COVID-19 — Coronavirus

[inbetween]

Which study supports that number?
The world is still quite clueless about an accurate true cases guess.

I asked some pages back but nobody replied:
Why should we massively under-test asymptomatic infections?

4m+ UK tested, roughly 80m tests globally and what we find is that under 10% of mainly symptomatics are positive, while positive asymptomatics are under-represented in big numbers?

I would need to have a good reason to follow that idea.

There is a discussion on it here but it's wildly varied.

https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2020/05/0...a-asymptomatic-versus-symptomatic-infections/

Personally I see mild symptoms as the same thing because prior to the increased awareness very few people were tested or had any knowledge that they could have the virus.

Everyone I know seems to know someone who just after Xmas was wiped out by 'something' they've never had before.

 

[Healdplace]

Yes, its weekend data but 15 deaths reported on the day is encouraging. Must be the lowest since the very earliest days of the outbreak.

North West too was a lower proportion of the new cases reported. Yorkshire and East England higher.

And total UK hospital deaths only just above 100. Again even for a Sunday that is another step in the right direction. Remember we were 8 x that level under 2 months ago.

Though the total deaths announced over the last two weekends were not significantly higher than this UK hospital only total. So the decrease is notably slowing Last Sundays announced figure for all settings was only about 10 higher than todays hospital only total.

All in all good news. But with a cautionary note.

 

[St.Pauli support]

There is a discussion on it here but it's wildly varied.

https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2020/05/0...a-asymptomatic-versus-symptomatic-infections/

Personally I see mild symptoms as the same thing because prior to the increased awareness very few people were tested or had any knowledge that they could have the virus.

Everyone I know seems to know someone who just after Xmas was wiped out by 'something' they've never had before.

Thanks for the link, although it perfectly supports my view, that we still don't know about true case numbers.
Modelling has the well known problem of wide error ranges, and I might add you can improve the outcome of your model if you have any political plans in mind. Modelling shows one future scenario at a certain probability, not more, not less.

We definitely need scientific proof, we can't rely on subjective statements how people have felt just after Xmas.

Antibody surveys should give us an idea - IF antibodies certainly exist after some time post infection.
To find out if antibodies have been produced many positive PCR tested persons should be antibody tested first.
We could go on from there and roll out antibody surveys for critical/frontline staff and across the community.

 

[grunge]

There is a discussion on it here but it's wildly varied.

https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2020/05/0...a-asymptomatic-versus-symptomatic-infections/

Personally I see mild symptoms as the same thing because prior to the increased awareness very few people were tested or had any knowledge that they could have the virus.

Everyone I know seems to know someone who just after Xmas was wiped out by 'something' they've never had before.

what ever it was before and just after xmas it wasnt covid.

average weekly deaths proves it without any doubt.

 

[Healdplace]

So the last 4 announced (all settings) deaths on a Sunday have been 269,170, 118 and 113 today, Falling but plateauing.

 

[west didsblue]

what ever it was before and just after xmas it wasnt covid.

average weekly deaths proves it without any doubt.

Was going to say the same.
I felt shit for 3 or 4 days in March a week or so after Wembley. Didn’t think I had it because I didn’t have the cough but I’m not so sure now.
It would be interesting to take the antibody test.

 

[denislawsbackheel]

The Infection fatality rate is somewhere between 0.25% and 1% based on studies in Germany and America

From the measured mortality you can then get a rough idea of how many people have had it - very rough based on a that spread.

For example if we assume 0.5% IFR and 50,000 deaths in the UK then 10m have had it in the UK. However nothing is simple. Can we say that the IFR is uniform when we know for example that demographics have such a huge effect. Look at Africa. Look at Singapore. The migrant population hut hard, the domestic population untouched. Look at New York, New York City has antibody rates of 50% according to a very large survey and yet the suburbs have hardly been touched. It's not uniform.

I must admit the antibody testing in the UK conflicts with this.

Or perhaps NY are using shit antibody tests.
I suspect they are.
My daughter in law just went in for one at a drop in centre.
They are reportedly only 50% accurate!

 

[blueparrot]

Or perhaps NY are using shit antibody tests.
I suspect they are.
My daughter in law just went in for one at a drop in centre.
They are reportedly only 50% accurate!

Haven’t seen antibody tests we are using being only 50% accurate being reported.

 

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

Take a look at The Sun online front page, but it sums up why lockdown is fucked and as I said earlier that the youths are screwing it up for the adults - check how many of the stories are what could be classed as “shake your head” examples...

Youths screwing it up for the adults? That’d make a change (and I’m 56)...

 

[Millwallawayveteran1988]

Was going to say the same.
I felt shit for 3 or 4 days in March a week or so after Wembley. Didn’t think I had it because I didn’t have the cough but I’m not so sure now.
It would be interesting to take the antibody test.

wonder how many people got it at Wembley. Must have a been a fair few.