jimincalif

Glad you’ve recovered. It’s astounding to me the subways were not closed down, especially with so many MTA employees getting it. But I’m not in NY myself, so I don’t have the same perspective. The good news, if there is any, is that S. Korean info suggests that reinfection is not likely. https://www.livescience.com/coronavi...positives.html. Stay safe!

livedarklions

I think the issue in NYC is that you couldn't keep the essentials like hospitals open. If you shut down the subways, the staff can't get there.

tds101 

I missed my damn appt,...UGH!!! There's so many people that if you're not early, you're late. I can reschedule for next week.

tds101 

Update: antibody blood test taken at CityMD.

CycleryNorth81

Brazil is letting the coronavirus run wild with little intervention, and the results are strikingly bad

https://www.yahoo.com/news/brazil-le...215148153.html

Trevtassie

Well actually the situation is remarkably similar to the USA, states trying to do the right thing with lockdowns, nutjob in charge pouring fuel on the fire. Could be much, much worse. Also has the nepotism thing going on too.

tds101 

Wrong thread,...

PS: Population control.

SHBR

N.Y.C. is amazing!

tds101 

NYC is a madhouse, and so is almost the rest of the world unfortunately.

SHBR

Heh. I've been saying that for the past THREE months.

Nobody cares, and its most likely a nothing burger.

I miss the old America.

79pmooney

I screwed up Sunday and let myself get sucked into being way too close to strangers not masked. On top of that, I have a housemate who will not survive should I bring this disease home. We had the "what if" discussion a few weeks ago and he is willing to take care of me should I get sick and we both know that ultimately he will be going to the hospital (and near certainly, his end) if he comes down with it.

Started playing out the math - if I get sick I may be able to ride it out at home but if I infect him, he may push one over-exposed health care worker over the edge. That worker exposes his/her spouse. Another two get infected from them. Those two are less conscientious and infect two each. Now it its out in the general pubic where each positive typically infects three each. So that's 8 sick right there. Next "generation" takes it to 30.

Had a tele-visit with my GP yesterday and will get a test in an hour. If I show positive I will kick my housemate out and pay for his living costs until he can come back. (Probably costing me $5000 if he cannot find a friend to stay with.) But $5000 vs 30 more getting sick and likely 3 of them very sick at the cost to the health system of many thousands and just as likely, at least one death? I give real money to charities, Seems pretty simple. Here, that money is better spent not creating the need.

Hope to come out of this negative and just a real scare. If so, might just have to spend a little of that saved money throwing the nice Campy and other parts I purchased from a forumite on a frame! (To keep this sightly bicycle related on "Bike Forums"!)

Ben - a member of this new world where we strive to a life of negativity

Biker395 

Good idea to be tested if you think there is a real probability you were infected. Did your doc give you any timing information (e.g. ... presuming you were infected, how long after that infection before the test will be conclusive, and how long until before you are infectious)?

79pmooney

I didn't ask but she is pretty both savvy and stays up on the current medicine. I did make it clear when this happened. She will know the results in 24 hours. If negative, I'll ask her.

I'm impressed, All of this has happened very fast and has been easy for me. My appointment was 2:20 yesterday. Got tested 10:25 this morning. Likely to know by lunch tomorrow. The testing was just driving up to the back entrance to the hospital, waiting for two cars - basically the drive-in at McDonald's mid afternoon - and maybe 2 minutes of getting instructed as to what to expect, the swab (I had no idea you could stick a solid object that far back in one's nose!) and drive off.

tds101 

CityMD here in NY is using an antibody test that's using an emergency approval, and it's inaccurate as all heck. It came back negative for both antibodies AND infection as well. Other's have been complaining about the inaccuracy of the test.

From the CityMD website:

AdkMtnMonster

I hate to ruin someone else's bad health with good news, but the Roche serology test has a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 99.8%. Click and learn. So, if it says you don't have the antibody, then you are really, REALLY unlikely to have the antibody. Unless you fall into that 0.2%. And, well, somebody has to be there, but a mere 2 out of 1000 people makes the odds pretty low, donchathink???

Here's to great health for all, for happiness and long lives, and an end to the suffering of those in the grip of this pandemic, both literally and figuratively. (I think that should just about cover every single human on Earth.)

CycleryNorth81

In this case it really is a case of bad news, good news. The good news is that the OP most likely never had the corona virus and was never infected.

The bad news is the OP has no natural protection (antibodies) to the virus. The OP needs to continue protective hygiene (social distancing, PPE, hand washing ....) to protect himself and others.

gsteinb

Meh. I had the labcorp test last weekend. It came back negative for antibodies. A number of problems, of course. Its unknown accuracy, as well as uncertainty as to how long the antibodies last in the body. So rather than providing any sort of clarity on why my body had been off since I got sick in February there's the same confusion and concern over covid19. If I didn't have that and I got as sick as I did what did I have, and what would happen to me if I got covid? My wife works for a city research hospital and their tests are about ready for primetime so we're going to head there some time soon and toss my body at science.

tds101 

Coming off snarky isn't exactly the correct way to interact with me, not appreciated. Do you know me? Do you know what I went through when I was ill? No, so be respectful. I'm still not experiencing "great health", and I'm dealing with coworkers who still have family members dying as I type this.

Now, the accuracy rating of the test is 96.5%, not 100%, as that's what the company claims. Good stats, but not good enough. If you'd read what I posted throughout this thread, you have SEEN that I tested positive for Covid 19. I'm also socially distancing as best as possible, and I'd never stopped using the proper PPE that's required. I'm an essential worker. I've returned to work AFTER my medically required quarantine PLUS extra time. Now, READ what I posted BEFORE you post that a link to something posted as "READ AND LEARN". Here's my link: READ AND LEARN THE REAL %

I don't really care where you came to that last 0.2%, but considering how I'm lucky I am that I fared as well as I did, I'm sure I'd had Covid 19. But, you deciding what happened to me, and exactly what I should think or feel, and how I should accept being healthy,...that pisses me the **** off.

Like I said, I tested positive, but this test came back negative. I've been around other coworkers who've ALL tested positive, and we all had the same symptoms. The difference was severity, some had a fever, some didn't, and some didn't survive. Even after being ill, wearing PPE, social distancing, and hand washing are required. I don't understand why some of you assume it's something a survivor of this illness wouldn't do.

I've been instructed that I need to retake the antibody test at a different medical facility. It also needs to be a different branded test. I'm planning on going to one of the locations my employer (MTA/NYCT) has set up to test us. I'm still dealing with breathing issues. I need this to be fully, CORRECTLY documented. I'd recommend anyone who knows that they've contracted Covid 19 to get tested so you have the proper results.

AdkMtnMonster

First off, I wish you 100% good health, and nothing less. To directly answer your question, "that last 0.2%" is right there in the article you just linked. "Earlier this week, a new antibody developed by Roche was approved by the FDA, and is considered to be the most accurate antibody test developed to date. Roche states the test detects antibodies with 100% accuracy, and has a false positive rate of just 0.2%."

I meant no offense, just hoping that you would find some peace in wading through the health information that you've been presented. Good luck. Hang in there. Stay positive. (Or, uh, stay negative, actually. Covid-19 negative, that is!)

tds101 

Stop quoting what Roche states as their numbers,...it's not fully accurate. I did miss their stated 0.2% spec, and that's my mistake. The issue is I've definitely had Covid 19, but it failed to register it. I need it to be recorded in my health records. My issue is the sarcasm,...it's uncalled for. I'm not finding peace in this being treated as comedy.

PS: This is from my Covid 19 antibody test results,... It proves there's still a considerable margin for error in the testing.

AdkMtnMonster

There's also the base rate bias that muddies the waters of antibody testing even further. For example, if the real infection rate (this is just an example for simple math purposes!) is 1 out of 1000 people, the rate of false positives will be higher than if the real infection rate is 3%. Why? Because if you test 5000 people from the first data set, you should see true positives of 5. Anything >5 is unlikely IF THE REAL INFECTION RATE is 1:1000. So, those would likely be false positives. If 5000 people from the 3% set are tested, you would have a group of 150 positives, which sounds more reasonable. This is why it's called a base rate bias. Until and unless you KNOW the true base rate, everything is an approximation. It can be a very, very close approximation, but it is still not exact. And no one should believe, at any time, that these numbers are exact, nor should anyone tell you that any numbers are exact. There's always a little room either way, like too much/not enough frosting on a cinnamon roll.

At this point in time, nothing is ever exact, 100% guaranteed. There's actually not much in the wide world of healthcare that ever was, or is 100% guaranteed. (There are some things that are considered "gold standard assays" but, for the discussion on Covid-19, let's operate under the presumption that things are still fluid and there is not a clear leader in the "100% accuracy department." Some are much better than others, though.)

A negative PCR test does not mean a patient does NOT have Covid-19. It can mean that the specimen was collected poorly; it was collected as well as possible but without obtaining any virus from the nasopharynx; it is very possible that the patient did not have a high enough viral load to shed virus at that time; it could be a processing error at the laboratory (which is possible, rather improbable, but cannot be ruled out); or a few other reasons.

A positive PCR test is a bit different, as the assay looks for an extremely specific piece of genetic material that is exclusive to the SARS-CoV-2 virus, and there is very little that can cause false positives. BUT, and this is significant, they can still occur.

Serology (blood) tests for antibodies are entirely different from swabs and PCR testing. Like, bicycles compared to a pint of beer different, even though both things go pretty well together in a before/after sequence. A negative serology test does NOT mean that someone did NOT have Covid-19, and a positive test does not guarantee that someone DID have or OR that they have any immunity whatsoever. Those are things we just don't know yet.

The Roche antibody test is very accurate. It is among the most accurate available. When tested against known positives it yielded an extremely high sensitivity and specificity for the antibody. Not everyone will produce antibodies, nor will they produce them at the same rate or at the same titer. Variability from person to person prevents any assay like this from being 100%.

tds101 

And like I said, my point is I managed to get a false negative test result, and I've been told that I'd need to retake the test to get a true end result. The entire wall of text above, though descriptive, was truly unnecessary. Most of us are quite capable of understanding how this works. Well,...some of us. I know we have a few people around who deny anything based on actual science. I don't happen to be one of them. I've seen too many on point examples to say otherwise.

UPDATE: The antibody test I took wasn't from Roche, it was from ****tt Architect,...it's not 100% accurate. Oh, the way this entire pandemic is being handled is pathetic.

https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/...st-performance

I wonder why the site is blocking the name of the company,...

Biker395 

A-b-b-o is a banned word? I agree with you ... WTF.

Well, from what I can tell, it is a Norwegian cuss/slang word. Gotta love an international crowd.

CycleryNorth81

CityMD mistakenly tells more than 15,000 people who tested positive for coronavirus antibodies in New York and New Jersey that they're IMMUNE

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...es-immune.html

• The urgent care chain told 15,000 people they were immune to COVID-19
• Scientists are yet to prove that the antibodies give a person immunity
• CityMD said it would get in touch with the 15,000 people to correct them
• The facilities use the ****tt Architects antibody tests
• There are dozens on the market but only one - Quest - has received FDA approval
• A recent Chinese study found nearly everyone who recovered from the virus had the antibodies
• But it's unclear how long they may offer immunity - if at all

tds101 

DEAR LORD!!! I said something was wrong with this damn test,... Or it's just how CITYMD is contacting patients and relaying test information.