SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
Recommended by:
Mick Mørmøny
To: PKRBKR who wrote (1223219)4/21/2020 5:39:06 PM
From: Tenchusatsu1 Recommendation  Read Replies (1) of 1578501
 
Pkrbkr,
Presumably this is captured in the wide ranges reported. Even at the low end we're looking at ~25x. This doesn't seem all that unreasonable to me given how contagious this is.
I ran the revised numbers, and it's more like 11x.

Still a significant finding, though, enough to convince me that there are far more people who got infected by the coronavirus than what the official numbers indicate.

Even then, though, that still only represents like 1% of the entire population of California.

Compare that to New York, whose *confirmed* cases of coronavirus is already at 1.3% of the population. That means the number of people already infected there but did not exhibit symptoms might be somewhere between 5-10%, depending on how good your guess is.

I don't know about you, but I sure don't want to see what happens to California if we lift the lockdown, only to see a resurgence that causes the percentage to jump from 1% to 5% in a few weeks.

Tenchusatsu
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News