Wtf 
SARS CoV-2 coronavirus / Covid-19 (No tin foil hat silliness please)
- Thread starter Don't Kill Bill
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Is that 11 in 100 indicating a sample size of 100 just a janky way of saying 11%?
My brother is a huge anti-vaxxer and I can’t really bear discussing this with him anymore. The ‘hugely profitable’ vaccine business is such a common myth, it’s worth $60billion a year, that’s three times less than a fecking supplements business let alone alcohol or food. I blame internet for this common stupidity.
haha, yeah 11%.
Sample size was 100.
Chief epidemiologist here reckons the result could mean some serious affects of any possible herd immunity could/should be felt after a couple more weeks.
So both, sorry missed “or” there.
I don’t know any data scientist worth their salt who would make any predictions on a sample size of 100.
Don't be so precious. When we talk about Stockholm, do you mean city with 1m or greater area with 2.3m
You do understand that a sample of 100 blood donors fails both in sample size and in being unbiased.
Happy to make some sort of a bet. Minimum 1.000€ or 100€+loser doesn't post on this forum in 2021, so everybody wins
mod has to escrowWatch the BBC completely ignore this story. To my mind this is huge, but hey, it's just democracy at stake.
For the RT-PCR they are basically the same at or very near to 100% depending on the test in question. But remember the "positives" were contrived by spiking old swab specimens with various amounts of RNA and the testing values don't account for sampling differences etc.
You'll see huge variability in the ELISA and other immunoassays. They are all over the place. So far I think I've seen SN and SP from the 60s to 99%.
SC Gov. Henry McMaster - "we're going to open up beaches and some retail stores"
Reporter - "have we met the federal guidelines for entering Phase 1?"
McMaster and the Dept. of Health rep - "no, we have not"
Reporter - "have we met the federal guidelines for entering Phase 1?"
McMaster and the Dept. of Health rep - "no, we have not"
Not my study, I “mean” nothing. Just passing it on as I did with the pregnant women study.
Not gonna get pulled into shitty debates again about studies I have nothing to do with.
Encouraging news. Will be interesting to see the numbers needed to get herd immunity for a city of that size. The one unknown factor is: Apart from the older populace, how many of the general population have gone into hiding? The Apple tracker indicates a sharp decline in movement around the same time as the rest of the Nordics (far less movement in Stockholm than Sweden in general), so we might see smaller outbreaks later on when these people return to normal daily life.
Enough to make a difference I’d say, from what I see anyway.
Younger people in City not caring as much as they should but still enough people doing the “right thing”.
So yeah, prob enough to make a difference when they return to normal life also.
Not surprised that you aren't willing to put your money where your mouth is. Looking forward to more personal attacks insteadNot my study, I “mean” nothing. Just passing it on as I did with the pregnant women study.
Is that literally 11 out of 100? Or another way of saying 11%? If the former, that's an absolutely tiny sample so wouldn't read much into it at all. In medical science, the bigger the sample size the more reliable the results. A study of 100 people would be a pretty useless way to learn about anything, never mind studying the way a virus is spreading through the population of an entire country! Think about it. How could 100 people (possibly all from the same location?) be in any way representative of the whole of Sweden?
There have been bigger (and hence more reliable) blood donor studies in other countries which have come up with lower prevalence. We already mentioned the Danish one, where 1500 donors were tested earlier in this thread (1.5% positive) and a similar study in Scotland found 6 out of 1000 tests were positive (0.6%)
https://figshare.com/articles/Serol...CoV2antibodiescollectedinMarch2020/12116778/2
Blood donors (like pregnant women) are more likely to have been around hospitals or have family members who are regular patients in hospital. The best possible analysis would be people randomly selected from the general public. In Iceland they did that study, randomly selecting a cohort of nearly 7000 people to be screened. 0.6% of them tested positive.
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2006100?query=featured_home
So yeah, I'm still highly skeptical about what you're hoping to see in Sweden, in terms of prevalence in the community. I mean, it is possible that 1 or 2 million Swedes all got infected in the space of, what? 4 to 6 weeks? I'd have to say that's very very unlikely. Not with the mortality rates we're seeing in every other country. You'd be digging mass graves by now, if that was the case.
Is it possible that 11% of 975,000 Stockholmers got infected in 6 weeks?.. absolutely I’d say.
Considering schools have remained open I’d imagine it’s rife in school kids, teachers and parents.
No-one knows the mortality rate still Pogue.
Totally agree with this.
100 is such a small sample to make it useless for anything.
Iceland's one is a bit worrying though. Officially, 0.5% of the population has been confirmed to have been infected. If a random testing showed only 0.6% being infected, it means that they did an almost perfect job on diagnosing cases (only 20% of the infected people were missed). Which might well be the case, considering the insane number of testing they have been doing (126k for 1 million people, compare it to 12k for the US, and 7k for the UK). It is bad news, but at the same time, it should be higher in the other countries where there was not enough testings, and consequently, many infected people were missed. Though I would bet, it is closer to 2-3% rather than 10-15%.
SC Gov. Henry McMaster - "we're going to open up beaches and some retail stores"
Reporter - "have we met the federal guidelines for entering Phase 1?"
McMaster and the Dept. of Health rep - "no, we have not"
So enough Americans are now fully aware of the threat of covid. It's no longer something happening in a foreign terrorist land. Regardless of what Trump, OAN or their own community echo chambers are telling them.
The inevitable deaths that will come to their own doorsteps for visiting the beaches is all on them. Will reduce some of the Idiocrats living in those lands.
No way. That would mean 200k people got infected. Yet there are less than 1000 deaths in Stockholm. For comparison, the province of Bergamo who has around the same population has had more than 4500 deaths at the beginning of April (likely raised since then). Why they should have 5 times more deaths than Stockholm? The only way for the numbers to match, is if every person there was infected (if you imagine Stockholm having 20% infections).
Denmark tested for antibodies in 3989 blood donors and found 72 of them had developed them. They estimate that about 1.9 % of the population have had it when taking into account the uncertainty of the antibody test and geography of the tested, and that's looking through their most rose coloured glasses. Don't know what Sweden's playing at with that sample size.
It just blows my mind that we are blatantly not following the guidelines of the Trump administration when our governor LOVES Trump.
That’s the most peculiar thing about it. Why a serious scientist would even try to draw conclusions about such a trivial amount of data.
Yeah, but in practical terms the sensitivity must be limited by the sampling process... Whilst the specificity is not, I presume.
I say that because we had a patient (assymptomatic) whom went from positive to negative very shortly, unless we caught him exactly at the time of "recovery/cure" one of those should be false. I was arguing with my colleagues that it was much more likely that the negative was the false result.
I've seen at least one patient going pos-pos-neg-pos-neg-neg (cured) and that 4th test was very hard on him psychologically.
Yep, it has to be something like this. Maybe 5-10% in heavy hit areas like Lombardy or New York, but in most countries, it has to be around 2-3%.
Sweden might be somewhere in between. The death per capita there is much heavier than in Denmark (around 2-2.5 more), so you can also expect a higher percentage of the population to have been infected, which would put it around 5%.
Stockholm had a random sample study end of March, result was 2,5% on that time had it (not antibody). So 5-8% when including recovered. So 11% isn't impossible at all in Stockholm city (1m), impossible for Sweden and unlikely for Greater stockholm (2.3m). And it isn't contradictory to what I have said before. But in general the more biased and smaller the sample the more Regulus likes it.
Week 1. 3.5% random test bearing virus of 750ish people in Stockholm.
Week 1.5. 7.5% of all pregnant woman coming in for child bearing virus in Stockholm
Week 2.5. 11% of 100 Stockholm blood donors have had virus on antibody test. Test is approx. 80%.
Not surprised you guys are playing the pessimists again though.
It’s definitely possible that the worst hit town at the centre of an epidemic can have 10-20% of people infected. The German town with the most cases apparently had 14% prevalence. This tells us feck all about the country as a whole, though. And herd immunity will be about the whole country, not specific hot spots.
Unless you find a way to stop all travel within that country. Somehow hope that Stockholm can work on herd immunity in complete isolation from the rest of Sweden. Which would be a completely bonkers and unworkable plan.
I like optimistic, positive results in any form in fairness.
I’ll like it better when it’s done en masse and shows a huge percentage of infected in this City.
This result following on from the 2 previous studies is cause for optimism, if you’re that way inclined like. Which many here absolutely are not.
Last edited:
Pogue’s pessimism.
Indeed.
A shit-load of deaths, by the sound of things.
Iran?Is there any country in the world where the sale is alcohol is forbidden? Or am I cursed by living in the only one?!
Iran? I guess I'm not cursed after all. A little perspective goes a long way.
?
There's 69 deaths from ~60,000 infections. So where did you get the "this disease kills 1 in 100"?
Isn't this very good news? Or would you rather be right?
What are you basing this on?
I don't understand your post without providing more context.
That Santa Clara study has loads of problems. Also in NYC already 0,15% of total population has already died and 100% aren't infected obviously. So far I think our best study is the one from Gangelt, Germany, that had a 0,37% death rate, but it isn't published/finished yet.
That is a scandal if true.
Ah, ok, got it. These numbers do not match anything else right there. It puts the mortality rate at the flu's level. It also means that there should be 1/3 of the Iceland population be infected, in order for them to reach 10 deaths (but Iceland studies, show only 0.6% of people being infected). It also means that in Bergamo region (who has the same population as Stockholm, every person had to have been infected 4 times, in order to reach their 4500 deaths.
So, there are four options here:
- Stockhol's study is nonsense.
- Stockholm is hiding thousands of deaths.
- Stockholm people are hardcore badasses, and the virus does feck all to them.
- Stockholm does not have 60k infections.
Again, I am using your 69 as the number of deaths in Stockholm. Is this true?