The data from multiple serosurveys around the world have shown that anything up to 20% of a population have antibodies (and hence their immune system has been challenged by the virus). Places like NYC and Northern Italy have antibody rates of this level. In both cases, that was WAY in excess of their positive swab test rate.

Other places have lower numbers, but same pattern with antibody rates consistently >> swab rates.

Part of the explanation is the swab is not that sensitive. Within the first few days of exposure to the virus, the swab will usually be negative - even in people who will become infected. In the first few days after exposure and before symptoms, 70-80% of swabs will be negative.

Understand that most testing is in this group - people who were at a hotel or whatever 2 nights ago. 80% of people who become infected may well be negative that early. But finding 20% is useful from a public health perspective as it may allow you to get R0 from 1.2 to 0.95 or whatever. If you do the public health swabs at 6-7 days after exposure, most of them will be positive, but by then these people will have infected others. So the swabs will be more accurate, but too late to help.

Same at the other end. The swab becomes negative again about 2 weeks after exposure. It is only a short window of 7 -10 days or so when the swab is likely to be positive.

So understand that the number of positive swabs has only a very lose association with what is happening in the community.


Graph 1 - different tests over time
Exposed at week - 1
Symptom onset at week 0 (7 days post-exposure)
Nasal PCR swab is blue line. Goes up a few days after exposure, peaks 1-2 days after symptoms, and is gone in a couple of weeks.
Green is IgG antibody. Later to rise, but stays up.
Over time, you will find more people with antibodies than ever had a positive swab - either they were not swabbed, or you missed the 2 week window.

https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....e9c7f16827.png

Graph 2 (top) - sensitivity of PCR over time
x axis = days since exposure
vertical dashed line = day 5 when symptoms usually start
y axis = probability nasal PCR will be NEGATIVE in a person who definitely has (or will get) COVID.
So guaranteed to miss day 0 and 1.
Maybe a few positive day 2 and a few more day 3
Day 4 may be positive in 1/3
By day 5, positive in greater than 50%

Most swabs done have been by public health on days 2-3.
Public health isn't your doctor trying to tell if you are going to get sick
Public health isn't primarily about capturing the most complete data - if so would swab days 6-7
Public health is trying to identify and stop chains of future transmission before they are established. You develop symptoms on day 5, and peak infectivity is earlier at day 4 (highly unusual - whether by accident or design, this virus is a bastard to track and contain). Allowing 24 hours to perform test and notify positive, that means you need to swab around day 2-3, when the test is poor. But you will find a few positives, and will find them in time to stop them infecting others. By day 7-8, you can find most of them - but after they have infected other people.

If you have R0 a bit above 1.0, finding 20% of future infectious people and isolating them may be enough to drive R0 below 1.0.

So that is how public health and PCR tests work.
Can you use this data to go back and say how many infections there have been in your community? No. Absolutely not.


https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....29a4c962fb.png

1 hr 7 min ago

World Health Organization warns of "alarming rates of transmission" across Europe

From CNN's Vasco Cotovio
The World Health Organization (WHO) has warned that a “very serious situation” is unfolding in Europe, as "alarming rates of transmission" of the coronavirus surge across the continent.“Weekly cases have now exceeded those reported when the pandemic first peaked in Europe in March,” WHO Regional Director Hans Kluge said during a press conference on Thursday.
“Last week, the region’s weekly tally exceeded 300,000 patients.”Kluge added that more than half of Europe's countries have reported an increase of more than 10% in new cases in the past two weeks. "Of those, seven countries have seen newly reported cases increase more than two-fold in the same period,” he said. Kluge also said the increase in cases should serve as a warning of what is to come. “In the spring and early summer we were able to see the impact of strict lockdown measures. Our efforts, our sacrifices, paid off,” he said. “In June, cases hit an all-time low.”
“The September case numbers, however, should serve as a wake-up call for all of us."
“Although these numbers reflect more comprehensive testing, it also shows alarming rates of transmission across the region”

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So here is a WHO member Kluge, giving you the full wack of that good old fashion fear mongering. Rates have gone up 10% but no mention of deaths.
Why are you not reporting the deaths Mr Kluge? Let me think. Their is hardly any to report. Wow amazing.
The graphs are opening up between cases v deaths. Why can't he mention that.
Europe are coming off a summer where more heat and sun restricts the transmission, not bloody lockdowns.
WHO can you really trust these drongos now. Known about the disease since Dec.
Fauci has now said he is taking 6000IU of Vit D for the coming US winter. I wonder why?
Bring on that lovely Aussie sunshine and you councils don't even think about closing the beaches.
That's off my chest sleep well.

Because deaths lag cases, as you should well know by now. Of course the northern autumn/winter period has been predicted to be worse than the summer for obvious reasons. Regarding Vitamin D: some races do not react to sunlight the same as most caucasian people so supplements are needed. Vitamin D supplements are also not known to cause melanoma.

Because the deaths will arrive in 2 - 3 weeks, thats why.

2 - 3 weeks from now the fatality graph will look like the infection graph, only smaller.

The two week lag works the other way too. It take two weeks for any measures to improve the situation to have any effect.

Actually not exactly the case that’s happening.

https://www.worldometers.info/corona...ountry/france/

France for instance. From the graph of reported cases (concentrating on the 7 day moving average) you can see there was a similar number of cases on August 28 (3 weeks ago) as there was at the peak of the first wave on roughly April 3rd. The corresponding deaths per day were already high but began to fall roughly 2 weeks later.

The second wave is already at double the moving average deaths per day but no corresponding increase in cases has been seen. The deaths per day moving average is at less than 40 today (Sep 18), if it was concurrent with the first wave the deaths per day should be at least 1000 per day and climbing.

https://www.worldometers.info/corona...country/spain/

Second example Spain. They’ve had a slight higher second wave deaths per day but it’s still les than one tenth of the first wave. Their second wave peaked 30 days ago, Aug 19, but the corresponding deaths per day increase has been a fraction of the first, even though it should have risen within 14-21 days.

https://www.worldometers.info/corona...untry/germany/

Then Germany. Moving average of cases per day 4 times higher than early July but average deaths still in single digits.

The UK’s second wave only started to increase at the start of the month so if there’ll be any increase in deaths it’ll happen over the next week or two, but if they follow the same pattern as the other 3 countries it won’t rise at all.

Look at the graphs, even after the second wave has been happening in Europe for more than a month, the deaths per day are not increasing. It is undeniably less deadly than the first wave.

They have changed the causes.

https://public.flourish.studio/visualisation/2562261/

Generally I agree, but for different reasons.

During the earlier peak, there was a bias towards only testing the sickest, due to test kit availability.

Now most get a test. Case fatality rate should therefore decrease, as testing rate increases, which it appears to be.

Bottom line? As cases go up, so will deaths. But should be more like Australia's 3% CFR and less like UK"s horrendous 11% CFR.

All down to test availability.

Respiratory viruses tend to follow cold weather patterns of circulation, putting Australia in a good position right now.

Northern hemisphere? Not so much.

Even less, looking at the France and Germany figures of infections 14 days ago to deaths today the CFR was 0.7 and 0.5%.

Average influenza CFR? I’ve seen 0.1-0.6%?

Yes, as more info comes to hand , the more we know.

Deaths are perhaps not all the info we need.

For example, UK covid hospital admissions have trebled in the last fortnight.

One would hope their rate of survival will be a lot better than those admitted three or so months ago.

useless graphic, fails to include leading causes of death.

https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/mf/3303.0

Your table only shows Australia.:rolleyes:

Here is a more complete picture, 12 months, global.

Current 9 month numbers place it about 11th in a 12 month table. (2017 data)

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/a...eaths-by-cause

But shows what is below!

No known big ticket items below it, only stubbed toe type stuff.

But only about 9 months in, it out does road deaths!

let’s ban cars then, as the human race really needs to make sure people stop dying so much

I do not advocate banning anything - even seat belt wearing or helmet wearing.

They may slightly affect the death toll - but not really sure!

ex ABC News: NSW coronavirus death toll rises to 55........
 

Link: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-09-...tious/12682464

Article Quote/Extract here:
rgds
S28- BE

A Sydney taxi driver. Lucky he didn't come across VicPol. He would of been rammed, pulled out, masked, handcuffed, kicked in the head, trialled, fined,
then we will ask some questions.

https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/n...own-propaganda
More evidence of highly orchestrated social media reporting from China. So orchestrated it really has to be state sponsored.

China spent a lot of time trying to control the global narrative. Pity they didn’t spend as much time trying to find the origin and patient zero. But then, they may already have known.

Does anybody know what is specifically meant by the term "reclassified" as stated almost daily with Victoria's Covid numbers? On a daily basis the total number and deaths are realeased and we are told to wait for further info. The media jumps on this. When the press conference occurs, the breakdown is given and it is extremely common for a portion of the total to be reclassified. The adjusted total which is usually lower is ignored.
Example: 20 Sept figures. Total 14 cases. 6 reclassified. Therefore there's was actually only 8 cases.

https://www.dhhs.vic.gov.au/coronavi...9-daily-update

Also, what is the relevance of the following if you actually only have 8 cases?

• Within Victoria, 12 of the new cases are linked to outbreaks or complex cases and 2 are under investigation.

Just trying to understand what is causing us so much turmoil.

In relation to the title of this thread, has anyone received an explanation as to why positive cases can self isolate at home here in Queensland (and probably elsewhere) but someone returning from overseas who has a reasonable likelihood of not carrying Covid, has to go into hotel quarantine at their own expense?

I thought the people returning from overseas were high risk,isnt that how the hotel quarantine saga erupted in victoria.
I agree people self isolating at home could be an issue but right now we dont want any overseas arrivals in victoria,we want out of this & the overseas arrivals will have to go somewhere else & abide the rules in place.

I know in QLD positive cases are required to self isolate - to make sure they do guys in uniform are watching (army/army reserve).

As for overseas arrivals, unlike a known positive they could be asymptomatic. By the time a QLD resident got tested (isolate till result) they would generally have already have spread it as much as they would have anyway.

It erupted because, despite being in a quarantine hotel, they were not self-isolating. If they were, the virus could have been contained largely to that group.

So could anyone who came in contact with those people who contracted the virus in the southern and western suburbs of Brisbane a few weeks ago. How is that different to someone returning from overseas and going into required self-isolation at a venue of their choice, as was the case with the Qld positives? The Queensland positives were required to enter self-isolation, at home in most cases I'm sure, but the returning citizens must go to a hotel whether they're positive or not. Even if they were all positive on returning to Australia, why can one group of positives self-isolate at home and another have to fork out $3000 to stay in a hotel if they have a suitable place to self-isolate?

To put it simply. I was at far greater risk of contracting Covid had I gone to Indooroopilly Westfields in the days after the first few western suburbs positives were announced than I was had my next door neighbour flown home from Europe and gone straight into isolation in her home for 14 days - even if she was positive.

Because those who are isolating at home are Queensland residents who vote. Not everyone isolating in a hotel is a Queensland resident....Or is that too cynical? :bored:

Are those 2x- potential new 'Community Transmissions' - that can't be accounted back to a known source and then need to be tracked down/quantified????

rgds
S28- BE

Just most of Queensland is COVID 19 free, you have/had a very very slim chance of coming into contact with someone infected.

Coming from overseas, Victoria, NSW or ACT increases the chance of contact with an infected person (NSW and ACT due to Victorians jumping open borders to get to QLD).

Self isolation of people (with unknown status or no symptoms) has not been very successful (up to 30% were not at home), I expect that is because they take it less seriously. I also expect actually getting a positive result would give most a reality check, and they would then be happy to correctly self isolate.

The shear numbers of people from overseas entering each week would exceed the man power required to correctly monitor them all, so containment is the only viable option.

Section28- BE,
I have no idea. I just know that certain information is hard to find. Victoria today has been reported as total of 11, reduced by 2 (reclassified from August) gives a total of 9 news cases. Best since mid June. Hope the numbers stay down.

Clark y.

Are you sure they are not the figures from Victoria for those who had tested positive but had not met their self-isolation obligations? As most if not all (non-celebrity or sportspeople) international arrivals in most states have had to quarantine in hotels, I would suggest your latter suggestion that 30% hadn't met their self-isolation requirements, comes from the very same group you suggest would correctly self-isolate knowing they're positive. You don't think those becoming desperate to return home wouldn't be the most likely not to jeopardise their quarantine and risk hefty fines if they didn't follow the quarantine rules?

Just some consistency both within the States and federally would be nice. At the moment all we have is a totally inconsistent set of rules that are driven by political expediency and a desire not to lose face by admitting that some earlier decisions had been a little over the top.

Mods - not sure if this is ok, but exceptional times.

Might not suit everybody, might help some.

Might even need its own thread.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/353733222469486/

I would suggest, what I said in my previous post.

Queensland also had issues with self isolation.

More than 200 people who were meant to be isolating at home under strict coronavirus quarantine laws in Queensland are missing.

Since mid-April more than 2,000 compliance checks have been conducted by the COVID-19 taskforce, with officers uncovering almost 400 people who were not where they were supposed to be.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-07-...sland/12472332

But they not people returning from overseas. They are those who had tested positive or were known contacts of those who had, not inbound travellers. You suggested they're the most likely to adhere to the rules; evidently not it would seem.

So again, why are overseas arrivals required to isolate in hotels when known positive cases and their contacts don't?

Anyway, I've got as much chance of getting a logical answer here as I did when I asked my State and Federal members the same question…...:rolleyes:

FWIW its not just overseas arrivals, but interstate also.

The "positive test, immediate transfer to government facility until two negative tests followed by 14 days quarantine in another government facility" model would not fly here.

Works really well though, apparently.

I am not sure what you do not get.

Most people in QLD are known to be COVID free - there was a breach and some fools contaminated a few people.

Those then were in the community - they either developed symptoms or were asked to be tested - BY THIS TIME it was too late, they either infected others or did not have the virus. The saying the horse has bolted rings true.

The ones who tested positive by this stage had already done all the infecting they were going to do, they then need/ed the self isolate with Johnny Grunt watching - the numbers were/are low in QLD for this to happen.

However new arrivals from overseas are considered contagious until proven otherwise, we do not have enough Johnny Grunts to individually watch everyone of these voluntary arrivals at their own homes.

I do believe the self funded hotel quarantine ($3300) can be circumvented with an approved alternative also self funded, but that I expect costs a little more than $3300.

It seems around 3/4 of QLD cases are overseas arrivals including the one case today.

Just curious, Premier Gladys who is awesome and doing a fantastic job. She, today has said she won’t relax restrictions unless testing numbers increase.

Why won’t they accept that people don’t need to get tested and less ppl actually have symptoms?! Why would healthy normally ppl get a test than have to isolate until their results are returned.

Not sure testing is available for asymptomatic individuals in NSW unless identified as a possible close contact.

"Testing of asymptomatic people (that is, people with no symptoms) is not recommended routinely. In certain high risk outbreak settings, PHU may consider testing asymptomatic contacts to inform management of the outbreak"

From NSW Health.

https://www.health.nsw.gov.au/Infect...tions.aspx#4-2

Victoria had the same thing- we need more tests, but only if you have symptoms.

ex the QCL: Swapping 787s for 9240s as pilots retrain as header drivers...........
 

With, Mr "currawong/'s"- same Caveat/'s...... 'Mods'- feel free to, Excise/Flame/Move the following- all Cool!!!!!

Link here: https://www.queenslandcountrylife.co...field/?cs=4713

rgds all/be well
Section28

Today was 11 cases, that's about 39 for a 14 day even if we had 5 cases in any 14 day period Dan Andrews would still be hesitant to open up Melbourne.
It's in his fascist left-wing government DNA now, welcome to iron clad, ring of steal, you have no rights, state.
As per the article Slats 11 posted about the CCP Dan was introduced to this philosophy while he was trying to buy a belt.
Now we see it day in day out, moving the goal posts everyday and hence arresting pregnant women and letting go BLM and Casey spreaders.
Can governments defeat viruses. No. Do lockdowns work. No. Europe is now proving it right now. It prolongs the virus. Theory dead. Not according to governments.
Victoria will flatten out now and come March (when job keeper goes funny enough) the cases will spike again. Hence another lockdown.
Hope I'm bloody wrong though if correct these protests will become riots as we see in London. London now about to go into lockdown.
Instead of a $5000 quarantine fine London will fine you $18,000.
Again, the virus isn't scary, governments are.
China has us right where they want us. They like to see other countries damaged and poorer for it.

One more thing. Today at the Hotel quarantine enquiry, Chris Eccles department of the premiers office all of a sudden
could not answer questions today due to a bout of amnesia.
Dan and Jenny front up, under oath, on Wednesday. Lets see if this amnesia thing is also contagious.

It gets even better.
If you are found to be infected you are told (and trusted, with some verification) to go home and stay home.
If you arrive from "elsewhere" you must go into 14 day quarantine.
If during that 14 days you test positive, whether on day 3 or day 13, you are set free on day 14 (but not before) and you are told to go home and stay home.

How are the following infected people different, such that they are treated differently?
Someone found to be infected in the community (must isolate at home, no quarantine provided even if family/housemates not infected).
Someone found to be infected on arrival into quarantine (must remain in quarantine 14 days, then released regardless of whether still positive)
Someone found to be infected on day 13 of quarantine (released next day to self isolate - where if they don't have a local home??)

It's difficult to avoid the conclusion that "quarantine" for 14 days followed by release even if infected is primarily designed to inconvenience and discourage new arrivals.

All these people with amnesia need to go.
I dont care what public approval rating they have,as we know there are people out there who dont care what politicians do or stand for,as long as their preferred party is in power no wrong can be done & unfortunately that will never change.

Excerpt from Crikey.com

For a start, there’s the obvious inconsistency. If you test positive to COVID-19, you are asked to quarantine at home. That is, the Australian government trusts you to do the right thing. By contrast, if you are returning from overseas and test negative, you are still required to stay in a three-star hotel for 14 days.

Up until July, this was all at taxpayer expense (Victoria and ACT have not yet stipulated any costs for returning travellers, but theses states are also not currently accepting international flights).
So to clarify: if you test positive to COVID, please stay home. If you happen to come from another country and test negative to COVID, you’re staying at the Rydges for two weeks.
It’s also baffling that, unlike other countries such as Singapore, the Australian government treats residents returning from every country the same way. If you come from India (92,000 cases per day) you are subject to the exact same requirements as if you came from Vietnam (one case per day).

Moreover, the quarantine period is excessively long. While the virus’ incubation period does extend to 14 days, the median time for symptoms to present is around five days. Taiwan, the gold standard of COVID management, requires only five days of quarantine for those returning from low-risk countries.

Then there’s the other issue: as Victoria showed, hotel quarantine is far from foolproof. It relies on a number of checks and balances and human intervention (not to mention, it’s expensive — travellers are charged around $3000 for the stay). While Victoria was the high watermark of incompetence, it certainly was not alone — NSW and WA have also had their own hotel quarantine issues.

Given Australia has (rightly or wrongly) pursued a policy of elimination, it would make far more sense to allow returning travellers to quarantine at home under strict conditions.

The most obvious would be to require a negative test: provide a rapid test upon return and then utilise a location tracker like electronic ankle tags (or the Singapore/Canada model, which involves check-ins via phone). If a person under home quarantine breaches quarantine (or has a guest in their residence), they would be heavily fined ($10,000+) and forced to spend three weeks in a hotel. Random in-person checks could also be used.