Los Angeles Times

We don’t know the half of it

Did 50% of L.A. residents catch COVID-19? It all depends.

- SANDY BANKS

I’ve grown accustomed to conflictin­g views when it comes to the pandemic.

We can gather in the library, but our kids can’t go to school. I can finally get my hair done, but a facial is not allowed. You shouldn’t wear a mask, you have to wear a mask, you really should be wearing two masks.

I understand the inconsiste­ncy. This virus is so new that all of us — from CDC scientists to supermarke­t cashiers — are still trying to navigate a steep learning curve.

And I like to think that nothing surprises me anymore. But then something comes along that shocks me all over again. Last week, it was the news about how many people locally already carry antibodies to the virus.

According to some estimates, as reported in The Times and elsewhere, as many as half of Los Angeles County’s 10 million people have already been infected. And that’s even though tests for COVID-19 have confirmed fewer than 1.2 million local infections.

The prospect of that many millions of uncounted infections seemed mindboggli­ng to me. How could more than 3 million people slip through our testing apparatus?

I wanted to know how those numbers were calculated, so I called L.A. County’s chief prognostic­ator, Dr. Roger Lewis. His job is to quantify and model the spread of COVID-19, to help make sure that the county’s hospital system is prepared to meet pandemic healthcare needs.

He is not surprised by the high immunity estimates, but he noted that calculatio­ns vary. “I’ve seen different estimates, from 1 in 4 to more than 50%,” he said.

The county’s official immunity estimate is near the middle of that spread, at approximat­ely 3 in 8 people, or 37.5% of county residents. And that does not take into account the almost 2 million people who have received at least one dose of the vaccine.

Measuring immunity, it turns out, is more sophistica­ted that just counting positive tests and vaccinatio­ns. When the virus first emerged last year, California researcher­s began “antibody surveillan­ce” — tests of random people to check for COVID-19 antibodies.

“They found that the fraction of people with antibodies was much larger than the fraction of people who knew they’d been sick or people who’d tested positive,” Dr. Lewis said. Many people with evidence of having been infected had never experience­d symptoms of the illness; others may not have had access to tests.

Projecting that forward suggests there are now millions of uncounted COVID-19 survivors who were never tested, or at least not at a point when they would register as positive.

That early antibody testing clued researcher­s in to the phenomenon of asymptomat­ic infection and surreptiti­ous spread. Further study of virus replicatio­n, infection demographi­cs, hospitaliz­ations, deaths and more led them to believe that approximat­ely 40% of COVID-19 carriers will have no symptoms and may not show up in testing statistics.

That informatio­n establishe­d a baseline for measuring how many people might be immune — and, by extension, how many others are still vulnerable to the disease.

But immunity estimates are also influenced by what assumption­s researcher­s make and what trajectory they expect.

“If you talk to enough people, you’re bound to get a mix of opinions,” said Dr. George Rutherford, professor of epidemiolo­gy and biostatist­ics at UC San Francisco. “Some might [estimate] conservati­vely, and some are more gungho,” he told me.

In other words, they all use the same basic formula, but the ingredient­s and measuremen­ts might differ a bit.

“We know the natural progressio­n of this disease,” explained David Conti, a USC professor of preventive medicine and specialist in data science integratio­n. “We can describe that with a mathematic­al model.”

But in real life “the number of new cases each day bounces around a lot,” Conti said. “So as soon as we come up with a model, it’s out of date.”

The USC researcher­s’ recent model offers a wide range of estimated cumulative infections, concluding that between 3 million and 5.5 million people in Los Angeles County have likely already been infected by COVID-19.

That translates to between 30% and 55% of the county’s population. It’s the higher number — painting us as a hotbed of infection but also as a region drawing closer to herd immunity — that has caught people’s attention.

But that doesn’t mean that half of the people you know have already been infected with COVID-19.

“Our model is on the level of the entire L.A. County,” where infection rates vary drasticall­y by neighborho­od, USC researcher Abigail Horn said. “People want to take a number and make a statement about it. But it really is about the local communitie­s … and how this [pandemic] has amplified healthcare disparitie­s.”

That is a message we can’t afford to forget. The burden of disease is distribute­d unevenly — and a 50% immunity rate looks different depending on where you live. It’s a worrying reflection of the dismal job we’ve done protecting workingcla­ss families from infection — or it’s an encouragin­g prospect, because the remaining pool of prospectiv­e virus spreaders is smaller than presumed.

Considerin­g that sort of ambiguous messaging, I couldn’t help but wonder how vested we should be in the barrage of statistics that accompanie­s our journey through COVID-19.

I put that question to Dr. Rutherford, who specialize­s in the study of infectious diseases. He thinks a break from tracking the stats may be just what people like me need. “When you’re listening to all these statistics and opinions,” he said, “people may lose the forest for the trees.”

The “forest,” to him, is the rapid creation of effective COVID-19 vaccines, which he sees as “the greatest miracle of modern molecular biology since the discovery of DNA,” he says. “That’s the overwhelmi­ng good news right now … the culminatio­n of 70 years of [scientific] advances.”

The “trees” are the numbers we’re being bombarded with. “There were 64,000 [research] papers published about COVID-19 by the end of October,” he said. “There’s a lot of informatio­n to digest.”

We are not going to find the reassuranc­e we seek in the minutiae of statistics. “A vaccine that is 90% effective, is the same as one that is 85%,” Dr. Rutherford said. “You’re not being cheated out of that 5%.” Yet people are obsessing about which vaccine to get.

He reminded me that our health rests not on the numbers, but on the precaution­s we take. We may not know what number equals herd immunity, but we do know how to protect ourselves, the doctor says:

“Wear a mask, keep your distance from people outside your pod, avoid crowded indoor spaces. Don’t go to Costco on a Saturday afternoon. And get vaccinated as soon as your turn comes.”

 ?? Mel Melcon Los Angeles Times ?? NURSE Celeste Montoya, left, inoculates Winnetka resident Ana Vidales Torres as her daughter Talia, 6, gets a close-up look at a mass vaccinatio­n site at Valley Crossroads Seventh-day Adventist Church in Pacoima.
Mel Melcon Los Angeles Times NURSE Celeste Montoya, left, inoculates Winnetka resident Ana Vidales Torres as her daughter Talia, 6, gets a close-up look at a mass vaccinatio­n site at Valley Crossroads Seventh-day Adventist Church in Pacoima.
 ??  ??
 ?? Irfan Khan Los Angeles Times ?? NURSE Marijorie Tabago administer­s a COVID-19 test on Mercedes Madrano at an Ontario testing site.
Irfan Khan Los Angeles Times NURSE Marijorie Tabago administer­s a COVID-19 test on Mercedes Madrano at an Ontario testing site.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States