# UK Covid-19 antibody tests not ready until May at earliest



## Northerner (Apr 9, 2020)

Antibody tests to identify those who have had Covid-19 will not be available until May at the earliest, raising further questions about how the government will reach its target of 100,000 tests a day by the end of the month.

On Wednesday Prof John Newton, of Public Health England, conceded none of the tests trialled so far were accurate enough.

“We do not expect to be doing antibody tests by the end of April,” Newton told MPs on the science and technology select committee. “We’re not relying on antibody tests to make up that target.

“We were optimistic that a number of companies have been offering us these quick antibody tests and we were hoping they would be fit for purpose. They all work to some extent, but are not good enough to rely on. The judgment was made that it is better to develop a better antibody test before rolling it out.”









						UK Covid-19 antibody tests not ready until May at earliest
					

Health secretary’s target of 100,000 tests a day of NHS staff and key workers unlikely to be met, experts say




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## mikeyB (Apr 9, 2020)

You pay peanuts, you get rubbish. And whatever happened to clinical judgement? You have a fever and a dry cough, lose your sense of taste. If it looks like a duck...

And unless you test everyone in the country, you will never know the real death rate. The English government don’t report the real death rate in any event, only deaths in hospitals. In Scotland, they report any death which is certified that includes coronavirus on the death certificate, so automatically includes nursing or care home, or even deaths at home. The people of England are being told lies, as usual.

And that ‘not fit for purpose’ refers to 1.5m tests ordered.


----------



## Bruce Stephens (Apr 9, 2020)

A reasonably good test would be enough to answer some population level questions. For example there's this idea that about half the population has already been infected. If you had a not terrible antibody test you could get an idea of whether that's likely or not.

If you want to issue certificates to people saying they're definitely immune you'd need an incredibly reliable test. (Quite likely  one that could never actually be produced.)


----------



## Amity Island (Apr 9, 2020)

Northerner said:


> Antibody tests to identify those who have had Covid-19 will not be available until May at the earliest, raising further questions about how the government will reach its target of 100,000 tests a day by the end of the month.
> 
> On Wednesday Prof John Newton, of Public Health England, conceded none of the tests trialled so far were accurate enough.
> 
> ...


Is that another way of saying the lockdown won't be lifted until people can be tested? (May at the earliest)


----------



## Amity Island (Apr 10, 2020)

mikeyB said:


> You pay peanuts, you get rubbish. And whatever happened to clinical judgement? You have a fever and a dry cough, lose your sense of taste. If it looks like a duck...
> 
> And unless you test everyone in the country, you will never know the real death rate. The English government don’t report the real death rate in any event, only deaths in hospitals. In Scotland, they report any death which is certified that includes coronavirus on the death certificate, so automatically includes nursing or care home, or even deaths at home. The people of England are being told lies, as usual.
> 
> And that ‘not fit for purpose’ refers to 1.5m tests ordered.


Hi Mikey,
Do you have any idea how many deaths reported are actually pure covid19 deaths e.g not for example admitted weeks ago with heart failure then died, tested positive for covid19. I keep seeing so many official news reports saying "so and so died today....and tested positive for covid19. Or there have been another 576 deaths today who tested positive. It seems the hospitals are showing all deaths as covid19 deaths whether that was the cause of death or not.


----------



## mikeyB (Apr 13, 2020)

“Cause of Death” covers a multitude of sins. Deaths caused by the Secondary pneumonia that Covid 19 causes have to report the death as caused by pneumonia, with Covid 19, which didn’t cause the death but enabled it reported on the second line. You can’t write suspicions on death certificates. The nursing home deaths weren’t in folk who had been tested, because the government isn’t including non-tested folk in their announcement of deaths.

I repeat, if you don’t test everyone you have no idea how many folk have it, or have had it recently, so you can’t calculate the death rate, only the death rate in those admitted to hospital.


----------



## Amity Island (Apr 13, 2020)

mikeyB said:


> “Cause of Death” covers a multitude of sins. Deaths caused by the Secondary pneumonia that Covid 19 causes have to report the death as caused by pneumonia, with Covid 19, which didn’t cause the death but enabled it reported on the second line. You can’t write suspicions on death certificates. The nursing home deaths weren’t in folk who had been tested, because the government isn’t including non-tested folk in their announcement of deaths.
> 
> I repeat, if you don’t test everyone you have no idea how many folk have it, or have had it recently, so you can’t calculate the death rate, only the death rate in those admitted to hospital.


Thanks Mikey for your reply.

And it is impossible to determine the cause of death without a post mortem? 
MSN News reports there won't be any post mortems being done in Scotland if any body has tested positive for COVID19.


Post-mortem examinations will no longer be required for those who die in Scotland of the coronavirus as the nation prepares for the storm already stretching our NHS to reach full force.
The Crown Office taken action under the emergency powers in the Coronoavirus Act 2020 to ease the burden faced by the NHS as the UK moves towards predicted peak levels of infection and death.
Normally, patients who die in hospital have a post-mortem to establish beyond doubt the cause of death.
But with hundreds of coronavirus deaths daily in the UK, the burden on hospital mortuaries and pathologists would become impossible to manage.


Scotland’s most eminent pathologist, Tony Busuttil, emeritus professor of forensic medicine at Edinburgh University, said: “Without post-mortems, we can’t really say for sure what has gone on and why the patient has died and if we are to combat the new virus, we first have to understand its effects.”



			Post-mortems no longer required for those who die of coronavirus in Scotland


----------



## trophywench (Apr 14, 2020)

Post mortems are only required when the deceased is not known to a doctor as suffering from a health problem.  All care homes have a GP and are normally absolutely excellent at reporting health concerns of residents, to that GP.  Goodness ONLY knows how they are instructed to report suspicions of CV19 - but in the absence of inside info - I can only assume that there IS a system for doing so!

When my mother died in such a home, after a second stroke - we'd already made arrangements for a local funeral director to make the arrangements when it became obvious she was very nearly there, and the home were aware so that part was NP when it did happen - but it took us a few days to be able to get death certificate No 1 from the GP cos you always have had to do it by appointment and the FDs can't get the 2nd Death cert - necessary to cremate the deceased - until they have the first.  Hence you get the cert from the GP, then have to make another appt with the Registrar to register the death, and for the fee you pay them you get one official certificate, but if you need any more for eg private pension providers, you have to pay more for the copies cos the first one has to go to the FDs.  The FDs all have 'pet' GPs for the 2nd certs, and ditto for religious leaders for most faiths, necessary when the care home is not local to the immediate family responsible for the arrangements so they can't ask their own.

But the arrangements were when things were normal - and I don't even know if registry offices are still open!  Surely they must be though - people are still having babies and there's still a legal obligation to officially register a birth within 'so long' in any case.


----------



## grovesy (Apr 14, 2020)

I thought the government  changed many things regarding deaths, with the law they passed a few weeks ago.


----------



## Felinia (Apr 14, 2020)

mikeyB said:


> You pay peanuts, you get rubbish. And whatever happened to clinical judgement? You have a fever and a dry cough, lose your sense of taste. If it looks like a duck...
> 
> And unless you test everyone in the country, you will never know the real death rate. The English government don’t report the real death rate in any event, only deaths in hospitals. In Scotland, they report any death which is certified that includes coronavirus on the death certificate, so automatically includes nursing or care home, or even deaths at home. The people of England are being told lies, as usual.
> 
> And that ‘not fit for purpose’ refers to 1.5m tests ordered.


A few days before Christmas, I got a fever, then developed a hacking cough, ached all over, lost my appetite and spent almost a week in bed, then a further 3 weeks feeling totally exhausted - worst case of flu in my life.  At the time I thought, "it's not fair, I had the flu jab".  Now I would say "Quack, Quack" but then, when the virus was supposedly still confined to China, who knows ??????????????


----------



## Bruce Stephens (Apr 14, 2020)

Felinia said:


> A few days before Christmas, I got a fever, then developed a hacking cough, ached all over, lost my appetite and spent almost a week in bed, then a further 3 weeks feeling totally exhausted - worst case of flu in my life. At the time I thought, "it's not fair, I had the flu jab". Now I would say "Quack, Quack" but then, when the virus was supposedly still confined to China, who knows ??????????????



On the "it probably wasn't Covid19" side, what we're seeing now doesn't seem like something that could creep through the population quietly. It spreads easily (more easily than the usual flu variants, doubling every 3 or so days) and in a small proportion of cases requires hospital treatment. (I guess one could imagine you had a less nasty variant (one that much more rarely causes serious illness, and so might be lost in the usual winter illnesses). I've no idea whether that's plausible or not.)


----------



## trophywench (Apr 14, 2020)

Well there was a lot of that about at that time @Felinia  - @Ditto had something like it too.  Remains to be seen what it may have been but until they a) invent a test that works and b) it eventually in the fullness of time filers down so low that we get tested - and we are absolutely far down the line I'm afraid, I daresay younger people who a) are still at work and b) have families are FAR higher up the waiting list than the likes of OAPS like me and OH, no matter that both of us have other health considerations - Pete absolutely can't lose any more lung function safely as he only has 50% anyway through COPD.  He's 72, why bother if you can save a 35 yo instead?


----------



## Ditto (Apr 15, 2020)

Our registry office was still open not long ago as we went to get a copy of Dad's death certificate, better late than never, he popped off in 1971.  

I found those programmes saying the older ones should be glad to go very unsettling. Mum is 86 but she doesn't want to go yet. They can bugger off! Cheeky gits. Putting in place arrangements for them to go, saying intensive care too much for them to handle, good grief. 

I'm banking on the fact that I've had it but the Koreans are saying we can get it again. I'm def only shopping once a week now. Tim Brooke-Taylor going has really taken the wind out of my sails. He was my favourite Goodie.  

I don't believe any of their stats. How can they give numbers when they're not testing?


----------



## Amity Island (Apr 23, 2020)

Ditto said:


> Our registry office was still open not long ago as we went to get a copy of Dad's death certificate, better late than never, he popped off in 1971.
> 
> I found those programmes saying the older ones should be glad to go very unsettling. Mum is 86 but she doesn't want to go yet. They can bugger off! Cheeky gits. Putting in place arrangements for them to go, saying intensive care too much for them to handle, good grief.
> 
> ...


Hi Ditto,

Regarding the stats, it does appear that no matter what the cause of death, if you have a positive test for COVID19 (that's even assuming it's correct), it is covid19 which is being given as cause of death regardless of actual cause of death. This would mean the statistics are grossly high and inaccurate.

Regarding immunity, it seems that the world has given up on researching to find out if we have natural (and hopefully life long) immunity, they are only looking at vaccines or treatments now. Vaccines cost money and are time consuming to administer, natural immunity is free to anybody not self isolating. 
I'd of thought the best strategy (if we do have natural immunity) is to offer vaccines to those that are in high risk groups and those that want it, and the rest of us acquire natural immunity.


----------



## Bruce Stephens (Apr 23, 2020)

Amity Island said:


> Regarding the stats, it does appear that no matter what the cause of death, if you have a positive test for COVID19 (that's even assuming it's correct), it is covid19 which is being given as cause of death regardless of actual cause of death. This would mean the statistics are grossly high and inaccurate.



As far as I understand it if you get a positive test result it's very likely you have the virus (that is the false positive rate is very low). (If you get a negative test result there's a decent chance that's incorrect and you in fact do have it. That is the false negative rate is quite high. See https://www.statschat.org.nz/2020/04/19/counting-rare-things-is-hard/ )

A number of recent stories I've heard have been about the excess deaths _not_ attributed to COVID-19 and wondering about them (are doctors reluctant to use that diagnosis without a test, for example). I'm skeptical that there's significant over counting.



Amity Island said:


> Regarding immunity, it seems that the world has given up on researching to find out if we have natural (and hopefully life long) immunity, they are only looking at vaccines or treatments now. Vaccines cost money and are time consuming to administer, natural immunity is free to anybody not self isolating.
> I'd of thought the best strategy (if we do have natural immunity) is to offer vaccines to those that are in high risk groups and those that want it, and the rest of us acquire natural immunity.



People are still looking at that natural immunity. It's just early days. And that immunity's only free if you get a really mild (or even asymptomatic) reaction. A decent proportion of people will be off work for weeks, and a decent proportion of those will be in hospital for some of that. (And while there's some predictability (if you're an old, obese smoker you're more likely to do badly) there's still enough uncertainty (with apparently healthy young  people dying) to make people worried.) It might also be that the natural immunity isn't as good as the one produced by the vaccine.

Working hard on vaccines (and then trying hard to make them cheap enough that everybody can get them) seems rather sensible to me.


----------



## Amity Island (Apr 23, 2020)

Bruce Stephens said:


> As far as I understand it if you get a positive test result it's very likely you have the virus (that is the false positive rate is very low). (If you get a negative test result there's a decent chance that's incorrect and you in fact do have it. That is the false negative rate is quite high. See https://www.statschat.org.nz/2020/04/19/counting-rare-things-is-hard/ )
> 
> A number of recent stories I've heard have been about the excess deaths _not_ attributed to COVID-19 and wondering about them (are doctors reluctant to use that diagnosis without a test, for example). I'm skeptical that there's significant over counting.
> 
> ...


Hi Bruce,

That was a good link you posted about testing. Thanks.

IMHO I reckon many people have had it (covid19) and had it long before it even became news or the lockdown began. I suppose this is where the antibody tests will come in useful, if they eventually get one that is reliable enough, it appears it's an accurate antibody test (not the pcr) that they are really struggling to find. The flaw in the antibody tests according to W.H.O this week said, they don't give any indication of immunity, *which means* they need to do way more research into immunity.

If say half the population have already had it and are already immune, then a vaccine will become only a part of the strategy.


----------



## Bruce Stephens (Apr 23, 2020)

Amity Island said:


> If say half the population have already had it and are already immune, then a vaccine will become only a part of the strategy.



Definitely, and that would be wonderful.

I'm struggling to see how that would fit with what's being seen, though, which looks a lot like this was (earlier this year) relatively new out of China, spreading rapidly through countries causing sufficiently serious conditions in enough people that wealthy healthcare systems were overwhelmed. It just doesn't seem like something that would slip quietly through half the population.

But maybe I'm wrong, or maybe there was some variant milder strain that looked more like seasonal flu that still provides protection against this newer one. (I'd love to be wrong; I very much miss hugging strangers to Argentinian music from the early 20th century, a hobby which I fear will return some time after pubs and restaurants can open.)


----------



## Eddy Edson (Apr 23, 2020)

Amity Island said:


> If say half the population have already had it and are already immune, then a vaccine will become only a part of the strategy.



If half are immune then you're almost at the 60% level various expert bods reckon is the herd immunity level. In which case the country could soon go back to normal, vaccine or no.  

Unfortunately there's absolutely no reason to suppose that this is the case.


----------



## Amity Island (Apr 23, 2020)

Eddy Edson said:


> Unfortunately there's absolutely no reason to suppose that this is the case.


I agree, only full scale antibody testing could confirm the numbers involved.


----------



## everydayupsanddowns (Apr 23, 2020)

I saw a post from a respected researcher/specialist who was debunking some of the myths that are gaining traction, and one of those was the idea that many people had it in other countries earlier in the winter.

I‘m not sure I’m be able to find it again, but his specialist knowledge was in the makeup, evolution and distinctive nature of different viruses - and this one being known, being novel, and with a very particular makeup and origin, and having been the focus of a very rapid amount of research in record time, is not going to have been widely in circulation as one of the nasty cough/colds that were doing the rounds in the U.K. over the winter.


----------



## Amity Island (Apr 24, 2020)

Bruce Stephens said:


> Definitely, and that would be wonderful.
> 
> I'm struggling to see how that would fit with what's being seen, though, which looks a lot like this was (earlier this year) relatively new out of China, spreading rapidly through countries causing sufficiently serious conditions in enough people that wealthy healthcare systems were overwhelmed. It just doesn't seem like something that would slip quietly through half the population.
> 
> But maybe I'm wrong, or maybe there was some variant milder strain that looked more like seasonal flu that still provides protection against this newer one. (I'd love to be wrong; I very much miss hugging strangers to Argentinian music from the early 20th century, a hobby which I fear will return some time after pubs and restaurants can open.)


Hi Bruce,

Cambridge university experts are now saying the virus was spreading months before we thought. With international air travel, who knows how long other countries have had the virus.









						Report claims coronavirus started months earlier and not in Wuhan
					

New research by a team at the University of Cambridge has been published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences




					www.plymouthherald.co.uk


----------



## Eddy Edson (Apr 24, 2020)

Amity Island said:


> Hi Bruce,
> 
> Cambridge university experts are now saying the virus was spreading months before we thought. With international air travel, who knows how long other countries have had the virus.
> 
> ...



FWIW, that Cambridge study has been widely rejected by the virologists/epidemiologists I follow on Twitter.

There's a whole lot of crappy corona-related pre-prints being rushed out; best to wait a while and see what survives scrutiny.


----------



## Amity Island (Jun 9, 2020)

Bruce Stephens said:


> Definitely, and that would be wonderful.
> 
> I'm struggling to see how that would fit with what's being seen, though, which looks a lot like this was (earlier this year) relatively new out of China, spreading rapidly through countries causing sufficiently serious conditions in enough people that wealthy healthcare systems were overwhelmed. It just doesn't seem like something that would slip quietly through half the population.
> 
> But maybe I'm wrong, or maybe there was some variant milder strain that looked more like seasonal flu that still provides protection against this newer one. (I'd love to be wrong; I very much miss hugging strangers to Argentinian music from the early 20th century, a hobby which I fear will return some time after pubs and restaurants can open.)


Hi Bruce,

Todays news looks to be showing the likelihood of the virus having been around far longer than reported.


----------



## grovesy (Jun 9, 2020)

Amity Island said:


> Hi Bruce,
> 
> Todays news looks to be showing the likelihood of the virus having been around far longer than reported.


Is this something new or something that has been rumbling on.


----------



## Amity Island (Jun 9, 2020)

grovesy said:


> Is this something new or something that has been rumbling on.











						Latest news Covid19 likely to have been around earlier than reported.
					

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/coronavirus/satellite-images-of-packed-wuhan-hospitals-suggest-coronavirus-outbreak-began-earlier-than-thought/ar-BB15cDQi?ocid=spartanntp




					forum.diabetes.org.uk


----------



## grovesy (Jun 9, 2020)

Ta.


----------



## Docb (Jun 9, 2020)

My pharmacist acquaintance is absolutely sure something was going on in November/December simply because of the number of respiratory disease prescriptions they were dispensing.  Way, way beyond anything they had ever experienced before. Whether it was CV or some other respiratory infection is open to question.  The death stats suggest it was something else.


----------



## Robin (Jun 9, 2020)

Docb said:


> My pharmacist acquaintance is absolutely sure something was going on in November/December simply because of the number of respiratory disease prescriptions they were dispensing.  Way, way beyond anything they had ever experienced before. Whether it was CV or some other respiratory infection is open to question.  The death stats suggest it was something else.


A lot of people reckon there was something around, but as you say, I'd have expected more deaths after Christmas and New Year, after everyone had mixed at parties, if it had been Covid then.
Something I read a few weeks ago, to support the October theory in China, was that all mobile phone traffic stopped for a few days at the suspect Wuhan lab, supporting the theory that something had occurred there. Of course, it may have been due to some entirely unrelated problem.


----------



## Eddy Edson (Jun 9, 2020)

Amity Island said:


> Latest news Covid19 likely to have been around earlier than reported.
> 
> 
> https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/coronavirus/satellite-images-of-packed-wuhan-hospitals-suggest-coronavirus-outbreak-began-earlier-than-thought/ar-BB15cDQi?ocid=spartanntp
> ...



Really flimsy, IMO. There continues to be a whole lot of dubious academic coronavirus click bait being ground out & promoted by university PR departments, which often have a shocking record for hype. Wait until to see whether it gets accepted by the scientific community before taking much notice of this kind of thing. 

Or at least wait to see what Helen Whately thinks of it. I've adopted her as my COVID-19 guru.


----------



## Felinia (Jun 9, 2020)

My friend (aged 85) and I (aged 70), who are 250 miles apart, both came down with something very similar in December despite having the flu jab - hacking cough, lethargy, lack of appetite, headache, wheezy, but no runny nose.  We both spent about a week in bed (I had to sleep sitting up for 3 nights and my neighbours reported they could hear my coughing, it was that bad), then a further 3 - 5 weeks recovery.  Her son is convinced she had COVID-19 but I am not so sure.  I recall seeing an article suggesting there was a variant of OC43 going around at that time - another flu virus which was not covered by the flu jab.  But she intends to get tested for antibodies when she can, and if she comes back positive then I might do the same.  There was that French post confirming a positive COVID-19 test at the end of December.


----------



## Amity Island (Jun 9, 2020)

Eddy Edson said:


> Or at least wait to see what Helen Whately thinks of it. I've adopted her as my COVID-19 guru.


----------

