Quote Originally Posted by noel View Post
Good question. I've no frame of reference here. Clearly this many people don't have covid. Although, I suspect a lot of people have respiratory symptoms at this time of year with various colds/flu so might be worried they do have it. Do we have any data on how many people are being routinely tested (ie, without symptoms)?

Further to our ongoing discussion about the effects of false positives (and negatives), it's important to know whether people who are being tested have symptoms or not, since that affects how you interpret the data.

From personal experience, people in the ONS screening study (like me) are included in these figures. And I've been tested about 6 times now without having any covid symptoms.
Just back from a 3 hour walk on the hills. Very nice.

Just a further mathematical issue with the data.

Note that our areas are being judged on positive tests per 100,000.

Made up figures here, but let's say Blackburn were turning up 6 positives from 1000 tests end August and early September, that equates to a local rate per 100,000 population of 600.

Then the Govt issue their dictat that only symptomatic. The Local Authority echo that.

They still get the 6 positives, only 800 test though as 200 of the asymptomatic drop off.

Then they have a rate of 750 per 100k.

A 25% increase - yet there are no more cases, they've just cut out some of the asymptomatic guinea pigs.

That's an increase regardless of any issues with testing inaccuracies.