Covid Rate Remains Remarkably Low on UWS, as Rate Rises Elsewhere

Photo by Laura Phillips at the New-York Historical Society.

The rate of positive Covid-19 tests remains low on the Upper West Side — in fact, the zip codes here have some of the lowest rates in the city.

Recent data shows that the rates are rising in several parts of the city, outside the “hotspots” that had been causing concern earlier this fall. The percent of tests that come back positive are a good indication of whether there’s significant “community spread” of the virus. If the average weekly city rate goes above 3%, public schools will be shut down. So far it’s still below 2%. But in some areas, it’s growing faster.

“There are currently 67 ZIP codes out of 177 citywide that have an average test positivity rate over 2%, according to data posted Thursday on the Department of Health’s website,” Gothamist reported. “Sixteen of those ZIP codes are above 3%. The latest numbers cover a four-week period ending on October 24th.”

On the UWS, the rates are all below 1%.

10023: 57 cases, 0.77% positivity rate

10024: 45 cases, 0.54% positivity rate

10025: 104 cases, 0.73% positivity rate

10069: 9 cases, 0.92% positivity rate

That doesn’t mean people should let their guard down of course! Mask up!

See the full list of zip codes below.

NEWS | 24 comments | permalink
    1. Steve says:

      Highest positivity rate ion the UWS is in the development formerly known as Trump Place.

      • Danielle Remp says:

        That zip code, with a dense population, is largely comprised of single adults, mostly in their late-20s to their early-40s* — generally, a group that is very socially active. That could account for the high number of cases.
        It could also be that many medical professionals (who are at higher risk of contracting covid) live within that zip code, since it is close to Mt. Sinai West.

    2. UWSider says:

      It could mean that we have few people with the virus, or it could mean that we are doing more “useless” tests (people doing COVID tests without any symptoms and without contact with infected people).

      In my daughter’s school, which is in the Upper West Side, the entire school – students and staff – already tested twice since September, and some were asked to get tested even more because they were close to people with COVID. Virtually all tests were negative – a huge waste of time and money.

      • Sarah says:

        Actually, testing of the asymptomatic is helpful in determining community prevalence. If we only test those with symptoms/known exposure we won’t be able to accurately determine how widespread the disease in within the community, because of course infections rates among the symptomatic will be higher.

        • NYYgirl says:

          Thank you. It still doesn’t compute to me that so many don’t seem to realize the whole asymptomatic thing!

        • UWSider says:

          This can satisfy the intellectual curiosity of statisticians and academic epidemiologists. For the rest of us in the real world it’s only a distraction and an excuse to delay going back to normal. Great for labs doing all the testing. We’ve had enough of the anti-business policies of governor Cuomo.

          • ben says:

            It is PRECISELY the intellectual curiosity of the academics that we are now all counting on for a rapid and safe vaccine development. Without it we’d never even have recovered from/survived earlier pandemics. People in the real world benefit tremendously from satisfying the intellectual curiosity of those in academia.

      • ben says:

        Please refrain from spewing nonsense if you have no idea what you are talking about. Just because tests come back negative absolutely does not mean they were useless. Repeated testing of as many people as possible is the only way to survey the infections in the population. In fact, count your blessings that people your daughter’s school have the privilege of getting tested twice and coming back negative. They are important data points that many other folks wish they could be.

      • tam says:

        UWSider must be that little bird i always hear – “cheap cheap!”


      • Robin says:

        ‘Virtually all tests were negative’ suggests that some were positive. If even one was, aren’t you glad it was caught? Had it not been caught it is likely that others would have been infected. Catching lots of infections may make you feel that doing the tests were ‘worth it’ but in fact, catching just one saves many others from possible illness and from becoming spreaders. Congrats to your daughter’s school on doing their bit!

    3. Rudolf says:

      Hmm. What would happen if we don’t test anyone for a week? How about month?

      We would have 0 new cases per day

      imagine that, all goes back to normal.

      The only number that matters is how many died

      • Jimmy says:

        And if we stopped selling pregnancy tests nobody would be pregnant anymore

      • Bob Lamm says:


      • NYYgirl says:

        There was a cartoon circulating a little while ago which was basically about pregnant women who ‘couldn’t’ be pregnant since they haven’t taken a test. L.O.L. (O.M.G.)

      • Mark Moore says:

        The people who are hospitalized but survived would probably disagree with you.

      • NotImpressed says:

        The only number that matters is the number of deaths?
        So we don’t care about hospitalizations, ICU admissions, cardiovascular damage, neurological damage, renal damage, days lost of work/school?

      • Paul says:

        Really? So the number with kidney damage, heart damage, lung damage, vascular disease causing strokes, they’re chopped liver?

      • vikram says:

        That’s just plain dumb. I hope that was a a joke. As Sarah pointed out, in an ideal situation, as many people as possible would get tested as regularly as possible (within reason, according to available resources).
        Massive and regular testing is the only way to get a good idea of what is really happening. However, that’s obviously never going to happen.

      • ben says:

        Ahhh the good old burying-your-head-in-the-sand-and-the-problem-goes-away approach! Carry on with our lives because those that live fighting covid clearly don’t matter. smh

      • UpperWestSider says:

        To say the only number that counts is deaths is just wrong. Knowing who is infected, especially asymptomatic people, is critical to quarantining those people so they can’t spread the virus further.

    4. Shane says:

      Ridiculous comment Steve, first comment. 10069 is no longer Trump place and we all mask up every day and we have 9 cases among 1,000’s of residents.

    5. Lauren says:

      Great job masking up and distancing, UWS!

    6. GLocke says:

      Please let us all take a look at the number of COVID related deaths in certain European countries. Even there the Death Rate might be going down as they find more asymptomatic positives, the numbers of COVID related deaths on the graphs are getting alarming although they closed their borders as tightly as possible since September 1 and they are trying to be careful with social isolation and protective clothing. Please protect yourself and your loved ones in the following months as best as possible.