Posted on 05/16/2020 12:24:04 PM PDT by absalom01
Only 5% of Spaniards have been infected with the coronavirus, according to the preliminary results of a study by the Carlos III public health institute, which took blood samples from nearly 70,000 participants.
The prevalence study was conducted to determine how many people in Spain have developed antibodies after exposure to the virus. Similar studies in other countries are being used to help make decisions about easing confinement measures.
Health Minister Salvador Illa and Science Minister Pedro Duque offered a news conference on Wednesday afternoon to announce the preliminary results. The study contributes an X-ray of the epidemic in our country, said Illa. It confirms the hypotheses we have been working with, and which the deescalation plan rests on. Duque said that this is one of the most solid studies done in the world, an enormously ambitious job that we are very proud of.
The figures in the Spanish study show significant geographical differences: in some provinces, the prevalence of the virus is seven times higher than in others. In Soria province, 14.2% of the population has developed antibodies after being exposed to SARS-CoV-2. In the Madrid region, considered the epicenter of the pandemic, the prevalence is 11.3%.
(Excerpt) Read more at english.elpais.com ...
They went to great trouble to sample many thousands, (good), but then used multivariate analysis to reach a general conclusion about the country as a whole while burying the local information in a national "average".
Even my limited encounter with statistics reminds me that samples with high standard deviation CANT be used to force data into a "normal distribution". That's the exact same error that lead to the liquidity crisis ten years ago when the "quants" constructed their derivatives.
It's not 5% in Spain, it's 14.2% in Soria, 11.3% in Madrid, etc.
Still much lower than one might have expected,but it tells the same story that we're seeing in New York: densely settled places are hit hardest and first. It may be possible that more rural and less dense areas simply get hit later, but that's speculation at this point.
First question? What is the rate of false positives and false negatives in these tests?
I live in Spain. They will probably use this study as an excuse to extend the lockdown even longer.
Those data are not given in the piece.
But since they’re reporting the serology for IgG it’s probably highly specific and accurate.
Others are skeptical, I report, you decide.
So? Only 4% in US have
Only 0.4% have contracted covid-19 in the U.S.
It means that 95% haven’t.
“First question? What is the rate of false positives and false negatives in these tests?”
It doesn’t matter as much when the prevalence is relatively high.
If the prevalence is low like 1% then a false positive rate of 1% could mean all the positive cases are false. If the prevalence is 10% it would have to be a really bad test to have all the positives be false.
BTW this study establishes, once again, an infection mortality rate of more than 1%. 46mm population in Spain, times 5% (the percentage of individuals with infection, based on 70,000 tests of random people in the population) is 2.3mm. There have been 27,000 deaths in Spain, so the infection mortality rate is about 1.17%. This number is remarkably close to the NYC infection mortality rate.
Sorry Flubros, it’s least 10 times worse than seasonal flu.
... and 99.6% of people haven’t gotten covid-19 in the US
Well, with the earlier serology out of NYC, which showed 15-20% had contracted it, which lined up with the LA county figures, one might have hoped that the IFR would be around .5%
Early days yet, but it’s not currently looking good for the ‘herd immunity” camp.
OK, but I know one thing for sure.
4% and 0.4% are not the same thing.
Sounds like 3 million people got infected in Spain. So it looks like for every confirmed case, 10 people did not get tested. If we do the same in USA, it would be that around 20 million Americans got infected so far.
That’s confirmed cases, which mostly means people who have gotten sick.
These serology studies are trying to identify asymptomatic or mild cases that did not come to the attention of the public health system.
That’s how we get the .1% estimate of the IFR for the seasonal flue. It’s an important data point, and a matter of some urgency for the probably inevitable next waves of this CCP Virus.
I think the shutdowns are only worth it if we get vaccine in a couple of months. Otherwise, it was a mistake to shut down the country even if the casualties were going to be horrendous. I think it would be closer to 500,000 dead Americans rather than over 2 million according to worse case scenario by Imperial College in England.
Thanks. That makes sense.
You can’t extrapolate from Spain to the US!!! Use your brain. The infection rate in one place can’t be assumed to be the same 3,000 miles away for God’s sake.
I think that we can say that the “clampdown” was not necessary or effective based on the original premis of “flattening the curve”.
That was not obvious in early March, but we’re clearly going to be dealing with the virus for a fair time to come, and telling people to “just stay home” for 2 years is simply not sustainable.
You just have to shake your head in disbelief at that sort of nonsense and ask where are all the dead bodies from this disease that we didn't even know was hear. And remember that's how the disease was initially identified in Wuhan - pneumonia and death.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.