ALBANY, N.Y. (CBSNewYork)Gov. Andrew Cuomo said Monday that the number of statewide random antibody tests has expanded to 7,500, which reveals a better picture of the extent of coronavirus spread in New York.

Cuomo said 14.9% of those tested statewide tested positive for COVID-19 antibodies, which is up from the initial 13.9% statewide when a previous sample of 3,000 people was done on April 22. Cuomo said the 1% increase is statistically in the margin of error.

Regionally, the results suggest:

  • 24.7% positive in New York City
  • 15.1% positive in Westchester/Rockland
  • 14.4% positive on Long Island
  • 3.2% positive in the rest of the state

A new Siena College poll found more than half of New Yorkers — 51% — personally know someone who has tested positive for coronavirus. Of those people, 32%, which includes nearly half of New York City voters, know someone who died as a result of the virus, CBS2’s Alice Gainer reported Monday night.

The governor said he’s going to conduct antibody surveys of 1,000 NYPD and FDNY personnel to determine the infection rate in those organizations. A similar survey will be done with 3,000 health care workers and 1,000 transit workers.

“We want to un-PAUSE. May 15 is when the PAUSE regulations expire statewide. I will extend them in many parts of the state. But in some parts of the state, some regions, you can make the case that we should un-PAUSE on May 15. But you have to be smart about it,” Cuomo said. “Start thinking through what it means to reopen.”

CORONAVIRUS PANDEMIC

As for the conditions of a reopening, Cuomo said first CDC guidelines suggesting a decline of hospitalizations for 14 days must be met. Construction and manufacturing would be the first industries to be brought back, but precautions to protect the workers must be considered. The health care capacity of a region which might also be reopened also needs to be considered, especially as flu season approaches later this year. Testing and tracing systems must also be in place.

“We can’t open an attraction that might bring many people from outside the region and then overwhelm people in that region. You have a lot of pent up demand,” Cuomo said.

CORONAVIRUS: NY Health Dept. | NY Call 1-(888)-364-3065 | NYC Health Dept. | NYC Call 311, Text COVID to 692692 | NJ COVID-19 Info Hub | NJ Call 1-(800)-222-1222 or 211, Text NJCOVID to 898211 | CT Health Dept. | CT Call 211 | Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Cuomo said he had asked President Donald Trump to allow the temporary medical facilities the federal government has constructed to stay in place through September. More than 1,000 people had been treated at the temporary hospital at the Javits Center.

Gainer reported Monday night that all remaining patients have been taken off the USNS Comfort Navy hospital ship after it was determined last week it was no longer needed.

WEB EXTRA: See Gov. Cuomo’s Daily Presentation Slides (.pdf) 

Cuomo said the state was going to commit $25 million to help food banks that have been overwhelmed by demand as the pandemic continues. He asked philanthropies to also help. Food banks had seen a 40-60% surge in demand upstate, 40% increase on Long Island, 100% increase in New York City and 200% increase in Westchester. Philanthropies willing to help should contact Fran Barrett, Director of Nonprofits by emailing COVIDPhilantrhopies@exec.ny.gov.

“This is, I would say, the number one thing they can do to help,” Cuomo said.

PHOTO GALLERY: Coronavirus Shutdown 30 Days In

The governor launched an initiative to prevent dairies from dumping excess milk. Cuomo said the state was partnering with various dairy-related production companies to purchase the excess milk and have it turned into products that can be brought to food banks.

Comments (21)
  1. TDMS says:

    According to the National Academy of Sciences “All SARS-CoV-2 serological study results should be viewed as suspect until rigorous controls are performed and performance characteristics described…most [tests] so far have not described well-standardized controls. Samples from patients with seasonal (non-SARS-CoV-2) coronavirus infections are especially important as negative controls.” See https://download.nap.edu/cart/download.cgi?record_id=25775

  2. TDMS says:

    New York state is using an antibody assay that claims a false positive rate range of 0-7% https://on.ny.gov/2SclqMl. When Gov Cuomo states that 15% of the state has been infected, he does not give a range. So, is it 8% to 15% or some other range?

    How was the test validated? Is this test picking the four main corona viruses for the common cold? How many and what type of negative controls used? These details need to be made public so it can be reviewed by third parties.

    It’s horrific that New York, Massachusetts, Florida and other states are releasing prevalence numbers with inadequate information about the reliability of the tests. Huge failure by the news reporters not to ask to ask for the release of this information.

  3. Moose says:

    Why are we shut down again? I want to hit the bars and the clubs. I miss popping bottles and hitting on hot chicks.

  4. Bill Gish says:

    How the hell does Fredo II know that coronavirus antibodies are present In nearly 25% of all NYC residents? The answer is……HE DOESN’T!

  5. Rom says:

    this is honestly BAD statistics. Let’s say the antibody tests are “valid”

    the question we should be asking is HOW MANY OF THOSE 25% WERE ALREADY REPORTED AS POSITIVE CONFIRMED CASES IN THE OFFICIAL COUNT.

    Out of 7500 random tests -> 1875 showed antibodies?
    well if you told me 900 of those people were already positive cases – that would ONLY tell me the true number is probably double the current count (i.e. 300k in NYC instead of 150k -> aka 3.4%)

  6. Mark Parksel says:

    This is just grotesquely irresponsible of Cuomo to be out proclaiming what he is proclaiming around these antibody tests. The antibody tests are not validated, have not been demonstrated to indicate immunity nor how long you may be immune if carrying the antibody indeed provides for some immunity. In addition, there are many antibody tests out there, the degree of sensitivity and specificity of these tests for the actual sars-cov-2 virus have not been well demonstrated, many of these tests have exceptionally high false positive rates and so on.

    Cuomo should be deeply embarrassed by his intimating that these types of antibody testing results mean anything with respect to established immunity or identifying those who had an actual sars-cov-2 infection for which they mounted a response. Shame on his medical advisors as well. A bunch of freaking hacks.

  7. Fredo Cuomo says:

    If the scientists are right and we’re all going to die…then, I’m not dying at home waiting for my government check and the food bank to open.

    1. Bill Gish says:

      Same here.

  8. R. L.Hails Sr. P. E. (Ret.) says:

    Somebody is wrong, maybe dead wrong. IF. IF these tests are valid, they raise the question: How did millions of people throughout a large state in strict isolation become infected in little over one month? When did it begin? IF IF these tests are valid, the disease kills far fewer people than the numbers bandied about by our experts. Or China’s experts. Or Russia’s experts. Or North Korea’s experts.

    We either contend with supermen, or lousy test data, or political science, a contradiction in terms.

    Why did we rely on the science, the data, to destroy our economy? I offer one thought, “Cui Bono?.”

    1. Irishsetter says:

      The answer to your question is simply that the virus was present much earlier than reports indicate. I suspect as early as late December. (To avoid adding separate comments, these data samples are statistical studies and only a small sample is required to determine larger infection footprint of this virus. Not sure why folks are dismissing the data. It’s not politics, its basic statistical math/science.)

  9. Flying Dog says:

    It’s encouraging to see people questioning veracity and being rational about things, thinking critically about the data and what it might mean, and, above all, weighing what’s said here against what’s been done in the face of “the clovid”.

    I do hope that this sort of trend continues. Lots of people in this country have been asleep at the wheel, but I do believe this whole virus episode might have acted as the rumble-strip to wake them up. Remember, we the people have a lot more in common with one another than the career politicians and corporate media would like us to think.

  10. Rational Db8 says:

    This is incredibly deceptive. For all Cuomo knows, the antibody test is picking up everyone who had a COLD in the past six to nine months from run of the mill coronaviruses and they’ve never had this new Wuhan coronavirus at all. They have no idea yet how specific the new antibody tests are for this new coronavirus versus all the regular ones that have been around for ages and don’t cause anything worse than a cold. They also don’t know what percentage of tests are false positives. Add to that the problem that we’ve got no idea what antibody titer (e.g., how many, what level in your system) is even needed to actually have immunity – or how long that immunity might last – a few weeks? a month? several months? a year? a few years? They have no idea yet.

    But here he is, touting this as if it’s somehow set in stone and meaningful. It is scientifically interesting. It will help a little with eventually figuring out some of these issues – but not any time soon. It’s sure as heck nothing to hang your hat on or decide public policy on, because at this point they’ve got no clue how accurate it is and it may easily be grossly misleading.

    1. Griffin Mill says:

      I disagree (in part) and I agree (in part),

      My understanding is that, they test for genetic markers in the antibodies for the virus. If it’s a different virus than SARS-CoV-2 it will test negative. If it finds a mach, it will be positive. So the testing is probably accurate.

      But I do agree with some of your other comments. We simply don’t know.

      FWIW, here’s an interesting take on that point:

      What are the consequences of blindly following a policy in the name of science?

      Here’s an opinion:

      “It is not, as may sometimes appear, the progress of science which threatens our civilization, but scientific error, based usually on the presumption of knowledge which in fact we do not possess.” – F.A. Hayek, “The Errors of Constructivism”, 1970, University of Salsburg.

      The article below, Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer:

      “We’ve got to be nimble and we have to follow the science and be really smart about how we reengage,” she said, “because no one — no one, even if you’re a protester or you’re the sitting governor or you’re on another side of the issue — we know that no one wants a second wave.”

      (https://apnews.com/e126718399f1887b7451cc5a9cd23983)

      For what it’s worth, she’s right – to a point.

      It is a fact that events like this give politicians a lot of power they usually don’t have. Some will no doubt see waiting as-long-as-possible before relinquishing it as a win/win no matter the potential cost, because that cost is currently unknown. Fortunately for them, that lack of knowledge provides plausible deniability for waiting too long, which is something we may want to keep in mind for the future.

      We cannot stop the virus. We can only hope to manage the spread of it. But how much management is appropriate? What are the costs of that management and at what point does management begin to produce diminishing returns?

      In other words, when does the management start costing more lives than the virus – beyond those who will, tragically, perish no matter what we do?

      Do we know that point? Can we even determine, with any hope of accuracy, what that point is?

      In the greater scheme of things one has to consider the things we don’t know:

      1. How many people have really been infected?
      2. What is the real percentage of infected?
      3. What is the percentage of infected that need hospitalization?
      4. What percentage of that total are in ICU?
      5. What are the consequences of continuing a prolonged lock-
      down beyond what is really necessary?

      All of the above represent, “knowledge which in fact we do not possess”. Until we have an accurate number of infections, we cannot know 1-4 of the above. We will only be able to accurately answer #5 after the pandemic is over – producing a debate that will–in all likelihood–keep news outlets busy for months, if not years.

      But more to the point; how many lives can we save, and at what cost by remaining in lock-down? – remembering that there will be lives lost from both the virus and from the economic consequences of trying to manage the spread of the virus.

      There is so much we really don’t know. No one does. And there is very little certainty.

      Even in “science”

  11. Craig Eliot says:

    Isn’t mass transit just great?

  12. Liz Petillo says:

    25% positive in NYC … that means we crashed an outstanding economy FOR NOTHING. And in the process we blew a chance to have herd immunity in the fall so it’s all going to happen again. When it does, we can’t let the politicians OVER REACH and close the world down again. WE can’t let the politicians OVER REACH and try to ram their agendas through while we are all locked in our homes (like Pelosi is trying to do with a national paycheck for everyone). This is one giant screwed up mess all around by all the politicians – all of them.

    1. Bill Gish says:

      Tha’ts what Fredo II and Warren Wilhelm wanted to do. If they had their way, we would lose all our rights.

  13. Robert Suyak says:

    Why is this? I thought Gov Cuomo was a leader. That is the latest propaganda from the left. Seems like he is the leader: leader of Corona virus infections and leader of Covid-19 deaths.

  14. This is fakenews! Unless the entire population has been tested, there is no scientific evidence that 25% of the population has the antibodies. I find it interesting that when a conservative makes statements like this, liberals jump all over them and demand proof. When a liberal does it, the MSM remains silent and there is no outcry for evidentiary support.

  15. Constance Underfoot says:

    If 25% have had it, that puts the fatality rate at under 1%.

  16. TomasCruz says:

    CDC estimates* that, from October 1, 2019, through April 4, 2020, there have been:
    39,000,000 – 56,000,000
    flu illnesses
    18,000,000 – 26,000,000
    flu medical visits
    410,000 – 740,000
    flu hospitalizations
    24,000 – 62,000
    flu deaths
    WOW, what a range, they haven’t a clue of the flu/Wuhan virus stats.

  17. The Red River says:

    Sheesh. This guy is nuts. Watch, in 2 weeks sicknesses will begin to SPIKE. Our politicians want to kill us…sure, go back to work they say….

Leave a Reply