so do we think its possible that certain players go out on loan somewhere if certain leagues are starting up again in europe and MLS keeps being delayed ?
COVID-19 - Leagues Suspended
- Thread starter FootyLovin
- Start date
Latest results on NY State antibody testing.
Seems to me that it is time to start loosening restrictions in the city.
Seems to me that it is time to start loosening restrictions in the city.
So can someone explain this to me like I am five. Logically, not only does this mean that this virus is significantly less deadly than previously thought, and this would also make the hospitalization rate significantly lower. In addition to that, let's operate under an assumption if you had this virus, you have antibodies for a few months. Cuomo says today some regions may have to open later. Wouldn't this indicate that most regions can open up sooner?! I get this is all based off models, but that is all the lockdown was based off in the beginning.
for the record, not advocating to open up or saying the lockdown was wrong or whatever. But that data is not getting highlighted nearly as much as it should.
Three points worth making about New York.
1 - The virus is much more widespread than people think.
2 - The virus is less deadly than people think.
3 - #2 does not mean that the virus was/is not a serious event. Even a "not very deadly" virus can have catastrophic consequences when it blows through 25% of a population in a matter of weeks.
i dont know much about this either but i feel that local gov had to act this way because this virus is new and we still dont know how it fully works. in addition to those at risk, i keep reading people in their late 30's and 40's are dying still and are "healthy with no conditions"so its a wider range. I personally know of someone who is was on ventilator and is trying to get better. i also know other distant uncles that passed. so it is serious at least to me it is.
in a way its good that its not as bad as the projections said, but we dont know what this second wave may look like.
Last edited:
Agreed on all points. Do nothing, and nationwide we are still seeing 300-400K deaths most likely in a few months. I am glad we locked down, based on the data we had. It's a very fragile situation, and I really doubt any political motives. So now they have to figure out how we return to normalcy while protecting those populations that are more vulnerable to this virus. IDK what that answer is, but how things are currently are or going to be in the first reopening phase are not it.
I’m not sure how any of this points to being able to loosen restrictions. There is zero data that antibodies confer protection from reinfection. And for the large number of people that haven’t gotten it, that’s Russian roulette to open up businesses forcing them to go back to work because turning down available work kills somebody’s ability to be on unemployment - and that’s what would happen to a furlowed/unemployed person whose business was told it could reopen.
Regarding reopening.
1 - The purpose of the stay-at-home order was not to eliminate the virus. That's not possible. The purpose was to prevent the hospital system from being overwhelmed, so that every sick person could get treatment. Mission accomplished (although it was close and a lot of people did a great job expanding capacity).
2 - Relaxing the stay-at-home order is not the same as lifting it entirely. It is very possible to restart activities that would carry less risk for people generally and/or would only expose those people with a much lower risk of complications.
3 - For all the media attention on the tragic loss of young, healthy people, those who are hospitalized or killed by the virus are almost exclusively old or have an underlying condition. Over 99% of deaths in NYC fit that description. This is important not because some deaths are less tragic. It is important because it should be possible to target vulnerable populations for protection as restrictions are relaxed.
4 - One-quarter of the NYC population now has substantial resistance to the virus. This means that even if we completely reopened and went back to packed subways, bars and restaurants (which nobody is advocating), the virus could not peak as severely and as quickly as it did the first time. Not only do you cut out from the hospitalization rate the 25% of the community that has already gotten it, you also cut out anyone to whom that 25% would have spread the virus. This is not to say that a second peak couldn't be bad if things were mismanaged, only that it would hit more slowly, and we will be looking for it this time around and able to adjust quickly.
1 - The purpose of the stay-at-home order was not to eliminate the virus. That's not possible. The purpose was to prevent the hospital system from being overwhelmed, so that every sick person could get treatment. Mission accomplished (although it was close and a lot of people did a great job expanding capacity).
2 - Relaxing the stay-at-home order is not the same as lifting it entirely. It is very possible to restart activities that would carry less risk for people generally and/or would only expose those people with a much lower risk of complications.
3 - For all the media attention on the tragic loss of young, healthy people, those who are hospitalized or killed by the virus are almost exclusively old or have an underlying condition. Over 99% of deaths in NYC fit that description. This is important not because some deaths are less tragic. It is important because it should be possible to target vulnerable populations for protection as restrictions are relaxed.
4 - One-quarter of the NYC population now has substantial resistance to the virus. This means that even if we completely reopened and went back to packed subways, bars and restaurants (which nobody is advocating), the virus could not peak as severely and as quickly as it did the first time. Not only do you cut out from the hospitalization rate the 25% of the community that has already gotten it, you also cut out anyone to whom that 25% would have spread the virus. This is not to say that a second peak couldn't be bad if things were mismanaged, only that it would hit more slowly, and we will be looking for it this time around and able to adjust quickly.
I think a lot more testing needs to be done before we can get a clearer picture of how this virus has spread in NY and other places. At least here in NY, we are testing like crazy so our data is much more reliable and accurate than other states who have tested but a small fraction of what we have. Granted, the density of NYC alone and it's role as a travel hub and business mecca are big reasons why we saw such a rapid spike in numbers in the first place.
I think reopening is something that needs to be planned out and based on the last briefing I watched, Cuomo laid out a multi-phase plan to do that. Off the top of my head, Phase I included reopening manufacturing and construction jobs that were low risk, Phase II involved reopening other non-essential businesses that were deemed to be low risk with the request that business provide ideas on how they could reopen safely. This is all on top of an expanded testing roll out where you will eventually be able to get a covid test done at any pharmacy in the state and by test i mean get swabbed. Unless the place has one of those 15 minute abbot machines. I don't recall what phase III is.
Based on the latest numbers, I think these are all good, concrete steps of moving forward. Obviously, it would be foolish to say "ok everyone back to work". There are plenty of people who are quite happy collecting unemployment with the $600 bonus since it's more than what they would normally make at work. I read an article about a small business owner who got their loan and said she was going to rehire everyone and her employees got pissed at her for this very reason.
We need to start reopening and i'm glad cuomo is trying to put a reasonable plan in place. I seriously worry about the states who have already opened up... are we gonna see a spike in numbers in georgia soon? who knows. And as others have mentioned, if covid is like the spanish flu of old, the 2nd wave may be much worse. Hopefully, scientists can learn a lot more about the virus sooner rather than later.
I think reopening is something that needs to be planned out and based on the last briefing I watched, Cuomo laid out a multi-phase plan to do that. Off the top of my head, Phase I included reopening manufacturing and construction jobs that were low risk, Phase II involved reopening other non-essential businesses that were deemed to be low risk with the request that business provide ideas on how they could reopen safely. This is all on top of an expanded testing roll out where you will eventually be able to get a covid test done at any pharmacy in the state and by test i mean get swabbed. Unless the place has one of those 15 minute abbot machines. I don't recall what phase III is.
Based on the latest numbers, I think these are all good, concrete steps of moving forward. Obviously, it would be foolish to say "ok everyone back to work". There are plenty of people who are quite happy collecting unemployment with the $600 bonus since it's more than what they would normally make at work. I read an article about a small business owner who got their loan and said she was going to rehire everyone and her employees got pissed at her for this very reason.
We need to start reopening and i'm glad cuomo is trying to put a reasonable plan in place. I seriously worry about the states who have already opened up... are we gonna see a spike in numbers in georgia soon? who knows. And as others have mentioned, if covid is like the spanish flu of old, the 2nd wave may be much worse. Hopefully, scientists can learn a lot more about the virus sooner rather than later.
what about people coming in from other states where testing is not rampant etc. wont that mess with the capacity as well and the number of cases.
The situation in other states is more complicated. NY is an outlier with so much of the population having already contracted the virus. There is a built in defense that exists here that doesn't in other places. Consequently, we have advantages when reopening that other places do not have. The risk of a second wave is higher in these other states and if it hits could do so faster and harder.* On the whole, I think NY can afford to be a bit more aggressive than other places in reopening. After suffering the effects of 25% of the population catching the virus - we've certainly earned it. Whether we will take advantage is another question entirely.
And I am not that concerned about people coming to NY from other places. I don't see it happening in the numbers that could either (a) swamp our medical system or (b) eliminate our relative advantage in immunity.
* - For a lot of these states, one could argue that we are talking about a first wave, since they never really had a peak like what happened in NY.
And I am not that concerned about people coming to NY from other places. I don't see it happening in the numbers that could either (a) swamp our medical system or (b) eliminate our relative advantage in immunity.
* - For a lot of these states, one could argue that we are talking about a first wave, since they never really had a peak like what happened in NY.
This is a wild card and an unknown right now, and should affect the analysis/timeline to some degree.
Last edited:
The study that Cuomo was announcing today regarding antibodies is still pretty small in nature, and while those numbers could be real, there's a very real chance it isn't real. I think it's only like 5,000 people that have been tested in a clinical, random study. It's possible that it's 25%, but let's not act like that's a firm number.
Is the latest data entirely new testing? Or is it cumulative? I find it interesting that LI and rest of state actually decreased, which raises a few questions from me. Is the sample too small to properly extrapolate overall percentages? Are the antibodies short-lasting and beginning to fade altogether? Are tests flawed?
Separately, I've read of some having concerns that antibodies from prior low-harm coronavirus colds may be misleading positive results for Covid-19 antibodies in these tests.
Basically, while the numbers are promising, it's seems too early to give any serious credence to these tests while making decisions on reopening. You have to make too many assumptions.
The one silver lining is that NYC is testing way higher, which seems logical for numerous reasons. This gives me hope that at least the tests are fairly accurate.
The issue is that the virus clearly spreads very easily. If that many people really have contracted it then it could have been a much higher number had we not instituted stay at home orders. The mortality rate could be 10x lower than the flu but the infection rate could be 100x higher. Even with the stay at home order people are still somehow being infected regularly and having to be hospitalized. Now imagine if we did nothing. It’s putting a massive strain on hospitals despite the efforts we’ve made.
If there is no vaccine for next year and this turns into a seasonal bug then we’ll be in this same spot again.
I don't know what the margin of error is on a 5,000 person study, but it's probably only 2-3%. Even if it is 5%, that means 20-30% infection rate, which I don't think changes the conclusion that NYC has a great head start on herd immunity that should help slow down any second wave.
Stop saying people have resistance to the virus. That has *NOT* been proven in any scientific study.
There’s never been a virus where people infected do not come out with some resistance, even if it’s imperfect. And there is no evidence of anyone
There are almost no peer reviewed scientific studies that establish anything yet because the situation is so new and fluid, and making that the standard for what we can say would mean we all have to shut up altogether. That’s a ridiculous standard.
Most fundamentally, you don’t get to tell us what we can and cannot say.
ETA: I edited phrasing above (you can see how) to be more accurate.
Last edited:
I have no idea, either. I'm just saying that a poll or a study like this isn't exact, and we shouldn't take it to mean that exactly 25% of all New Yorkers have had this virus. It might be true, it just might not be true. We need to wait for more information. If 25% of the city does have it, then that also means it's far more transmissible than we thought. So while it would be good that so many people already have it and the death rate is far lower than we thought, it's also bad that it's so easy to get and that people with no apparent symptoms are able to infect others. This thing seems really hard to stop.
I asked him to please stop, I didn’t tell him he had to - there are zero consequences if he continues. There’s a difference in that, which evidently you can’t parse since you claim I’m dictating what can/can’t be said. You're actually the one making the demands here.
Covid-19 acts differently than other viruses. Fauci, our country's expert, initially said that shedding wouldn't occur before symptoms showed.... and guess what, that was proven false and a leading cause of transmission. Scientists didn't think the virus could crack the barrier protecting the nervous system and brain, but here we are with it being the case with enough deaths a result that it's been written up. So just because past virus conferred some levels of immunity with antibodies, it doesn't mean that this one will. Fine to hope, but not presume. No scientists are taking a stand that antibodies confer immunity - they all are be extremely guarded in what they say, and the WHO is especially warning not to assume immunity.
Frankly, I don't give a fck if people discuss potential immunity, but Gotham flat out said "this means...." So far, antibodies don't mean ANYTHING, but GG is again laying out pseudo-facts with absolutely no knowledge or skillset to be doing so. It was at the beginning of this shitfest dystopia we find ourselves in that GG was comparing this to the fcking flu, and how it isn't as bad because the flu kills more, etc, etc, etc...... and where are we now - outside of Heart Disease & Cancer, Covid-19 is the leading cause of death in the country, easily surpassing the flu, in less time, with the country social distancing and self-quarantining..... so color-me-unimpressed if GG makes another bold statement of "what this means......."
You're the guy that writes 500-1000 word tear downs of people to prove them wrong when they write something that isn't cited or goes against what's known. GG didn't do that, but you're angry at me. Fine.
I'm going to chalk this up to you having a bad day today, and whatever happened, I'm sorry about it and I hope it gets better.
