No one wants that number to be reached, but also many feel that there has to be a point where we've reached our limit on this little "French vacation" period and have to get back to work and living. Heck, I don't care about the work as much as the living part. It's an interesting moral dilemma for sure, not disregarding that one bit. So I definitely take all of this with a grain of salt and respect the situation and your opinion as you very well may be right. I'm afraid no decision made to reopen or not will make all of us happy.

Me: I want to live and take the chance. I want to go to movies, eat popcorn, lift (actually lift-not walk on a tread mill or "go light") at the gym without a mask and let those around me decide to train themselves at that gym, have freaking football with 100K in the stands, no masks screaming at the top of our lungs, eat at restaurants publicly and get the economy rolling again. If 2 million die? It would absolutely suck. But just to me, we evolved to not shelter all day in a cave. Sure, at night to avoid night time predators. But we had to hunt and gather in the day. And there were just as scary daytime predators roaming around. We dealt with it. Some died. More lived. We have to take chances and not live on cave grubs forever. Our species will adapt and gain herd immunity. My 2 cents. And I am only an expert in having an opinion, no doubt. Again, it's a very tough call either way...

Hey, I have loved this time off. We have saved money since we don't shop much except for groceries, I have absolutely loved to spend this time uninterrupted with my wife and young children. In many ways that has been an absolute blessing.

---

This is one of the best posts I've read on here. 2 million while a big number is only 0.6% of the population. For the other 99.4% this is no way to live. Life isn't worth living if you have to spend it locked in your home and avoiding all the things that made life fun in the first place.

Math math math........if an areas hospitals are fine open that ***** up! If an areas hospitals get overrun, close that area down.

Open this ***** up!