SeoulSaint
Active Member
Don’t forget that in the first few weeks pretty much all the UK testing was contact tracing and although led to some positives there were a lot of negatives in that time. So the bulk of the first 20-30,000 or so tests weren’t seriously ill patients. Likewise now there will be in the coming days and weeks a lot more frontline staff that are tested multiple times. Hence I still think the volume of UK testing data to assess positivity is a poor source. Agree that an arbitrary symptom app isn’t great either.Worldometers lists UK cases recovered at 135 cases. That would presumably be the number of people hospitalized that were tested again prior to release. By my understanding people who have mild symptoms and are self quarantined at home would not be retested in places where test capacity is constrained.
I'm willing to cede that 135 is lower than the actual number since reporting suffers in the chaos but lets look at the math a bit. I'll say 50,000 of the 266,000 tests were repeats wth a or 216,000 novel patients... still only 25% positive rate. Lets tack on another 50,000 duplicate tests for fun for political leaders, health care workers, military, and others with lots of person to person contacts... 156,000 novel patients... 33% positive rate.
Even with a margin of 100,000 duplicate tests, you can see assuming a 50% rate of positive infection based on self reported symptoms is very high.