50% across the UK may have the virus - its been here since January at the latest.

#4
I would love to think that is the case because if it is theres millions who will be immune. How can they possible know for certain though without testing?
This - the testing has to be improved and streamlined to become a fit for purpose process for the masses, not just for this occurance but for any future outbreaks. If we prepare we can determine the position quickly, formulate a plan and provide a timely response even if that is only processes to follow. That said, if you have leaders who are willing to - at least initially - overide the scientific evidence it all falls to naught.
 
#5
This is a very early stage of a study and hasn't been peer reviewed at all yet. I wouldn't put too much hope on it being more accurate than what we have already seen. It has already been debunked by some due to the similarity in the pattern of deaths in this country and others. If it had been around since before Xmas then deaths wouldn't be rising, we'd have already reached the peak.

Everyone that is hospitalised now with the symptoms and those that die are recorded and we can see it increasing daily. We aren't testing more people daily for it, we are testing all those that present. IF it had been around for months then there would be no rise at this time, we would expect to see a similar number each day or a declining number. The fact that we are not means we are still at an early stage.
 
#6
This is a very early stage of a study and hasn't been peer reviewed at all yet. I wouldn't put too much hope on it being more accurate than what we have already seen. It has already been debunked by some due to the similarity in the pattern of deaths in this country and others. If it had been around since before Xmas then deaths wouldn't be rising, we'd have already reached the peak.

Everyone that is hospitalised now with the symptoms and those that die are recorded and we can see it increasing daily. We aren't testing more people daily for it, we are testing all those that present. IF it had been around for months then there would be no rise at this time, we would expect to see a similar number each day or a declining number. The fact that we are not means we are still at an early stage.
Frightening & worrying
 
#7
This is a very early stage of a study and hasn't been peer reviewed at all yet. I wouldn't put too much hope on it being more accurate than what we have already seen. It has already been debunked by some due to the similarity in the pattern of deaths in this country and others. If it had been around since before Xmas then deaths wouldn't be rising, we'd have already reached the peak.

Everyone that is hospitalised now with the symptoms and those that die are recorded and we can see it increasing daily. We aren't testing more people daily for it, we are testing all those that present. IF it had been around for months then there would be no rise at this time, we would expect to see a similar number each day or a declining number. The fact that we are not means we are still at an early stage.

Fair points Boromike85. It’s interesting nonetheless, as surely the professors of epidemiology who have compiled this study have considered the points that you quite rightly make? Seems odd that they wouldn’t have?
 
#8
Fair points Boromike85. It’s interesting nonetheless, as surely the professors of epidemiology who have compiled this study have considered the points that you quite rightly make? Seems odd that they wouldn’t have?
I am with Boromike on this, whilst I am not a biologist I do have common sense and as soon as I read the article I thought it would be difficult accepting that model and make the rising death toll fit the model proposed in the article. Worth mentioning I do a lot of mathematical modelling in my day job.
 
#9
Fair points Boromike85. It’s interesting nonetheless, as surely the professors of epidemiology who have compiled this study have considered the points that you quite rightly make? Seems odd that they wouldn’t have?
That's just how science works. They test things that they don't think has a realistic chance of being proven right as well as wrong or they make assumptions that other models are incorrect and many studies don't find anything knew or challenge existing models. Peer review means that the ones that are correct and can stand up to scrutiny do so. This has been reported in the press much sooner in the process than it should have been because it hasn't undertaken that review yet.
 
#10
I am with Boromike on this, whilst I am not a biologist I do have common sense and as soon as I read the article I thought it would be difficult accepting that model and make the rising death toll fit the model proposed in the article. Worth mentioning I do a lot of mathematical modelling in my day job.
I'm just a plain old optimist and I like to bury my head in a sea of positivity so I love reports like this one and will put my faith in it being correct, until proved wrong.
 
#12
That's just how science works. They test things that they don't think has a realistic chance of being proven right as well as wrong or they make assumptions that other models are incorrect and many studies don't find anything knew or challenge existing models. Peer review means that the ones that are correct and can stand up to scrutiny do so. This has been reported in the press much sooner in the process than it should have been because it hasn't undertaken that review yet.

I am with Boromike on this, whilst I am not a biologist I do have common sense and as soon as I read the article I thought it would be difficult accepting that model and make the rising death toll fit the model proposed in the article. Worth mentioning I do a lot of mathematical modelling in my day job.
Thanks for the replies guys. Makes sense what you say, but I still think it’s interesting and I hope (perhaps foolishly) that there is some degree of ‘not being a million miles away from the truth’ in the study.
I think it’s a given that there are many more tens, possibly hundreds of thousands of cases that we are unaware of because they simply aren’t severe enough to require hospital treatment and testing, so the drive to antibody test the general population excites me.
 
#14
If half the population have had it and that scenario has happened everywhere then does that mean it isn’t very deadly at all and just similar to the flu or a bad cold - bearing in mind that it would mean tens of millions have already had it with very mild symptoms and just basically carried on as you would with a bad cold for example


🐔
 
#15
From a personal point of view I'd take it with a large pinch of salt.
I know several people with serious underlying respiratory illnesses who get out and about in pubs, clubs and lots of other places where they'd stand a very good chance of infection. Until recently they'd all have been doing what they would normally.
If the virus had been around for that long then I think the infection rate that has been determined in many countries already would have seen far more serious respiratory cases being admitted to hospital over here in January onwards.
 
#17
Current testing shows about 90:10 negative to positive.

So on that sample 10% positive.

Population 65 million so possibly 6.5 million carrying the virus in some shape or form.
Is that assumption skewed by the fact that people are currently more likely to be tested if they have symptoms of some sort? I think the percentage figure will also go up further still. Until there are enough tests being done of people without symptoms. I think some other countries (not Spain) had a system of tracking down contacts of people infected and testing them. That is not the case in the UK I believe. Spain is now trying to ramp up testing asap.
 
#19
Is that assumption skewed by the fact that people are currently more likely to be tested if they have symptoms of some sort? I think the percentage figure will also go up further still. Until there are enough tests being done of people without symptoms. I think some other countries (not Spain) had a system of tracking down contacts of people infected and testing them. That is not the case in the UK I believe. Spain is now trying to ramp up testing asap.
No idea, Id be interested to see the testing figures in London compared to say the north east of England.
 
Top