I reckon the above is spot on.
And yes of course everybody will fly back home on an airliner even if they are ill. No good getting stuck in some [insert your favourite disorganised country which has great wx] hospital. I would do the same, except I would be in the TB20 
Surely the young would be spreading it to the old already to at least some extent if that hypothesis was true.
France has been back at its March peak for about 2 weeks and is now well above it, with the deaths lower by about a factor of 50. I find it hard to believe that the old and the young have separated themselves to the extent required to cause such a dramatic drop.
GA_Pete wrote:
I have no knowledge but he was very convincing and committed to his point of view. Seems plausable to me.
Yes seems well tough of as dynamics but it is just explanatory, I am not sure he has any data or could predict (while it may seem obvious now) this say 3 months ago? also, did he declared “conflict of interest” on the radio: namely, his age ?
A better one, which is fairly well understood, relate to level of testing: it undershoot on wave 1 and overshoots on wave 2
France has been back at its March peak for about 2 weeks and is now well above it, with the deaths lower by about a factor of 50. I find it hard to believe that the old and the young have separated themselves to the extent required to cause such a dramatic drop.
Yes exactly that bit doesn’t add up.
The “old” might be careful but parents can’t avoid mixing with kids in their teens and 20s, who mostly still live at home.
Something else must be going on, to get the dramatic effect we are seeing.
The data clearly shows that the ones being tested positive is skewed towards younger people compared with the first “wave”. The young don’t care all that much anymore, but the older still do. It isn’t that difficult not to catch it, and the young who do catch it have no or only minor symptoms. It could also be a bit of Darwin. It’s self destructive for a virus to kill it’s host, so the less lethal strains have a larger chance of multiplying and spread.
Peter wrote:
And the media is hyper-vigilant on anything which makes the govt look bad.
We have been suspecting it, and it seems that jealousy may be involved in “travel shaming”: https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/travel-shaming-pandemic
The only rational reason I can think of is that the mere act of airline travel spreads it a lot more (among those travelling), especially when combined with buses at the ends.
It seems that airplane travel per se is not prone to spreading the disease, according to this: https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/odds-catching-covid-19-flight-wellness-scn/index.html
Back in March and April, the number of test were way lower, most countries only tested sick people. No healthy, young people were being tested. So it’s hard to make any comparisons with recent trends. It might just be if that if young healthy people were being tested before, the same trend would show up.
What do people think the false positive rate for the PCR tests can be?
I think that is a real problem. If you have say 0.1% of the population being infected, and the test makes 1% false positives, it is completely useless.
Currently, in the UK, the % infected, outside of known problem areas, is of the order of 0.01% (100ppm).
1% would be good wouldn’t it?
https://corona-transition.org/sars-cov-2-tests-haben-hohe-fehlerraten
German inter-laboratory survey
False positive rates in presence of the harmless cold corona virus OC43: 2.2%
False positive rates in presence of the harmless cold corona virus E229: 7.6%
False positive rates in absence of virus: 1.4%
Believing that study, up to 7%. How many countries or regions are actually getting significantly more than 7% ‘cases’ from all the mass testing?
Is it correct that the experience in Africa, and specially South Africa is very different to the rest of the world? Lower mortality despite high urban concentrations and higher poverty levels.
