[BostonCard]

If this virus behaves like almost all other viruses, antibodies will grant immunity, for an unsure duration of time but probably at least a good several months and likely a year or longer, with second exposures being much less severe once the immune system knows how to make the antibodies. I feel pretty comfortable with that assumption. 

I've heard this almost uniformly (again, from my relatively limited following of articles and interviewees).  I don't understand why those raising specter of "second wave" are getting the run they do . . . unless the goal is fear-mongering.  And we certainly have enough of that going around.

Because only a small fraction of the population will have become infected. Most people will still be susceptible to coronavirus after the first wave is passed, and unless you maintain some amount of social distancing, the virus will quickly spread amongst the majority of the population that is still susceptible.

As a rough guide, with a virus that spreads this quickly, you need about 70 - 80% of the population to have been infected and recover for too many people to be immune for it to spread efficiently.  Even if you figure that the true caseload in New York, the city most affected by the virus is understated by a factor of 10, you are still talking about 1 million people with antibodies out of a metro area of about 11 million.  Which leaves 10 million people ripe for the picking if we let down our guard.

BC

[BostonCard]

If this virus behaves like almost all other viruses, antibodies will grant immunity, for an unsure duration of time but probably at least a good several months and likely a year or longer, with second exposures being much less severe once the immune system knows how to make the antibodies. I feel pretty comfortable with that assumption. 

I've heard this almost uniformly (again, from my relatively limited following of articles and interviewees).  I don't understand why those raising specter of "second wave" are getting the run they do . . . unless the goal is fear-mongering.  And we certainly have enough of that going around.

Because only a small fraction of the population will have become infected. Most people will still be susceptible to coronavirus after the first wave is passed, and unless you maintain some amount of social distancing, the virus will quickly spread amongst the majority of the population that is still susceptible.

As a rough guide, with a virus that spreads this quickly, you need about 70 - 80% of the population to have been infected and recover for too many people to be immune for it to spread efficiently.  Even if you figure that the true caseload in New York, the city most affected by the virus is understated by a factor of 10, you are still talking about 1 million people with antibodies out of a metro area of about 11 million.  Which leaves 10 million people ripe for the picking if we let down our guard.

BC