and, regarding these questions i've been drawing attention to?

1) the death toll in new york city is beginning to tip over into my middle range of mortality rates, which i believe was around 18,000. so, i'm willing to acknowledge that the 0.1% number is maybe too low a bound; the middle bound of 0.3% may turn out to be more correct, at least in new york city. but, it's not like this is going to be precisely constant through diverse populations and shifting demographics, either. everybody knows that new york city is an exceedingly densely populated place...

so, if the mortality rate in new york city ends up around 0.2% rather than 0.1%, i'll need to accept the adjustment. but, i'll still be, conceptually, much closer to the truth - if the antibody tests back up the point.

2) the data is messy, and the numbers are being revised, but, regardless, it's not going to be very much longer before i have to concede that it's a plateau, and not a peak. but, the other data seems to point more towards a peak than a plateau.

do i think there was perfect social distancing over easter? no. so, this is another thing we can test. if we accept that the likelihood of transmission over the previous weekend was much higher than it was over the preceding weekends, we should see the effects of this kick in about this time next week. if we see a small blip, we'll know that most of the population is probably already immune, as this increase in exposure will have led to minimal increases in hospitalization rates. but, if we see a substantive spike, we'll know that social distancing was working, until we decided that access to nana's delicious easter ham took priority over maintaining her actual life.