Read on Twitter
“About 10% of the global population may be infected by October 2020. Global infection fatality rate is 0.15‐0.20% (0.03‐0.04% in those <70 years)”
You can make an estimate of the % of U.K. population infected by reference to Covid19 fatalities to date & the IFR. It’s not...
You can make an estimate of the % of U.K. population infected by reference to Covid19 fatalities to date & the IFR. It’s not...
...a perfect method, but it yielded around 32% (that’s using the higher IFR; it would be closer to 40% using the lower value).
However you do the maths, even if 100% of us were initially susceptible (as SAGE said), you don’t get “more than 90%” when subtracting 32% from 100%.
However you do the maths, even if 100% of us were initially susceptible (as SAGE said), you don’t get “more than 90%” when subtracting 32% from 100%.
Worse, our population never was 100% susceptible. That would have been truly astonishing because viruses tend to be related to other viruses.
Indeed, that rather radical journal, the BMJ, now recognised that around 30% of us had prior immunity to this virus, before it arrived,
Indeed, that rather radical journal, the BMJ, now recognised that around 30% of us had prior immunity to this virus, before it arrived,
...because we’d been exposed to one or more of the common cold-causing coronaviruses which Hugh Pym & Fergus Walsh have been busily telling your about. Or not.
So if 30% were thought likely to have had prior immunity, and then another 32% got infected (& mostly survived),
So if 30% were thought likely to have had prior immunity, and then another 32% got infected (& mostly survived),
...doesn’t that mean that under 40% remained susceptible when Sir Patrick made his remarks, live on TV, looking directly at the camera?
Ans: Yes.
Doesn’t that mean he said something demonstrably wrong? Something which would mean more deaths & a more prolonged pandemic?
Ans: Yes.
Doesn’t that mean he said something demonstrably wrong? Something which would mean more deaths & a more prolonged pandemic?
Ans: Yes.
Do you think a clever physician-scientist like Sir Patrick Vallance, who used to run R&D for GSK, one of the worlds largest pharmaceutical companies, doesn’t know about T-cell immunity? Or doesn’t understand that “7% of us possessing antibodies” does NOT mean that...
Do you think a clever physician-scientist like Sir Patrick Vallance, who used to run R&D for GSK, one of the worlds largest pharmaceutical companies, doesn’t know about T-cell immunity? Or doesn’t understand that “7% of us possessing antibodies” does NOT mean that...
...”only 7% of us have been infected & so sadly over 90% of the U.K. population remains susceptible”?
Ans: You decide.
By sheer luck, Mike’s & Pat’s research careers briefly crossed around 1990-1, when both worked at Wellcome Research Labs in Beckenham.
Ans: You decide.
By sheer luck, Mike’s & Pat’s research careers briefly crossed around 1990-1, when both worked at Wellcome Research Labs in Beckenham.
Because we’ve had a similar training & work history (I didn’t run a great research organisation, but Sir Pat didn’t found, secure the finance for & successfully lead his own biotech to a profitable trade sale to Novartis) I submit you should assume he knows everything I know.
