Where will it end... 12th September as it happens

Your obsessed with Scotland, perhaps you should go there Eh!

 

Can you direct me to data that confirms umbrellas keep you dry in the rain? Just because there is no data to confirm yet does not mean that it is not highly likely. The WHO did not cover themselves in glory waiting to declare a global pandemic until they had enough evidence. Many health workers would have been ill multiple times by now if no immunity was gained by the response to their first infection so common sense suggests it does.

 

Lots of places have started blood testing for antibodies now. New York State has said it intends to release results from the first 3000 by the end of this week. There should be loads more in the following week or two so we should not longer be in the dark about rates of infection in the general public in various places around the globe in a few weeks. We will then have a much better handle on the progression of the virus in wider communities and whether release of restrictions will risk further waves if infection or not.

Meanwhile the NHS is doing a trial on NHS staff in Manchester to calibrate the antibody tests to find one accurate enough to use. It's expected to take 6 months.

I've found another study suggesting Covid-19 cases are mostly so mild that they're being missed and infection rates are far higher in the general public than generally accepted. 1/3rd of public tested have antibodies in small Boston street study.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8232857/One-people-Massachusetts-study-tested-positive-COVID-19-antibodies.html

Is it possible that new cases and deaths around the world are starting to fall because large sections of the population have already been infected with no symptoms?



South Korea has restarted baseball behind closed doors.

https://sports.inquirer.net/392330/s-korean-baseball-to-return-with-preseason-action-this-week

 

And:

Spainish have agreed with their government to go back to training on the 4th of May.

 

Another blood antibody test result, producing similar figures:

https://seekingalpha.com/news/3562305-another-u-s-study-points-to-far-higher-rate-of-covid-infection

Antibodies don't test positive for 3 or 4 weeks after infection, so it suggests 4.1% of the adult population had been infected by 3 or 4 weeks ago. It will be much higher now. US swab test positives have quadrupled in the last 3 weeks and deaths are up 13 times so that 4.1% figure is likely to be much higher. Because of the similar time delay in infection leading to deaths and generating antibodies showing in tests, we can compare deaths directly to positive antibody estimates - so 600 dead from roughly 300,000 with antibodies, that's a mortality rate of 0.2%, in line with other blood antibody test results, and again similar to flu. (And that's if all Covid-19 deaths are FROM Covid-19 and not just WITH Covid-19 which could make it lower than 0.2%.)

To put into more understandable context, a similar 0.2% rate in the UK on (the slightly out of date) 19k ONS excess deaths so far would indicate 9.5 million had antibodies a week ago from infections at least 3 or 4 weeks earlier. And its worth noting that it has been suggested a proportion of younger people that have had the virus do not go on to develop enough antibodies to test positive in blood antibody tests, so the 9.5m figure for last week could be a little higher.

So that's 10m or so UK citizens that had already been infected BY 4 OR 5 WEEKS AGO on ONS numbers if we had similar blood test results and assume all excess deaths registered by the ONS are Covid-19.

 

Good info @Aleman, a bit of a look at historic pandemics suggests the more severe strains of a virus die off with the people it kills, leaving less deadly strains to roam and allow people to form a resistance. That's how they reckon Spanish Flu ended so abruptly despite the terrible losses it inflicted.

Comparisons to generic influenza and the common cold seemed fanciful to me, and while I wouldn't rule out a second peak or a second strain, or more suffering in areas it hasn't yet hit, I firmly believe that when catalogued infections and deaths start to decrease either the first or second time (or third), it will disappear as if 'by magic'.

That was obviously what Trump was told when he made his 'miracle' speech, and while their timing in terms of combating the disease is the absolute most important thing, and I don't think they've handled it very well, they were probably working on decent advice.

If this is a one peak virus, I reckon Europe and North America could be over it by the end of the year.

After that, it's a case of deciding who was best equipped and who handled the outbreak best. Sad to say I think the UK and USA will be bottom of the class.

 

Why do GP reported respiratory infections show the peak was early January (particularly lower repsiratory tract infections which covers pneumonia)? It's starting to make using very limited (lack of testing) swab test results for policy decisions look rather unwise if they had this data that contradicted it.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8235979/UKs-coronavirus-crisis-peaked-lockdown-Expert-argues-draconian-measures-unnecessary.html

If the peak in initial infections was really in before lockdown, it explains why Sweden seems to be doing okay without a lockdown. If the peak was in everywhere already, what actions different countries took might not matter much. They'd get similar results as the damage was already done.

The good news, if this is mild but extremely contageous so that it has already gone through everyone really quickly (further blood antibody studies to confirm), then we might be able to restart football now, possibly even with crowds. Crazy isn't it, but that is what blood antibody tests and GP stats might be suggesting.

 

I read earlier that it takes an average of 256 people to host and play a behind-closed-doors game at the highest level. Probably less at lower levels. But I'm not sure how you do that if significant social distancing rules are applied. Certainly there'd be a level of risk involved.

 

Probably because attending your GP has been discouraged since the lockdown, and people will have avoided taking the risk.

I don't read the Daily Mail because it's just contrary nonsense, but I don't see how looking at GP's is a useful measure at all.

 

Well parliament happened today and is on tomorrow.

Think it's a case mate of people reading far far too much into things and not finding solutions.

 

Not sure understand the correlation between a small scale parliament convening and the number of people it takes to run a behind closed doors game of football....?

I'm sure the detail is being explored. Or at least I hope it is. But there are more people to factor in to the logistics than it might first seem.

 

I'm not sure that you understand things can change in a month or 2.

We're not going to stop sport from happening until a vaccine happens.. utter madness thought. Just like we won't stop parliament.

Spain and Germany are back playing soon as are other countries! All behind closed doors!

 

If it takes an average of 256 people to put on a game of behind closed doors football now, why will that change in a month or 2?

Did you read my post? Properly? I haven’t said it won’t happen. I’ve said that there’ll be logistical challenges, risk involved and that the numbers are higher than many people might realise.

 

It could take 500 people.. it doesn't matter.

Just like when the government were asked today about not testing or quarantine people coming into the country now they skipped round the issue & basically said it's not important. Why? Flights bring a lot of money to the economy and football does.

In a month or 2 we should have more testing. We are working on a vaccine.

Point is football, flights, education whatever the government will find ways that work to get them going again just like they're in Germany and Spain.

If they can do it in Germany and Span then why not England?

This really isn't a time to prevent.. it's time to find solutions!

 

Some season ticket holder somewhere is going to sue a club for return of part of their season tickets money for non-fulfilment of contract, that they weren't able to sit in their designated seat and watch the game.
We're still govered by EU law, so it could quite easily be some tinpot league that only has to set a precedent
It's going to be a minefield

 

If the season doesn't finish. I will be suing for a full refund! 100%.

I won't mind it finishing play behind closed doors and watch it on ifollow. I am fine with that.

 

and that's why its going to be a minefield Fordy,'cos I bet someone will sue & it doesnt have to be on these shores to cause an issue

 

So just to be clear, you expect the owner to invest significant amounts of his own wealth to grow the club, but if we're unable to complete the season because of a global pandemic that's taken thousands of lives, you'll sue the club for your £149 back?

 

Yes, i see no reason why the season can't finish behind closed doors.

Next season will be more in doubt than finishing this and it will be the greed owners that this won't finish.

I think many other fans up and down the country will ask for refunds also.

I would be suing for season ticket, travel costs, away costs the lot.