• Welcome to DOSBODS

     

    DOSBODS is free of any advertising.

    Ads are annoying, and - increasingly - advertising companies limit free speech online. DOSBODS Forums are completely free to use. Please create a free account to be able to access all the features of the DOSBODS community. It only takes 20 seconds!

     

Sign in to follow this  
maffo

Manchester Uni Study: 25% potentially already infected with CV19 in the UK

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Study from Manchester uni shows what many of us 'Bodders probably thought, a large percentage of the population has had the bug with little or no  serious effect to their health.

https://www.manchester.ac.uk/discover/news/over-25-of-the-uk-likely-to-have-had-covid-19-already/

 

Quote

A team of researchers from The University of Manchester, Salford Royal and Res Consortium, have shown that a significant proportion of people in the UK- over 25% - is likely to have been infected already by the COVID-19 virus.The study - published this week in the International Journal of Clinical Practice - is the first to use the published local authority data to assess the cumulative impact of infection since the COVID-19 outbreak began.This has enabled them to calculate the R-value - the number of people infected by one person with COVID-19 - within each local authority area.

The published case data from the 144 Local Authorities analysed by the team now gives an R value of well below 1.The value – which was over 3 at the start of the outbreak in the middle of March 2020 – fell as a consequence of social distancing combined with the natural consequences of cumulative community infection.Daily reported cases peaked at the beginning of April 2020 and hospital deaths a week later in England. By the second half of April, based on extrapolating the variation in infection rate between local authorities with more or less cases reported depending on location, over 25% in the UK population could already have had the virus, the team have found.

Dr Adrian Heald from The University of Manchester, one of the researchers, said: “COVID-19 is a highly infectious condition and very dangerous for a small group of people. However a much larger group seem to have low or no symptoms and have been unreported. https://www.manchester.ac.uk/discover/news/over-25-of-the-uk-likely-to-have-had-covid-19-already/

 

Edited by maffo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Complete bollocks. There's no way we've had five times the infection rate of Spain with very similar known cases and deaths per capita. If Spain's had a 5% infection rate (confirmed by serological testing rather than modelling) then we can't have had more than about 7.5% (I've added 50% to account for our all cause mortality being a bit higher than Spain's but that is probably over generous).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, This Time said:

Complete bollocks. There's no way we've had five times the infection rate of Spain with very similar known cases and deaths per capita. If Spain's had a 5% infection rate (confirmed by serological testing rather than modelling) then we can't have had more than about 7.5% (I've added 50% to account for our all cause mortality being a bit higher than Spain's but that is probably over generous).

You also have to look at Uni bias.

Do unis depend on overseas students for huge chunks of money?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, This Time said:

Complete bollocks. There's no way we've had five times the infection rate of Spain with very similar known cases and deaths per capita. If Spain's had a 5% infection rate (confirmed by serological testing rather than modelling) then we can't have had more than about 7.5% (I've added 50% to account for our all cause mortality being a bit higher than Spain's but that is probably over generous).

Manchester Uni study has already been debunked by several epidemiologists. Much as I'd love the 25% to be true, 5% or so does seem to be the consensus. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Craig said:

Manchester Uni study has already been debunked by several epidemiologists. Much as I'd love the 25% to be true, 5% or so does seem to be the consensus. 

Who were they? Neil Ferguson spelt several different ways? ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its those pesky academics again.

Arseholes.

Get the all singing n dancing test and well know one way or another.

 

24 minutes ago, This Time said:

Complete bollocks. There's no way we've had five times the infection rate of Spain with very similar known cases and deaths per capita. If Spain's had a 5% infection rate (confirmed by serological testing rather than modelling) then we can't have had more than about 7.5% (I've added 50% to account for our all cause mortality being a bit higher than Spain's but that is probably over generous).

Im not sure on that.,

The Spanish lockdown was massive - police patrolling n fining.

My BILs wife has been fined twice for walking the dog.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason the models are giving such different results is that they don't consider those who resist the infection with natural non-specific immunity. And that that makes R a load of bollocks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I'm thinking that the rest of China would surely have seen much bigger outbreaks?

Now the CCP may have played up the impact in Wuhan and played down the impact elsewhere - but I just can't see it that we are anyway near 25% . Probably 15% in London?

Edited by A tremendous # on the lung

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll read the Manchester paper over the weekend, however...

A simple estimate can be obtained by dividing the total number of deaths by some average CFR.  So, for example (using nicely rounded figures), with 50,000 deaths and an average CFR (including asymptomatic cases) of 0.5% we get 10,000,000 cases.  There are (at least) three problems with this estimate.  First, it indicates the number of cases in the past - people will have been infected since, but are not yet dead (this is more of a problem when the spread is exponentially increasing).  Second, the data is crap - how many have died from Covid-19 in the UK?  Third, and this is the big one, if the spread has been preferentially amongst a vulnerable group (say people in care homes) the dividing CFR should be much greater.

I think there probably has been a fair bit of spread within the larger cities (especially London), but (as I have written before) it appears that there's the square root of fuck all in my area.  It's possible that, effectively, the epidemic is yet to start.  Or maybe it is over - we need random serological testing across the UK now!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, This Time said:

Complete bollocks. There's no way we've had five times the infection rate of Spain with very similar known cases and deaths per capita. If Spain's had a 5% infection rate (confirmed by serological testing rather than modelling) then we can't have had more than about 7.5% (I've added 50% to account for our all cause mortality being a bit higher than Spain's but that is probably over generous).

How do they know the level of infection in Spain?  Have they already done random antibody testing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't bloody matter whether it's 5% or 25% or 50%! (though obviously a higher figure would probably be better)

It doesn't kill enough people to justify what's been done, that's what matters. 

Just re-open the Nightingale hospitals, get loads of decent PPE equipment, pay the Covid frontline staff a bonus to stay the course and let's all get back to work before there is no fucking work!  

:Old:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, ccc said:

Nobody knows. Get used to that because that part of this isn't changing. 

It's amazing really. Are there no indisputable facts anymore? All science seems to be nothing more than opinions, without even any common consensus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, eight said:

It's amazing really. Are there no indisputable facts anymore? All science seems to be nothing more than opinions, without even any common consensus.

I don't think anything is fully indisputable really. :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Craig said:

Manchester Uni study has already been debunked by several epidemiologists. Much as I'd love the 25% to be true, 5% or so does seem to be the consensus. 

Exactly, the antibody study (5%) trumps this one which is based on modelling, exactly like the terrible Imperial one (but in the other direction).

Interestingly they are relying on the governments R numbers which are clearly crap as they were based on their terrible testing figures and the Imperial model.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Big Boy said:

I'll read the Manchester paper over the weekend, however...

A simple estimate can be obtained by dividing the total number of deaths by some average CFR.  So, for example (using nicely rounded figures), with 50,000 deaths and an average CFR (including asymptomatic cases) of 0.5% we get 10,000,000 cases.  There are (at least) three problems with this estimate.  First, it indicates the number of cases in the past - people will have been infected since, but are not yet dead (this is more of a problem when the spread is exponentially increasing).  Second, the data is crap - how many have died from Covid-19 in the UK?  Third, and this is the big one, if the spread has been preferentially amongst a vulnerable group (say people in care homes) the dividing CFR should be much greater.

I think there probably has been a fair bit of spread within the larger cities (especially London), but (as I have written before) it appears that there's the square root of fuck all in my area.  It's possible that, effectively, the epidemic is yet to start.  Or maybe it is over - we need random serological testing across the UK now!

It will have been seeded in your area, but its probably innately difficult for things to spread there. In the modellers simplistic view, your R is likely less than one. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Stuey said:

It will have been seeded in your area, but its probably innately difficult for things to spread there. In the modellers simplistic view, your R is likely less than one. 

Yes, small town in a rural area - though the greatest local mixing will be in schools so the school closures will have had an effect.

I can't claim zero cases locally.  The health centre was closed for a "deep clean" due to some idiot walking in, the GPs appear to be terrified and won't see anybody, I did hear early on of a couple being infected by a health visitor, and a recent map of national deaths had a couple in or near my town (though with the caveat that some data had been shuffled across boundaries to preserve anonymity - I've heard nothing on the grapevine about these).  However, among direct family contacts (100s of people) no confirmed cases at all, so I would guess the %age is very low here - unless they were all mild or asymptomatic :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Big Boy said:

Yes, small town in a rural area - though the greatest local mixing will be in schools so the school closures will have had an effect.

I can't claim zero cases locally.  The health centre was closed for a "deep clean" due to some idiot walking in, the GPs appear to be terrified and won't see anybody, I did hear early on of a couple being infected by a health visitor, and a recent map of national deaths had a couple in or near my town (though with the caveat that some data had been shuffled across boundaries to preserve anonymity - I've heard nothing on the grapevine about these).  However, among direct family contacts (100s of people) no confirmed cases at all, so I would guess the %age is very low here - unless they were all mild or asymptomatic :ph34r:

These are the local anecdotes that keep on confirming to me that talking about R for a nation, even a region is just nonsense. Comparable to climate modellers talking about the global average temperature. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Big Boy said:

However, among direct family contacts (100s of people) no confirmed cases at all, so I would guess the %age is very low here - unless they were all mild or asymptomatic :ph34r:

Same here, I'm in the building trade with thousands of contacts. Only two confirmed people and both recovered. Lots of ‘I felt really bad just before/after Xmas, funny cough etc’ though :ph34r:
19 million may be a bit far fetched, but I do believe it could be half that number.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.