Corona Virus main thread

[Van wink 2,994]

48 minutes ago, T said:

They are saying there is no evidence   They are not saying there isn’t immunity   It will take time to know naturally S Korea reported some people coming back but when they checked they think is was the same Infection.  flaring up again in a few people according to local doctor.   The General expectation is there will be immunity but how much and how long is not known yet. 

Correct, there is evidence of infection returning, not known if that is reinfection or an inaccurate negative test.

Edited April 18, 2020 by Van wink

[T 190]

56 minutes ago, Van wink said:

YF

"However, the lack of current evidence as per WHO is far more likely given the limited serology testing to date to be down to very few people who we know have had the virus, truly cleared the virus and the been reinfected. It far more likely that there are false positives / negatives at work here it the testing!"

What has been observed I believe is cases where people with CV19 have been admitted to hospital treated, recovered, tested negative, been released and then gone down with CV19 again. What I believe you are saying is that in these circumstance they may not in fact have made a full recovery first time round and the negative test may have been a false negative? Thats certainly is a possible explanation.

Absolutely agree that more testing will give a better picture, we are still dealing with a relatively small set of data with a lot of potential errors.

Sorry but that is incorrect. . They deliberated selected a sample of 3000 in Munich to check the infection rate because that gives you 95pc confidence of the answer with a narrow range. Increasing the sample doesn’t make a significant difference to the answer beyond a certain point. There is a mathematically and scientifically proven formula to calculate sample size. You don’t need loads of date to get a good answer. You anxiously need extensive testing to trace. 

[Herman 9,717]

12 minutes ago, SHRIMPER said:

This far in and our girl still has not been tested and she is a front line nurse..In London

This just isn't good enough. I can't understand why they aren't the first to be tested.

[sonyc 5,492]

10 minutes ago, SHRIMPER said:

This far in and our girl still has not been tested and she is a front line nurse..In London

I believe this is one issue that once this crisis is over, will be highlighted as a national disgrace. I read Brian May (he of the Queen) has called it today and I agree with him. Now, I realise it's a national emergency and the logistics are complex.

I'm amazed we haven't been discussing how as a country we've managed this. I suppose it helps not to vent one's anger here. It changes nothing.

Yet, the NHS has held up and it's one very positive factor. Thankfully, your daughter is one of those on the front line facilitating that feat.

[Van wink 2,994]

34 minutes ago, T said:

Sorry but that is incorrect. . They deliberated selected a sample of 3000 in Munich to check the infection rate because that gives you 95pc confidence of the answer with a narrow range. Increasing the sample doesn’t make a significant difference to the answer beyond a certain point. There is a mathematically and scientifically proven formula to calculate sample size. You don’t need loads of date to get a good answer. You anxiously need extensive testing to trace. 

What is the level of confidence in the test ?  We were talking about reinfection?

3000 sounds a very low number to give 95 % confidence, would be interested to see a link to the survey if you had one? 

There are many variables around infection rate, one being behavioural, which really means that you cant assume infection rates are the same everywhere, only indicative,  a lot more  localised testing required to get a true picture.

 

Edited April 18, 2020 by Van wink

[Van wink 2,994]

 

 

11 minutes ago, Herman said:

This just isn't good enough. I can't understand why they aren't the first to be tested.

Especially as we are told there is now a lot of unused testing capacity. 

[sonyc 5,492]

A few testing stations have been set up in out of the way locations (R4 report by nurses union spokeswoman).

[Yellow Fever 3,749]

20 minutes ago, T said:

Sorry but that is incorrect. . They deliberated selected a sample of 3000 in Munich to check the infection rate because that gives you 95pc confidence of the answer with a narrow range. Increasing the sample doesn’t make a significant difference to the answer beyond a certain point. There is a mathematically and scientifically proven formula to calculate sample size. You don’t need loads of date to get a good answer. You anxiously need extensive testing to trace. 

I'm not sure that you're not answering a different question T but I'm fully up to speed with basic sampling theory and confidence limits with the null hypothesis. 3000 or so is fine for a simple yes no answer to have antigens.

However, the point about more data is having to sample enough people that just only not have the  antigens (say 3000 with 95%) but also to find those that then go on to recatch the virus. That origonal 3000 wont tell you that unless you keep retesting them etc. and applying similar confidence limits. Given that only a handful of 'possible' such cases have been identified worldwide at present you'll need to find lots more to give any confidence its not just false positive / negative errors.

Find 3000 with the antigen, and then see how may are reinfected a few months later.

[Herman 9,717]

8 minutes ago, sonyc said:

A few testing stations have been set up in out of the way locations (R4 report by nurses union spokeswoman).

On Orkney, Scilly, Man, Ipswich........😀

[Van wink 2,994]

9 minutes ago, sonyc said:

A few testing stations have been set up in out of the way locations (R4 report by nurses union spokeswoman).

Access seems to be part of the problem

[sonyc 5,492]

NHS frontline staff may walk out over lack of PPE, say unions

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/18/nhs-frontline-staff-may-refuse-to-work-over-lack-of-coronavirus-ppe-says-union-unison?

I wonder whether staff will act on this situation though? Biggest story rumbling over the last few weeks, last few days especially.

 

[sonyc 5,492]

2 minutes ago, Van wink said:

Access seems to be part of the problem

Yes, the spokeswoman suggested you couldn't make it up. Yet, Hancock has suggested there is now 38,000 capacity.

Another logistics nightmare I am guessing.

[ricardo 7,349]

3-1  4 minutes added 😀

[T 190]

2 hours ago, Van wink said:

What is the level of confidence in the test ?  We were talking about reinfection?

3000 sounds a very low number to give 95 % confidence, would be interested to see a link to the survey if you had one? 

There are many variables around infection rate, one being behavioural, which really means that you cant assume infection rates are the same everywhere, only indicative,  a lot more  localised testing required to get a true picture.

 

Agreed. I'm only a saying a sample of 3000 is enough to give you 95% confidence of the infection rate in Munich which is suspected to be the entry point for the virus to Europe from China. It should also give you a good  idea of the level of infections elsewhere when you can compare that with levl of testing, confirmed cases, hospitalisations and deaths.  Munich has a close business conection to China and also a lot of people returning from infected ski resorts offset by more testing, tracing and isolation and locked down about a week before UK.  It's not going to give you an exact figure everywhere but it should give you a good estimate when compared with other available data if the infection rate is single digit percentage as is expected. 

[T 190]

2 hours ago, Yellow Fever said:

I'm not sure that you're not answering a different question T but I'm fully up to speed with basic sampling theory and confidence limits with the null hypothesis. 3000 or so is fine for a simple yes no answer to have antigens.

However, the point about more data is having to sample enough people that just only not have the  antigens (say 3000 with 95%) but also to find those that then go on to recatch the virus. That origonal 3000 wont tell you that unless you keep retesting them etc. and applying similar confidence limits. Given that only a handful of 'possible' such cases have been identified worldwide at present you'll need to find lots more to give any confidence its not just false positive / negative errors.

Find 3000 with the antigen, and then see how may are reinfected a few months later.

Germany and no dount other countries are also tracking a sample of infected people over time just as there is also sample testing of treatments. I think most experts expert there will be immunity but the question is what proportion and for how long which I completely agree you can only do by tracking a sample of people over time. I'm only saying you don't needs lots of data but a representaitive sample which is relatively small to find answers to these questions. 

[Bill 1,788]

20 minutes ago, ricardo said:

3-1  4 minutes added 😀

you are on the wrong thread, you old duffer 🤦‍♂️

[ricardo 7,349]

1 minute ago, Bill said:

you are on the wrong thread, you old duffer 🤦‍♂️

Blame the bloody server, get a proper computer bod on the job.

To many unbuntu's

[Yellow Fever 3,749]

1 hour ago, T said:

Germany and no dount other countries are also tracking a sample of infected people over time just as there is also sample testing of treatments. I think most experts expert there will be immunity but the question is what proportion and for how long which I completely agree you can only do by tracking a sample of people over time. I'm only saying you don't needs lots of data but a representaitive sample which is relatively small to find answers to these questions. 

Agreed. Sigma over root n

[Mark .Y. 351]

Makes an interesting listen from one of the most experienced epidemiologists in the world (spoiler - he's Swedish 😀)

Swedish bloke

[ricardo 7,349]

A more informative graph

[sonyc 5,492]

26 minutes ago, ricardo said:

A more informative graph

More figures. The loss of life is shocking and for every one person there must be 20 to 30 more people attached to those, affected and in grief.

[Mark .Y. 351]

I still prefer this as the lead indicator.............

[Rock The Boat 1,326]

6 hours ago, Barbe bleu said:

The ultimate pessimist!

I'll bet a dollar that enough people develop an enduring immune memory that with enough worldwide will and resources we can vaccinate this strain right out.

One thing I will agree on though (and for the sake of bill confirmation bias is at play) antibody testing will not play a major role in our slow path back to normality.

Not so optimistic. 40 years on and we don't have a vaccine to stop AIDS despite millions spent on research. This may never go away as it mutates. 

[Rock The Boat 1,326]

5 hours ago, sonyc said:

Yes, the spokeswoman suggested you couldn't make it up. Yet, Hancock has suggested there is now 38,000 capacity.

Another logistics nightmare I am guessing.

The capacity is there but frontline staff are not presenting themselves for testing. The question is why?

[sonyc 5,492]

Accessibility is one problem RTB (for NHS staff anyway).

Testing needs to be close to or at the place of work ...if I was responsible that's what I would have tried to do anyway (find rooms in site at hospitals and use closed community centres for care homes, directed and facilitated by local authorities to ensure there was a place for the swabs to be taken as locally as possible)

Here is one source below. Though I had read 38k per day was now the capacity not 35k as noted in this piece. 

Coronavirus: More professions to be tested amid fears supplies going to waste | Politics News | Sky News https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-more-professions-to-be-tested-amid-fears-supplies-going-to-waste-11974648

[Bill 1,788]

maybe this might help to explain

"The two Chinese companies were offering a risky proposition: 2 million home test kits said to detect antibodies for the coronavirus for at least $20 million (£16m), take it or leave it.

"The asking price was high, the technology was unproven, and the money had to be paid upfront. And the buyer would be required to pick up the crate loads of test kits from a facility in China.

Yet British officials took the deal, according to a senior civil servant involved, then confidently promised tests would be available at pharmacies in as little as two weeks."

ah I hear you say - mistakes will be made while the ever competent Boris Johnson is not at the helm...................however

"“As simple as a pregnancy test,” gushed Boris Johnson, the prime minister. “It has the potential to be a total game changer."  There was one problem, however. The tests did not work."

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/uk-coronavirus-tests-symptoms-covid-19-testing-kit-a9470071.html

"

 

[Herman 9,717]

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/coronavirus-38-days-when-britain-sleepwalked-into-disaster-hq3b9tlgh

[Yellow Fever 3,749]

39 minutes ago, Herman said:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/coronavirus-38-days-when-britain-sleepwalked-into-disaster-hq3b9tlgh

I think the PPE fisaco is finally the straw that's breaking this government.

Many of the papers are turning up the heat.

Deeds not words.

[sonyc 5,492]

Thanks Herman & Yellow Fever.

It's difficult to respond on this site this evening.

There are a reported 6000 care home deaths not yet included in the overall total (France have recently added their total). The UK could yet be the worst in Europe and we did have those precious week's and days to watch and learn.

I fear things are about to get a whole lot worse in the NHS as the trust in government leadership  is ebbing away with the PPE issue, let alone testing and deaths of NHS staff. There are senior Tory ministers also asking questions. You worry about morale and burnout given the pressures.

Those graphs showing reductions are encouraging yet we hear from the media such a different story from those hard pressed workers... Anger, frustration, bitterness.

I read lots of very informed opinion on here about the numbers and modelling. What has amazed me is the sheer lack of comment about the leadership (the other thread has a small amount of discussion). I feel as if I'm on an island.

Perhaps folk here are happy or accepting of it all or people feel it's unseemly to criticise in the middle of an emergency, or they feel it achieves nothing to debate. Or, people feel everyone would just take on their political affiliations. Talking of numbers is easier and less contentious.

I am sensing a sea change anyway in public feeling....in myself too. I am starting to have a sense of being played by this government and I consider myself moderate, thoughtful. And I want to be wrong about my thoughts on the shortcomings of this cabinet which I'm finding shallow and lacking in depth but also mendacious in their public statements.

Edited April 18, 2020 by sonyc

[T 190]

Indeed Germany elected a scientist as leader and the UK an after dinner speaker. And we all know the background to why that happened. Boring pragmatic evidence based reality over jingoistic ideology. No doubt some will  continue to deny their culpability and think it is a price worth paying. It was never going to be easy but the UK has a government chosen based on ideology rather than ability. Lessons to be learned.