Estimates say only 10% of the population have immunity to CV following infection. This isn't enough for herd immunity

[goldpartyhat]

Obviously without testing the general population we won't know for certain, but this doesn't look good for ending/relaxing the lockdown, without another huge spike in infections.

I'm hoping by the end of April antibody testing and active infection and tracing can be starting, so that by June we can have a clearer picture of everything.

Lockdown until it's back under control and then strict restrictions around travel social distancing testing etc, not lockdown alll the time that would be bonkers

Which begs the question how do you get something under control when large amounts of people wont know they have it and show no symptoms at all.

And you cant lock down everyone as key workers naturally need to able to work

And people are still needing to shop etc

I agree social distancing should he something that takes place anyway I hate space invaders theres no need.

But one person can I fect so many people and the incubation period is so long that it's going to be impossible to know fir sure

I know someone who was a confirmed case who has been sent a 12 week isolation letter as it has lowered her immunity and now she is susceptible. That frightens me, I thought once you had it you were immune!

Spanish flu ran for about 18 months before there was enough herd immunity for it to cease to be a problem.

However, they didn't have such strict restrictions in place to slow it down

Hopefully the restrictions, which we all understand are needed so we don't overwhelm the NHS to the point where sufferers cannot be treated, won't mean it lasts even longer than the Spanish Flu did.

We also need to work out how the nhs can even last with out people working.
How many business will fold in however long coupled with millions of people applying for UC and the 2.4 billion a day its costing the UK to lock down.

They have 2 months if furlough to work it out

This is the Imperial paper from 30 March with estimates for how many people had been infected in different countries on 28 March:
www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-Europe-estimates-and-NPI-impact-30-03-2020.pdf

This paper (also Imperial) is about short term forecasts for deaths from COVID-19 but if you go to the Case Ascertainment section it estimates the true number of cases of COVID-19 in the last week for all countries. For the UK there were 24,814 observed cases but they estimate the true number of cases was 656,000 - 821,000 (in one week, not cumulatively). That means, in one week, 0.98 - 1.2% of the population were infected:
sangeetabhatia03.github.io/covid19-short-term-forecasts/index.html

@andannabegins umm, are you absolutely sure she’s telling the truth?

The only thing to stop more peaks, is gradual reduction in lockdown, such as schools reopening. Certain workers returning to work. Home working continued. Vulnerable still isolating. Social distancing and shopping restrictions still in place. Large gatherings, holiday destinations etc all banned.

Mass antibody testing to locate immunity high areas, who can work more normally.

Keep this type of measure in place til a vaccine arrives or effective treatments are found.

It's so depressing.

Ps. I wonder if Germany will have a massive peak if they come abruptly out of lockdown. Very few of their population have had the virus so I suspect herd immunity is minuscule.

I don't think you'd be a high risk case BECAUSE you've had the virus. The consensus seems to be that whilst they don't know about immunity, some immunity is most likely though not sure for how long. A professor Mark Harris from Leeds university is quoted as saying it's very unlikely that once you're fully recovered you'd get ill again. Also - re a vaccine. It's not that we WILL have one in 12-18 months. It's the EARLIEST. Note that many viruses still don't have vaccines decades later (cold, hiv).

@ChipotleBlessing she definitely had corona, blue lighted to hospital and tested and kept in and has since had the letter even though she didn't have underlying conditions to be on the list before x

Spanish flu is an interesting comparison. They didn't have the same restrictions, but equally the population as a whole was presumably far less mobile, both nationally and internationally. Far, far less travel for holidays and commerce. Families more likely to live close together than they are now.

but equally the population as a whole was presumably far less mobile

It was a time of great mobility, both in terms of American internal colonisation migration and both the war and post war movements of military, associated services and refugees throughout the world. There were rich trade routes and holidays were already very much a "thing" for many. I'm afraid they were no more confined to the village of their birth than we are.

More particularly in a year like 1918.

Actually, Patrick Valance at the government press conference yesterday said he thought the likely percentage of people in UK who had caught the virus was potentially in low single digit percentage. So not even 10%. He said work was being carried out to have a better idea but that's what it appeared based on studies elsewhere.

If they test the children who lick everything and the parents who have their faces coughed and spat in on a daily basis, no doubt that figure will rise.

@captainmarble The population at the time of the Spanish flu were not mobile in the way we see it now, but there was massive movement of people (mostly men) because of the ending of the First World War with soldiers returning to their home countries. In fact it was this that allowed it to spread so widely and kill so many. Something that's being replicated with CV. ☹️

Oh sure, I totally accept that the amount of movement was much higher during and post-war than it had been previously, and that this made Spanush flu spread farther and faster than it would have done 20 years earlier. But surely the total number of people-miles travelled - or the number of people globally who made at least one international trip during the year - was still far lower than in 2019, no? I have no facts, only guesswork, so I'm quite prepared to be told I'm wrong.

If it's 10% we might need to lockdown and release 6-8 more times.
But if we can find the 10% they might be able to go back to work.
I suspect the anyibody tests work but they wont use them yet. Until the max people have got it in this round 1.

Anyone else feel like this is a ride they want to get off and go somewhere like NZ they are trying to keep it out. Or germany where they have lots of beds.

I dont understand why there is no therapy using immune people's antibodies for once you get ill?
Or why they couldnt trial infecting animals with a tiny dose just enough to build immunity.

Thing is as time goes on it will be more and more in our environment.

This discussion has moved on I see.

I'm posting a link to a thread I started a few day ago, It's Chris Witty, and the lecture is from 2018 so it is interesting in terms of planning for a pandemic and the various responses to it. He talks in terms of Ebola, SARA, AIDS but it is interesting in its own right and to compare with what's happening now both here and around the world.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/coronavirus/3874558-Lecture-by-Chris-Witty

Something I heard on the radio while half asleep was the chief pharmacist of Boots saying that he doesn't expect antibody tests to be ready for use for 4-8 weeks. He also said that he doesn't yet know how the govt will want to use them and that they would not necessarily be available in shops. In a recent press conference someone did say that when the tests are ready they won't just be letting them be used in a way that doesn't gather reliable data in the process.

I hope they do manage to develop a good antibody test, I think they have been struggling for a good rate of accuracy. Esp re false positives I think from the detection of antibodies to other coronaviruses.

I bet is that by end of May/June 2020 only 5% of living UK population will have had it, so 95% still susceptible. Maybe 40% of care workers & HCWs, maybe 15% of Londoners immune, obviously much lower other groups/places.

How did you come to those figures, lljkk?

It's a bet, a guess.
I'll try to make a better guess now...
If we get to 20k deaths by mid June, that suggests maybe 2.5 million survivors (have I done math right?), ~0.8% death rate.
That would be 2.5/66 (million) had it, or 3.8%
So my 5% looks much too high then, right?

10% have immunity post CV
Or
10% have had CV?

Both seem to be talked about in posts

"I know someone who was a confirmed case who has been sent a 12 week isolation letter as it has lowered her immunity and now she is susceptible. That frightens me, I thought once you had it you were immune!"

This is probably a garble. She will have been sent the 'shield' letter because her immunity is low for one of the reasons listed by the government. They re sent out based on whether the NHS has any record of you having one of the relevant conditions. There is k to see there you have already had a confirmed case.

Once antibody testing is available, I hope your friend can be tested quickly, so she knows if she has developed immunity and can leave the highly restricted life of shielding. It is ho possible that those with immune conditions might not form a lasting response, and that should not be considered typical for the rest of the population.

"marsha*

10% have immunity post CV
Or
10% have had CV?

Both seem to be talked about in posts

Neither. It's:

Some epidemiologists have estimated that 10% of the population have no had CV, many asymptomatically. But others differ

And of course without surveillance antibody testing, we have little idea which estimate is likely to be right