The prevalence of infections is more than 10 times higher than the counted number of cases in six regions of the United States.

Barbara Davis, a nurse, drawing blood last week for an antibody test for the coronavirus in the District of Columbia. 
Barbara Davis, a nurse, drawing blood last week for an antibody test for the coronavirus in the District of Columbia. Credit…Win Mcnamee/Getty Images

By Apoorva Mandavilli New York Times

The number of coronavirus infections in many parts of the United States is more than 10 times higher than the reported rate, according to data released on Friday by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The analysis is part of a wide-ranging set of surveys started by the C.D.C. to estimate how widely the virus has spread. Similar studies, sponsored by universities, national governments and the World Health Organization, are continuing all over the world.

The C.D.C. study found, for instance, that in South Florida, just under 2 percent of the population had been exposed to the virus as of April 10, but the proportion is likely to be higher now given the surge of infections in the state. The prevalence was highest in New York City at nearly 7 percent as of April 1.

“This study underscores that there are probably a lot of people infected without knowing it, likely because they have mild or asymptomatic infection,” said Dr. Fiona Havers, who led the C.D.C. study. “But those people could still spread it to others.”

Like this? Click to receive free EP Blog updates

She emphasized the importance of hand-washing, wearing cloth masks and social distancing to stop the spread of the virus from people without symptoms.

The numbers indicate that even in areas hit hard by the virus, an overwhelming majority of people have not yet been infected, said Scott Hensley, a viral immunologist at the University of Pennsylvania who was not involved in the research.

“Many of us are sitting ducks who are still susceptible to second waves,” he said.

The difference between recorded infections and the actual prevalence in the data was highest in Missouri, where about 2.65 percent of the population was infected with the virus as of April 26, although many people might not have felt sick. This number is about 24 times the reported rate: nearly 162,000 compared with the 6,800 thought to have been infected by then.

The results confirm what some scientists have warned about for months: that without wider testing, scores of infected people go undetected and circulate the virus.

“Our politicians can say our testing is awesome, but the fact is our testing is inadequate,” Dr. Hensley said. “These are exactly the kind of studies we need right now.”

Read the full story

Verified by MonsterInsights