I did not say that it did! I said the "pandemic still rages" as it does - that means all countries currently in lockdown are at risk of repeated waves of infection.

Did you read the article?

https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/17/a-fiasco-in-the-making-as-the-coronavirus-pandemic-takes-hold-we-are-making-decisions-without-reliable-data/

I like this analogy:

"...

That huge range markedly affects how severe the pandemic is and what should be done. A population-wide case fatality rate of 0.05% is lower than seasonal influenza. If that is the true rate, locking down the world with potentially tremendous social and financial consequences may be totally irrational. It’s like an elephant being attacked by a house cat. Frustrated and trying to avoid the cat, the elephant accidentally jumps off a cliff and dies.

..."

That doesn't appear to be supported by the available reliable evidence (i.e. exclude China).

I think you were the first on here to post about the Dutch blood donour coronavirus antibody testing. Have you got any more info or updates? I can't find anything. 

Of course there is still so much we don't know, but there are things we do (like what worked in Asia). But 'being in the dark' doesn't mean we should take unquantifiable risks where the downsides could be huge. I'll give you an example from that article:

"A population-wide case fatality rate of 0.05% is lower than seasonal influenza. If that is the true rate, locking down the world with potentially tremendous social and financial consequences may be totally irrational."

Ok, should the Italian authorities have considered this and avoid the lockdown just because we don't know the mortality rate?

And as I said many times the mortality rate is not an inherent characteristic of the disease. It exhibits significant spatial and temporal variation and it is affected by several external factors. The numbers we hear for SARS I and MERS etc. are just averages (and in fact estimates of those averages).

Again, the issue is not the CFR but the risk of overwhelming Heath services and, as a result, more people dying from Covid-19 and other illnesses that can't be dealt with because of Covid-19.

It clearly does: no exponential growth of infections and no significant number of deaths.

That was from five days ago, but there have been no new updates:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-netherlands-testin/dutch-test-blood-donations-for-unseen-coronavirus-spread-idUSKBN2161S4

As in all such matters, I expect that more time is needed to see if it is a useful indicator.

Funny, because I had selected exactly this from the article s I think it's the weakest point.

Exactly.

And no economic activity - that cannot be sustained. We need to see what happens as the lockdowns are lifted.

From the article:

Three months after the outbreak emerged, most countries, including the U.S., lack the ability to test a large number of people and no countries have reliable data on the prevalence of the virus in a representative random sample of the general population.

Agree with this 100%. The lack of testing - particularly not having randomised samples - this far into the epidemic and then pandemic to me seems farcical. 

Sorry, but are you drunk? The Asian countries (out of China) didn't have lockdowns or a collapse of economic activity. 

I'm still struggling with this , the company next door have situated their smoking area at the back of their building , 5 or 6 all stood in a huddle fagging away , at this rate it will take an age to get on top of.

I still maintain a total  lockdown is the only way 

We have 15 people in here ( split the workforce ) the nature of our job means some will have to get within the recommended distance , imagine business's with 10 times that amount , it is impossible to keep the sort of distance apart that the PM wants .

He's been asked for his views quite a lot over the last few months. Just an observation.

Although convalescent plasma is “old school,” it has a good chance of success.

Convalescent plasma decreased the severity of symptoms & shortened hospital stays for #SARS, and preliminary reports from #China suggests it also works for #coronavirus.😃https://t.co/g7uJoCC7He

— Dr. Dena Grayson (@DrDenaGrayson) March 24, 2020

Taiwan, Singapore and Hong Kong are now reporting greater increases in new cases than they were previously. Obviously not on the levels of Europe but still cause for concern

Indeed, but I think they will probably control it again.

Taiwan implemented strict border controls, quarantine and testing from the very outset.

Singapore is a special case, since it is a constrained and small geographic area with very strong government and social control.

Stats for Thailand and Malaysia are most likely fictive, but it is interesting that they do not appear to have been overwhelmed like Italy.

We know that Indonesia has been engaged in a massive cover up, so difficult to know what is actually happening on the ground there.

South Korea were quickly on the case when a cluster emerged there - by rigorous testing and contact tracing, they have managed to contain it for now - but all European countries are well past the stage of being able to do that.

One of the mysteries of this virus is why and how it can suddenly erupt and rocket in particular places like Iran, Italy, New York - and now most of western Europe - that is something academics and epidemiologists are trying to understand. There are going to be numerous factors - here are a few:

1. local climate.


2. local demographics, especially age profile.


3. local customs, including those related to personal hygiene.


4. mixing of demographics - worse affected countries like Italy and Spain have a history of different generations living together.


5. housing type - high density housing in apartment blocks is a key indicator of likely contagion.

These and many other factors will be at work in determining where the virus takes a particular hold on a population.

The article also says:

"Some worry that the 68 deaths from Covid-19 in the U.S. as of March 16 will increase exponentially to 680, 6,800, 68,000, 680,000 … along with similar catastrophic patterns around the globe. Is that a realistic scenario, or bad science fiction? How can we tell at what point such a curve might stop?

The most valuable piece of information for answering those questions would be to know the current prevalence of the infection in a random sample of a population and to repeat this exercise at regular time intervals to estimate the incidence of new infections. Sadly, that’s information we don’t have."

I think that is the point Hunt is making. By only testing the seriously ill you do not have any handle on the scale of the problem building up in the community and whether the measures being taken are working.

We will remain in headless chicken mode unless we try to take a science-based approach.

A big problem with govt is that there are so few people with a scientific background - and the few that are have spent so much time clambering up the greasy pole that their thinking is seriously compromised by fear of falling off it.

So spot on!

In an ideal world, mass testing would find that half the population have it or have had it.

Random testing of population groups would give an idea - could be modeled to assess the total for the population.

So you are making an assertion without any basis in fact.