Coronavirus

[Dave2002]

Testing - strategies for doing it

It occurs to me that with testing belng limited at the moment, that the most important thing right now does seem to be to get that done for the case workers. However, as things develop, and if we ever do get to the 100k tests per day scenario, it will still take around 2 years for everybody in the UK to have had just one test. That won't necessarily be very useful.

There may come a time, perhaps not so far ahead, when it could/would make sense to do some random testing - perhaps 1000 random tests per day (which would be 1% of 100k tests per day) in order to try to ascertain the proportion of asymptomatic cases in the UK. This would help to determine whether many of us have already been exposed and built up some - perhaps modest - form of immunity, or whether we are at large mostly unprotected. Without an estimate of exposure in the way suggested here, it's going to take a very long while to come up with sensible strategies, and a gradual, but distinctive, shift in testing should be initiated quite soon in order to get more robust data on the progress of the virus and the development (or not) of immunity and susceptibility in the population at large.

[oddoneout]

I realise one can pick holes in this as an initiative

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/15/jacinda-ardern-and-ministers-take-20-pay-cut-in-solidarity-with-those-hit-by-covid-19

But what a contrast with our lot awarding themselves(which is what it is, however much they may choose to dress it up as independent recommendation) another pay increase for this year, effective from this month.

[MrGongGong]

I realise one can pick holes in this as an initiative

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/15/jacinda-ardern-and-ministers-take-20-pay-cut-in-solidarity-with-those-hit-by-covid-19

But what a contrast with our lot awarding themselves(which is what it is, however much they may choose to dress it up as independent recommendation) another pay increase for this year, effective from this month.

A complete contrast between someone with empathy and compassion and our own group of $%£^$

[Bryn]

It occurs to me that with testing belng limited at the moment, that the most important thing right now does seem to be to get that done for the case workers. However, as things develop, and if we ever do get to the 100k tests per day scenario, it will still take around 2 years for everybody in the UK to have had just one test. That won't necessarily be very useful.

There may come a time, perhaps not so far ahead, when it could/would make sense to do some random testing - perhaps 1000 random tests per day (which would be 1% of 100k tests per day) in order to try to ascertain the proportion of asymptomatic cases in the UK. This would help to determine whether many of us have already been exposed and built up some - perhaps modest - form of immunity, or whether we are at large mostly unprotected. Without an estimate of exposure in the way suggested here, it's going to take a very long while to come up with sensible strategies, and a gradual, but distinctive, shift in testing should be initiated quite soon in order to get more robust data on the progress of the virus and the development (or not) of immunity and susceptibility in the population at large.

A salutary consideration. I fairly strongly suspect I might have had a symptomless infection, having attended the same public events, five weeks ago in a small, crowded venue, as others who have either experienced the typical symptoms and survived or, in one case I know of, died from COVID-19. I, therefore, intend to observe physical distancing until such time as general testing for antibodies is carried out.

[Dave2002]

A salutary consideration. I fairly strongly suspect I might have had a symptomless infection, having attended the same public events, five weeks ago in a small, crowded venue, as others who have either experienced the typical symptoms and survived or, in one case I know of, died from COVID-19. I, therefore, intend to observe physical distancing until such time as general testing for antibodies is carried out.

I have also wondered about my own situation. I may well have been exposed to CV-19 if it was circulating well before the thing apparently exploded. I went to several large events in London and Edinburgh, and also have been on tube trains and aircraft and buses, though not since the middle of February. I have also been to other events and meetings in Scotland up until the begining of March at which point I stopped socialising completely. It's also possible that I had very mild symptoms - but not as described, nor within the time frames suggested for the "official" tests. Despite not having been out or in close contact with anyone outside our house for over a month now, I have had occasional issues - runny nose, the odd sneeze, and a very slight breathlessness issue - but these could have been due to things other than CV-19.

My point about the random testing is to suggest that there will come a time when some testing should be allocated to getting more data, more estimates about the disease in the population at large. This kind of testing could take the form of randomised sampling, possibly targeted **, but maybe not too much, of the kind done by marketeers and opinion pollsters, and for statistical quality control. This should be done to get a much clearer picture of the way things are going - and would surely be helpful to modellers and other people doing analysis. A brute force exhaustive testing only of key workers may not be anything like optimal in terms of getting this under control, and actually wasting resources, though at the present time with limited tests, key worker testing will be a priority.

**Stratified targeted sampling can be used to get better results with fewer tests, but if the samples are too targeted, then information and clues about the people outside the sample set will be missed. Asymptomatic cases may well be outside the "obvious" target sets.

[LHC]

It occurs to me that with testing belng limited at the moment, that the most important thing right now does seem to be to get that done for the case workers. However, as things develop, and if we ever do get to the 100k tests per day scenario, it will still take around 2 years for everybody in the UK to have had just one test. That won't necessarily be very useful.

There may come a time, perhaps not so far ahead, when it could/would make sense to do some random testing - perhaps 1000 random tests per day (which would be 1% of 100k tests per day) in order to try to ascertain the proportion of asymptomatic cases in the UK. This would help to determine whether many of us have already been exposed and built up some - perhaps modest - form of immunity, or whether we are at large mostly unprotected. Without an estimate of exposure in the way suggested here, it's going to take a very long while to come up with sensible strategies, and a gradual, but distinctive, shift in testing should be initiated quite soon in order to get more robust data on the progress of the virus and the development (or not) of immunity and susceptibility in the population at large.

The current testing is to ascertain whether you have the virus. As I understand it, if you have had the virus and recovered, the test will then be negative, so there is no point widening the test to cover the general population. The important test for assessing the extent to which the wider population has been exposed will be the antibody test, which will identify those people who have had the disease and recovered. However, all of the antibody tests looked at so far are far too inaccurate to be used. Once we have a reliable and efficient antibody test, we can test the general public, and perhaps use this as part of the strategy for relaxing lockdown restrictions.

[Dave2002]

LHC - I think you have an extra negative here - " However, none of the antibody tests looked at so far are far too inaccurate to be used." - probably not what you meant.

See also my msg 1622. Testing the general public may be pointless - but we don't know yet. That's why I'm suggesting random sampling in order that modellers and analysts may get a quicker handle on the problem, with potentially useful estimates of relevant parameters. Note also that those parameters may change over time. Exhaustive testing of the whole population will take too long even at over 100,000 tests per day.

[MrGongGong]

"Insurance"

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/apr/15/most-uk-firms-do-not-have-coronavirus-coverage-insurance-industry-told

[ardcarp]

Travel Insurance and Covid.

We've just had a letter from our (very expensive) travel insurance company to say that if we travel abroad in the future and are affected by the Covid 19 virus, we will not be covered. The reason that they give is that our insurance only covers us for unforeseen circumstances and that being affected by Covid 19 would not be unforeseen. (I paraphrase, but that's the gist of it.)

On a wider point, we are entering an era when we have paid out for a lot of things in advance and no-one is going to commit to repaying anything. One small example: subscription to Nataional Trust. All properties and car parks shut.

[Pulcinella]

Travel Insurance and Covid.

We've just had a letter from our (very expensive) travel insurance company to say that if we travel abroad in the future and are affected by the Covid 19 virus, we will not be covered. The reason that they give is that our insurance only covers us for unforeseen circumstances and that being affected by Covid 19 would not be unforeseen. (I paraphrase, but that's the gist of it.)

On a wider point, we are entering an era when we have paid out for a lot of things in advance and no-one is going to commit to repaying anything. One small example: subscription to Nataional Trust. All properties and car parks shut.

I'm pretty sure that we have heard from them (or maybe it was English Heritage) that the subscription period would be extended.
My cinema membership certainly has been.

PS: Correction. The National Trust has no plans to freeze membership; see point 8 here.

https://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/features/coronavirus-faqs

[MrGongGong]

Travel Insurance and Covid.

We've just had a letter from our (very expensive) travel insurance company to say that if we travel abroad in the future and are affected by the Covid 19 virus, we will not be covered. The reason that they give is that our insurance only covers us for unforeseen circumstances and that being affected by Covid 19 would not be unforeseen. (I paraphrase, but that's the gist of it.)

On a wider point, we are entering an era when we have paid out for a lot of things in advance and no-one is going to commit to repaying anything. One small example: subscription to Nataional Trust. All properties and car parks shut.

I had to cancel a trip to Stockholm.
My global travel insurance won't pay out as they said I "chose" not to go... the flights were finally cancelled a day before I was due to leave.
So I will, eventually, get the cost of the flights back... but as to when ?

Insurance is always a bit of a con IMV, worth having if you plan to travel and might get ill while away etc but ....

Like many self-employed folks I used to get lots of offers of insurance to cover sickness etc ... sounds good, apart from the fact that it covers everything apart from what is likely to happen... so no stress-related, backache, broken limb or accident injury etc

When I did get cancer and had to go for a bit of surgery in hospital a few years ago I called my "life" insurance company which was supposed to cover me for these things.
"Do you have a terminal diagnosis ?" I was asked
when I said "no"
the answer was "that's a shame, if you did you would be covered"

I'll stick with being alive if that's ok with you

[Dave2002]

When I did get cancer and had to go for a bit of surgery in hospital a few years ago I called my "life" insurance company which was supposed to cover me for these things.
"Do you have a terminal diagnosis ?" I was asked
when I said "no"
the answer was "that's a shame, if you did you would be covered"

I'll stick with being alive if that's ok with you

Shouldn't that be on the joke section?

Appalling story, though.

Glad you survived.

[Pulcinella]

Should we all be folding@home to help the research effort?

https://foldingathome.org/

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/apr/15/volunteers-create-worlds-fastest-supercomputer-to-combat-coronavirus

[Bryn]

Should we all be folding@home to help the research effort?

https://foldingathome.org/

https://www.theguardian.com/technolo...at-coronavirus

Many thanks for the alert. Can/should we establish a team?

[Pulcinella]

Many thanks for the alert. Can/should we establish a team?

I guess you just sign up and become part of the already existing team.
I wonder though if you have to do anything such as disable sleep mode or whether whatever they run carries on in the background even then?
No doubt Dave will alert us (quite rightly) to potential hazards, but this seems a worthwhile thing to get involved in.
What do others think?