First representative study (I know of)
-
This study came out today and is likely to influence the Corona policy of the German government.
It was conducted in the place with the highest density of Corona cases in Germany.
Main result:
Preliminary result: An existing immunity of approx. 14% (antiSARS-CoV2 IgG positive, specificity of the method>, 99%) was determined. About 2% of the Individuals had a current SARS-CoV-2 determined using the PCR method
Infection on. The infection rate (current infection or already gone through) was
a total of approx. 15%. The lethality (case fatality rate) based on the total number of
Infected in the community of Gangelt is based on the preliminary data from this
Study about 0.37%. Currently in Germany from Johns-Hopkins University
calculated lethality is 1.98% and is 5 times higher. The
Mortality based on the total population in Gangelt is currently 0.15%. -
I saw reference on twitter last night to half a dozen or so randomized antibody tests around the world. Today I will try to find them.
-
Do they have any indication of the state of the 15% who tested positive? IOW, how many of them are truly asymptomatic vs pre-symptomatic?
-
How would this affect policy? If hard-hit areas still have relatively low serology surely the primary conclusion is any curve-bending we see is due to social distancing and not herd immunity.
-
The study is evidence that mortality rates are much lower than what the division exercises of the Johns Hopkins numbers suggest. Of course that affects policy. From what I understand, our government now considers it to be time to come up with a time plan to eventually get back to normal.
-
That was a content-free post.
Of course the IFR is less than than CFR, that’s always been known. Why would this (or another) estimate change the approach?
-
@jon-nyc said in First representative study (I know of):
How would this affect policy?
Also, your political instinct seems to be off.
Maybe you think it shouldn't affect public policy, and maybe you have good reasons for that (or not). But as a matter of fact it does.
Here's a random sample of news articles about this study from today. They all contain the same words: "Lockerung" - easing/relaxation of the quarantine. A surprisingly high immunity. A surprisingly low death rate.
-
@Klaus said in First representative study (I know of):
@jon-nyc said in First representative study (I know of):
How would this affect policy?
Also, your political instinct seems to be off.
Maybe you think it shouldn't affect public policy, and maybe you have good reasons for that (or not). But as a matter of fact it does.
Here's a random sample of news articles about this study from today. They all contain the same words: "Lockerung" - easing/relaxation of the quarantine. A surprisingly high immunity. A surprisingly low death rate.
Wonder if the population genetic make-up plays any factor?
Always remember, Operation Valkyrie was an act of sedition.
Warning: I post things that interest me. Read and comment at your own discretion. -
@Jolly said in First representative study (I know of):
@Klaus said in First representative study (I know of):
@jon-nyc said in First representative study (I know of):
How would this affect policy?
Also, your political instinct seems to be off.
Maybe you think it shouldn't affect public policy, and maybe you have good reasons for that (or not). But as a matter of fact it does.
Here's a random sample of news articles about this study from today. They all contain the same words: "Lockerung" - easing/relaxation of the quarantine. A surprisingly high immunity. A surprisingly low death rate.
Wonder if the population genetic make-up plays any factor?
I have been thinking and talking to my wife about that. I think genetics has a huge role in this.
-
I'm guessing that too, mark. Would explain part of the random severity of the disease in some and not in others.
