L.A. COVID-19 antibody study adds further support for a higher-than-suspected infection rate


A new study conducted by the University of Southern California along with the LA County Department of Public Health indicates that the presence of antibodies for COVID-19 in between 2.5 and 5.6% of the population of LA County, suggesting that between 221,000 and 442,000 individuals had the infection – up to 55 times more people than have been confirmed via testing. This is the second antibody study in a short span of time in California that suspects infections are far more widespread than previously thought, and a good justification for continued social distancing measures.
The LA County study does contain some good news, if the antibody testing proves to be accurate (we aren’t entirely sure what they show for sure at this point, especially in terms of immunity), in that the mortality rate of the infection is actually much lower than the official diagnosed case data would suggest. The infection rate found via antibody testing through the USC study is also remarkably close to the rate found in a Stanford study published last week about the number of infections in Santa Clara County, which found that between 48,000 and 81,000 people in that part of California could’ve had and recovered from the infection.
Whereas the LA study found around 2.8 to 5.6 parent had antibodies, accounting for the margin of error and extrapolating from results to the entire population, the Stanford research found between 2.5 and 4.2 percent of residents carry antibodies for the infection. Those numbers are based on the test kits’ performance, as well as the demographic makeup of the sample population tested.
Neither new research papers have yet been peer-reviewed, so it’s worth taking them with a grain of salt. But the close alignment between the numbers in both, along with early results from similar studies being conducted globally, does seem to suggest that the number of actual cases of COVID-19 far undershoots the published numbers, which typically only include confirmed diagnoses – most of which represent individuals showing moderate to severe symptoms.
The higher rate of undetected infection definitely should not be taken as a sign that COVID-19 is less serious than it appeared, however; this new info only means that its transmission from people who showed no outward symptoms and never subsequently never sought any medical care or were identified for quarantine or contact tracing is probably a lot higher than anyone guessed.
That means social distancing measures are more important than ever, since it’s likely harder than ever to identify who might be a passive carrier of the virus that leads to COVID-19 without realizing it. Eventually, understanding the nature of the spread should help with refining measures to avoid the greatest potential risks of exposure, but for now, this new info just means that COVID-19 is much more effective at moving through a population without raising early warning signs than we previously understood.
A new study conducted by the University of Southern California along with the LA County Department of Public Health indicates that the presence of antibodies for COVID-19 in between 2.5 and 5.6% of the population of LA County, suggesting that between 221,000 and 442,000 individuals had the infection – up…
Recent Posts
- The Oppo Find N5 has made me even more excited for the Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge – here’s why
- Apple Intelligence is coming to the Vision Pro
- Security flaw in popular stalkerware apps is exposing phone data of millions
- Anker’s 58-liter solar fridge is a noisy power-monster
- Salt Typhoon hackers used this clever technique to attack US networks
Archives
- February 2025
- January 2025
- December 2024
- November 2024
- October 2024
- September 2024
- August 2024
- July 2024
- June 2024
- May 2024
- April 2024
- March 2024
- February 2024
- January 2024
- December 2023
- November 2023
- October 2023
- September 2023
- August 2023
- July 2023
- June 2023
- May 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- October 2022
- September 2022
- August 2022
- July 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- September 2018
- October 2017
- December 2011
- August 2010