Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Study finds 100,000+ In LA County have antibodies

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/h...virus-study-finds/ar-BB12W5mG?li=BBnb7Kz

If true things need to open up immediately, and the politicians that wrecked the world economy need to be fed to the hogs.

Okay for those who won't look at the article here is the point of it all.

The initial results from the first large-scale study tracking the spread of the coronavirus in the county found that 2.8% to 5.6% of adults have antibodies to the virus in their blood, an indication of past exposure.

That translates to roughly 221,000 to 442,000 adults who have recovered from an infection, according to the researchers conducting the study, even though the county had reported fewer than 8,000 cases at that time.

The Stanford study has been posted, Doc Rocket commented on it a few days ago. There is some legitimate criticism of the sampling methods that may have skewed the results and thus the conclusions.

My dad's a retired physician, and he agrees with me that what I thought was the flu that I had while visiting him for Christmas (which kept me in bed for three straight days while there) may well have been the Novel Coronavirus. I had a cough for a month after that, and it didn't feel like any flu I've ever had before. I could very well have antibodies for it.

In another post, I told everyone that I was part of the antibody study here in South Tennessee. The criteria for acceptance was you had to have been sick between December and March, tested negative for the flu, recovered without going to the hospital, and had all of the other symptoms of COVID 19. I had all but the high fever. I was one of 25 people tested here on this past Monday. I had to sign a non-disclosure that was ended today. I did test positive for the antibody virus. Out of 25 people tested, 18 of us had COVID-19 antibodies, two were inconclusive, and five were negative. The nurse said that they are drawing no conclusions from this study at this time. She did tell me that 10,000 people were in this original test from all over America. She also warned me that just because I tested positive for COVIS-19 antibodies, does not mean I can't get it again. They just don't know. She said that they have no idea how many people actually have had this virus and until everyone is tested, no one will know. I am 71 and 50 pounds over weight. If I can survive this, so can most people. And NO, I do not want to get again.

BTW, Georgia is opening up its businesses this Friday and Tennessee will do the same on May 1.

This is huge, thank you.

When we’re you sick?

The COVID- Chorus Girls will poo-poo it.

The way they chose the sample is questionable they also account for that lack of randomness is the spread of percentages. There were at the time of the article 8k cases. We are talking orders of magnitude of difference. Perfect data or not it certainly should not be ignored.

What is interesting a study in Conn. pretty much duplicates the Stanford death rate, but it say there are 28 million vs 11 million Americans who have had it.

The data and methodology should be peer reviewed, scrutinized, and verified with additional studies before taking the conclusions at face value. Certainly there has been a substantial number of asymptomatic and mild cases of Covid-19, is it a magnited of 10? Or a magnitudde of 50 higher? Hard to say at this point.

One other thing about the antibody tests that are being used in these studies, the efficacy of the tests are unknown, they are unapproved and made in China.

https://news.yahoo.com/unapproved-chinese-coronavirus-antibody-tests-213100124.html

It does say all that in the article posted if you care to read.

Interesting that this is being held to such rigorous scientific procedures (as it should be), then there is "climate change" which is sold as "settled science".....

Or the university of Washington model that has never been right but is also being used as a guide for re-opening the economy.

2.8 - 5.6 percent if the sampling was truly random is not surprising, nor does it tell us anything other than about 95% of the population is still every bit as susceptible as we were when this started. The best we could hope for in this case is that there was a sh*t ton of FALSE negatives which is not out of the question given the poor quality attributed to a lot of the Chinese tests. If the sampling is not random, then without knowing the biases and their extent we cannot begin to know what direction the true numbers may lie in much lest the extent of their deviation from the results.

2.8 - 5.6 percent if the sampling was truly random is not surprising, nor does it tell us anything other than about 95% of the population is still every bit as susceptible as we were when this started. The best we could hope for in this case is that there was a sh*t ton of FALSE negatives which is not out of the question given the poor quality attributed to a lot of the Chinese tests. If the sampling is not random, then without knowing the biases and their extent we cannot begin to know what direction the true numbers may lie in much lest the extent of their deviation from the results.

Let's all hope something positive comes from this and that 1) a vaccine can be formulated from these antibodies and, 2) these people's immune systems can counteract any re-infection they might be exposed to.

Glass half empty reply, go figure. Sky is still falling in your world, nothing new.

Do you think MN will break 500 deaths? That would be truly alarming numbers for a population of over 5m . . .right Miles?

Infected but not Detected

Yes Minnesota will break 500 deaths from Covid 19 and likely it will be between 1000 and 5000 minimum. Left to people with your lack of comprehension it could well be a lot more. We have a lot of industries that are just like Smithfield in Sioux Falls. There are a bunch of Golden Plump plants, other (besides JBS) pork plants, beef plants etc. But, the prevalene of business whit common lunch rooms and a lot of other common areas guarantees that when the virus achieves penetration here we will see levels of infection similar to everywhere else where it has.

We are now at a very low total for in-fection according to Osterholm. Under 5%, much like the cited study in this thread. With most of the epidemiologists betting that we'll come out close to 70% infected before we get done, we will have to find more and better ways to treat people than we have right now to even have a prayer of getting down to 5000 deaths.

For the idiots like you, we are clocking hundreds of new infections per day under lock down. Lets hear what you think is going to prevent that trend continuing over the next year, and please be sure to account for the logarithmic increase in new cases that has accompanied every single place where the virus has gotten a start.