> Simulating from 1 January, we obtained 108,689 (95% PPI: 1,023 to 14,182,310) local infections cumulatively in the United States by 12 March (Fig. 1A).
What that means is that they don't really know - that confidence interval is absurd - but they have reason to think there could have been 100k Americans with the coronavirus on March 12.
I don't understand the comments on this thread that seem to want to suppress preliminary data about COVID.
Sure, the confidence interval is ridiculously large but the paper is open about its methods and conclusions. It's definitely in the "more work is needed" category, but I don't see how this information should not be published.
