First question? What is the rate of false positives and false negatives in these tests?
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.
“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.