Interesting: so the R value in London is down to about 1.8 but hardly changed elsewhere at around 2.3

Given the number of cases in London I don't think it's surprising that the number with antibodies is relatively high.  It does rather undermine the case in Four's video.

Given that Johnson singled out two foreign nurses who helped keep him alive I was somewhat surprised at his initial stance. It looked like such an obvious concession to give, with some obvious PR advantages, whereas the initial position was nothing but negative.

A quick bit of arithmetic suggests that there are 150,000 foreign workers in health and social care (£600 each and an annual cost of £90m).

What test results are being referred to?

Edit: Sorry, I've just read it is what Hancock said. Therefore it seems antibody testing has been taking place? I wonder how big the sample size is. 

An antibody surveillance study - didnt go into more details than that.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2020/may/21/london-17-of-population-may-have-had-coronavirus-says-matt-hancock-video

Just reading about the briefing. So Hancock has said a decision to delay the NHS app-ocalypse has been taken and it isn't needed for track and trace anyway. Christ on a cracker. I doubt even the Chinese would spew out inconsistent drivel like this. I'm not really sure the UK government has a the required competencies currently available. They badly need to up their game. Move one should be replacing Hancock with Hunt. Give Hancock the chance to say he is exhausted and suffering from stress and going on his own volition.      

That's patently wrong, and has been thoroughly debunked already, Colin.

For a start, the very low IFR of 1 in 1000 is impossible. It would imply that 200% of New York City had already got infected.

Oh dear. I only read the text of interview, but I am at a loss:

• she used to call for antibody testing and now she dismisses them because their results don't fit her model 


• She dismisses even the very reliable antibody tests that have been verified independently without providing any evidence


• She continues to think that the mortality rate is between 0.01 - 0.1%, when in NYC ~0.23% of the population (not of patients!) has died (so far)


• She explains the above 'through a combination of circumstances leading to unusually bad outbreaks, including the infection load and the layout of the population'. Isn't that the whole problem? That there are many more places with high density population and pockets of deprivation that could lead to mortality rates hugely higher than her estimates?

I am trying to keep an open mind, but it just smacks of dangerous nonsense and inflated academic egos. Interesting also that the results of her unpublished modelling study were leaked to the media in March via a PR company and not via Oxford Uni press dept.

Keep an open mind Nick...

Hancock is clearly the worst person to have in charge at Health at a time of pandemic. He is a lying and snivelling little weasel. If I was still in a position to commission hacks to go out and dig, I would have everything thrown at him to reduce him to ashes.  He wouldn't last a day.

Yes she's totally out on a limb and flying in the face of the accumulating evidence. Perhaps she should stick to her other career as a novelist.

From New Scientist..

UK needs contact strategy to prevent second wave of covid-19

Time is running out to prevent a second surge of infection in the UK

The NHS Confederation, a membership body that represents people who commission or provide NHS services, has warned of the urgent need for a UK contact tracing strategy. “Our members are concerned that unless there is a clear strategy, then there must be a greater risk of a second wave of infections and serious health consequences,” chief executive Niall Dickson wrote in a letter sent to the UK’s health and social care minister Matt Hancock yesterday. “We would therefore urge you to produce such a strategy with a clear implementation plan ahead of any further easing of the lockdown.” 

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2237475-uk-needs-contact-strategy-to-prevent-second-wave-of-covid-19/

I see Gideon Osborne's Evening Standard is spinning that since excess deaths are at winter levels, then everything is OK and we can open up the economy

If this is true, then it just shows the virus is not affected by warmer weather all that much

Surely it is good news if the vulnerable are shielded and more of those who don't suffer very bad symptoms are more likely to be infected and build up some immunity?

Is it your view that the vulnerable should be 'shielded' (which means having their lives significantly restricted) until 'some immunity' has been achieved?  Also, I assume by 'some immunity' you mean sufficient to drive down the R value to a level sufficiently below 1.

If so, you must be suggesting the shielding continue for 6-12 months at least?

The shielding has to continue until the epidemic has receded, either from mass vaccination (with a viable vaccine) or because we have achieved herd immunity.

If you look at Spanish flu, it came in two waves, after which it degraded to something society as a whole could live with.

But we need to look at the bigger picture - the economy needs the less vulnerable to be out there doing the things which put food on the table.

Superdrug offering C19 antibody testing kits for £69.

https://onlinedoctor.superdrug.com/coronavirus-antibody-test-kits.html

Looks like they've already sold out.

Actually Spanish flu came in three waves, not two. The second was the deadliest.

Your understanding of how Spanish Flu ended is flawed, AFAIK. It ended because a sufficient herd immunity threshold was reached.  If that's your end game for Covid-19 then you might want to do the maths.

I'll have a go for himself:

• the FT model has been underestimating slightly the number of excess deaths, but still its latest estimate is 63,300 deaths 


• if 5% of the population has been infected so far and we need 62% for herd immunity, then that would mean 785,000 deaths in the UK


• That of course assumes a rather linear/steady evolution and that the NHS isn't overwhelmed at any stage; if that happened then mortality would be even higher

Yep, that was where my invitation was supposed to lead him.

I think Richard might have the word 'economy' glued over the number pad but I live in hope.

Professor Gupta is back. Tim Martin will be delighted with this intervention I expect!

Pubs and restaurants could reopen now without risking public health, says Oxford scientist

Professor Sunetra Gupta says coronavirus epidemic 'on way out' and urges rapid exit from UK lockdown

Pubs and restaurants could reopen tomorrow without posing the threat of a second wave of coronavirus, a leading Oxford scientist has suggested.

Sunetra Gupta, a professor of Theoretical Epidemiology, said there was a "strong possibility" that the hospitality industry could get back to work without posing a danger to the public.

In an interview, Prof Gupta called for a "rapid exit" from lockdown and said the coronavirus epidemic was already "on the way out". Much of the UK population may already have been exposed to the virus before the Government ordered people to stay at home, she added.

In March, Prof Gupta and her team published a controversial study claiming coronavirus had been spreading for months, with up to half the UK population already exposed.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/05/21/pubs-restaurants-could-reopen-now-without-risking-public-health/

Immunity doesn't last forever so if we have only got 5% immunity after 2.5-3 months then would we get close to herd immunity before people start becoming un-immune? Could end up just getting stuck on, say, 30% immunity until a vaccine turns up, with vulnerable people having to sit out until that vaccine appears.

Truth and scrutiny don't matter anymore. A load of bullcrap gets pasted around and swallowed by those who want to believe it. Jesus f...king Christ.

At that rate we'd probably have double immunity by now.