SARS CoV-2 coronavirus / Covid-19 (No tin foil hat silliness please)

[Alabaster Codify7]

Was living in Switzerland for a year, got back to the UK in April (about 2 weeks ago). Situation is pretty calm, you can still go out (i.e. to the park) but you have to socially distance of course and be with less than 5 people. Supermarkets are full, they are limiting the number of people allowed in pharmacies. Borders are still open as far as I am aware since I was able to come back to the UK.

Interesting, thanks for the info.

Obviously not fully opened straightaway. But things like kids back to school, people back to work in offices. The increase in capacity now means that a higher curve can be coped with whilst a vaccine and treatments are developed.

I'm with you man. Our fellow European countries have already started loosening restrictions, our numbers are very slowly but surely showing signs that we've peaked and are on the downward slope and we have 2.5 weeks until this lockdown period 'ends'. By the time May 7th arrives, I stand by my prediction that Boris will come out and state "2 more weeks", giving a date of like, May 22-25th as when lockdown is released. That's 1 month away. That's a long time for numbers to keep sliding downhill.

It'll be cautious and incremental but it will begin. I reckon similar to Germany - small shops opening, non-essential workers can start earning again, small gatherings slowly begin to be tolerated.

Remember. They got a freeze on mortgages and rent for 3months. That 3month period ends in June. By June, people will be back in work because if they aren't, they're homeless.

 

[cyberman]

I wish it's that simple

if a 1 month lock down can guarantee 0 infection then it's an easy options. The problem is that we could be locking down for 1 months, collapsing the economy, and still collapsing the health care. It's not a simple choice of "health or money", it could be both.

I try to be balanced and looking from everybody's point of view. Sometimes the naysayers are saying it in a stupid way, but they do have a point, at some point you'd have to also take consideration the economic ramifications of lockdowns. Chaos anarchy riots once supply chain is out of food isn't an unlikely scenario. Money is one thing but the whole supply chain can't last 2-3 months without economy reopens. Even if the government gives us cheques, we still need physical goods to be available. having money with no supply would only make a hyperinflation that could spiral out of control.

Our next door convenient store needs goods produced by farmers, farmers needs to go out buy seeds, they need tools, they need gears, etc. You can't simply says only "X can remain open an Y close"

Im a farmer and i can get every one of those?
A lot of businesses will open, i dont see any stories about any spike in supermarket workers getting infected but thats down to social distancing in those stores. More businesses that we think will reopen and safely as well but itll be a less profit simply because social distancing is so ingrained into us now.
Plus its not as if the government can just say forget about social distancing so business picks up.
Pubs etc have no chance. I heard on the radio today that if social distancing were followed in the guests pub it would be at 1/8 capacity. Theres just no way round that

 

[Sparky Rhiwabon]

UK:

• A “best-case scenario” being worked on by the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) hopes to end lockdown restrictions for certain nonessential shops and industries in the short term, from early to mid-May.
• Some social distancing measures could then gradually be relaxed in the medium term, in June and July, eventually leading to the reopening of pubs and restaurants towards the end of summer.
• Long-term “shielding” for elderly and vulnerable people could mean limits on people seeing their parents or grandparents over 70 for as long as 12 to 18 months until a vaccine is found.
• The timeline relies on SAGE scientists calculating how many new COVID-19 infections per day the UK’s test and trace capabilities can manage and an “impossible” political decision for Downing Street on how many deaths per day they are willing to accept in order to be able to lift some restrictions before there is a vaccine.

(sources with direct knowledge of the plan )

 

[Rajma]

What do you all think, for how long can China keep its borders closed to foreigners? Because as soon as they will reopen to masses I can't see how it won't spread there again given the densities of their cities.

 

[buchansleftleg]

Richard Branson offers his island as collateral as Virgin Atlantic and Virgin Australia face collapse


https://edition.cnn.com/2020/04/20/business/virgin-australia-richard-branson/index.html

That whole island would need disinfecting after that seedy bloke has been living there with his dodgy parties.

If you shone a blacklight over the island it would look like a plasterers' radio.

 

[0le]

That whole island would need disinfecting after that seedy bloke has been living there with his dodgy parties.

If you shone a blacklight over the island it would look like a plasterers' radio.

Some have mistaken it for an iceberg.

 

[Kag]

UK:

• A “best-case scenario” being worked on by the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) hopes to end lockdown restrictions for certain nonessential shops and industries in the short term, from early to mid-May.
• Some social distancing measures could then gradually be relaxed in the medium term, in June and July, eventually leading to the reopening of pubs and restaurants towards the end of summer.
• Long-term “shielding” for elderly and vulnerable people could mean limits on people seeing their parents or grandparents over 70 for as long as 12 to 18 months until a vaccine is found.
• The timeline relies on SAGE scientists calculating how many new COVID-19 infections per day the UK’s test and trace capabilities can manage and an “impossible” political decision for Downing Street on how many deaths per day they are willing to accept in order to be able to lift some restrictions before there is a vaccine.

(sources with direct knowledge of the plan)

I really struggle to believe that this can be maintained. I mean, plenty will buy into it. But plenty won’t. I can only work from anecdotal experience, but as I’ve been exercising, or on the rare occasions I’ve gone into work, I have seen lots of elderly people going about their business to some extent. By contrast, very few children or older youths.

How you do convince a 70+year old that may or may not have battled serious illness that they should not and will not spend time with their children and grandchildren? I’d sympathise with those who would choose to return to some sort of normality in their lives.

 

[zenith]

Social distancing is all well and good but what happens when we return to normal and that too in the absence of a vaccine.

It'll be the whole story all over again. Even with a handful of cases around the world, it can increase in no time.

Clearly climate is having no impact, as I'm in India where the temp is 40 degrees celsius and we continue to see rises despite a nationwide lockdown.

What seems to be the likely end game here.

 

[madzo2007]

UK:

• A “best-case scenario” being worked on by the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) hopes to end lockdown restrictions for certain nonessential shops and industries in the short term, from early to mid-May.
• Some social distancing measures could then gradually be relaxed in the medium term, in June and July, eventually leading to the reopening of pubs and restaurants towards the end of summer.
• Long-term “shielding” for elderly and vulnerable people could mean limits on people seeing their parents or grandparents over 70 for as long as 12 to 18 months until a vaccine is found.
• The timeline relies on SAGE scientists calculating how many new COVID-19 infections per day the UK’s test and trace capabilities can manage and an “impossible” political decision for Downing Street on how many deaths per day they are willing to accept in order to be able to lift some restrictions before there is a vaccine.

(sources with direct knowledge of the plan )

Buzzfeed - Revealed: The UK’s “Three Stage” Exit Strategy To Ease The Coronavirus Lockdown

 

[Shakesy]

Im a farmer and i can get every one of those?
A lot of businesses will open, i dont see any stories about any spike in supermarket workers getting infected but thats down to social distancing in those stores. More businesses that we think will reopen and safely as well but itll be a less profit simply because social distancing is so ingrained into us now.

If this is true then I just don't understand contagion. WHY are grocery store workers not being infected en masse? On those rare occasions that I risk my life going to the grocery store I always feel sorry for those who must brave this virus for a paycheck. Yet, most (I believe) don't get infected... Why? They don't have PPE.

I read several stories about people who've gone into a store with a mask, adhered to strict social distancing, never touched their face and still got sick. Why not the workers? Or do we just not read about them? I dunno. It's weird. Surely they have the second riskiest job after medical workers?

 

[Pexbo]

The virus won't go way until we get a vaccine or herd immunity.

We'll need to get serious in how we reopen the economy and then decide how we operate as a society, whilst people are still getting the virus and dying from said virus.

Do you just keep putting the same post through 4 or 5 different language translations before back to English and posting it here four or five times a day?

 

[Shakesy]

Do you just keep putting the same post through 4 or 5 different language translations before back to English and posting it here four or five times a day?

I did that with your comment: "Translating and publishing the same article 4-5 times in different languages, then in English, then 4-5 times?"

 

[Regulus Arcturus Black]

11 of 100 blood donors in Stockholm have had it.
Prof Jan Albert in clinical microbiology at Karolinska reckons it’s over 20% as the antibody test doesn’t catch all cases by any stretch.
Karolinska did this test last week.

https://www.svt.se/nyheter/inrikes/11-procent-av-stockholmarna-har-antikroppar-mot-covid-19

Thoughts @Pogue Mahone & especially @massi83 who doubted my 7.5% optimism last week as “pregnant women are at higher risk”.

 

[fergieisold]

11 of 100 blood donors in Stockholm have had it.
Prof Jan Albert in clinical microbiology at Karolinska reckons it’s over 20% as the antibody test doesn’t catch all cases by any stretch.
Karolinska did this test last week.

https://www.svt.se/nyheter/inrikes/11-procent-av-stockholmarna-har-antikroppar-mot-covid-19

Thoughts @Pogue Mahone & especially @massi83 who doubted my 7.5% optimism last week as “pregnant women are at higher risk”.

Thanks for posting this. I've been struggling with some of my more panic stricken colleagues about this kind of thing. There seems to be a very strong human response in a lot of people that rejects any optimistic results. It is completely baffling to me! They champion studies that predict doom and want to scoff at ones that might give a more mild opinion.

 

[Regulus Arcturus Black]

I told him this also already couple of days ago, but apparently because Swedish hospitals are so amazing, it wasn't possible.

This new test (see above) makes you sound like another know it all, know feck all.
Just because massi, the insufferable nitpicking pedant from redcafe “told me”, means naff all to me mate, I listen to experts.

Maybe take a step back and realise you don’t have all of the answers, if any. As I suggested, pregnant woman go into a completely different section of a hospital, nowhere near to where Covid-19 patients are doctors/nurses would be and weren’t/aren’t much more at risk, if at all.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

 

[Carolina Red]

Wtf

 

[Pexbo]

11 of 100 blood donors in Stockholm have had it.
Prof Jan Albert in clinical microbiology at Karolinska reckons it’s over 20% as the antibody test doesn’t catch all cases by any stretch.
Karolinska did this test last week.

https://www.svt.se/nyheter/inrikes/11-procent-av-stockholmarna-har-antikroppar-mot-covid-19

Thoughts @Pogue Mahone & especially @massi83 who doubted my 7.5% optimism last week as “pregnant women are at higher risk”.

Is that 11 in 100 indicating a sample size of 100 just a janky way of saying 11%?

 

[Sarni]

My brother is a huge anti-vaxxer and I can’t really bear discussing this with him anymore. The ‘hugely profitable’ vaccine business is such a common myth, it’s worth $60billion a year, that’s three times less than a fecking supplements business let alone alcohol or food. I blame internet for this common stupidity.

 

[Regulus Arcturus Black]

Is that 11 in 100 indicating a sample size of 100 just a janky way of saying 11%?

haha, yeah 11%.
Sample size was 100.
Chief epidemiologist here reckons the result could mean some serious affects of any possible herd immunity could/should be felt after a couple more weeks.

 

[Pexbo]

haha, yeah 11%.
Sample size was 100.
Chief epidemiologist here reckons the result could mean some serious affects of any possible herd immunity could/should be felt after a couple more weeks.

So both, sorry missed “or” there.

I don’t know any data scientist worth their salt who would make any predictions on a sample size of 100.

 

[massi83]

This new test (see above) makes you sound like another know it all, know feck all.
Just because massi, the insufferable nitpicking pedant from redcafe “told me”, means naff all to me mate, I listen to experts.

Maybe take a step back and realise you don’t have all of the answers, if any. As I suggested, pregnant woman go into a completely different section of a hospital, nowhere near to where Covid-19 patients are doctors/nurses would be and weren’t/aren’t much more at risk, if at all.

Don't be so precious. When we talk about Stockholm, do you mean city with 1m or greater area with 2.3m

You do understand that a sample of 100 blood donors fails both in sample size and in being unbiased.

Happy to make some sort of a bet. Minimum 1.000€ or 100€+loser doesn't post on this forum in 2021, so everybody wins mod has to escrow

 

[FireballXL5]

Watch the BBC completely ignore this story. To my mind this is huge, but hey, it's just democracy at stake.

 

[senorgregster]

@senorgregster The specificity of RT-PCR for SarsCov2 is higher than the sensitivity, right? I'm trying to look for it, but am not finding simple answers, my head is a bit fried anyway.

For the RT-PCR they are basically the same at or very near to 100% depending on the test in question. But remember the "positives" were contrived by spiking old swab specimens with various amounts of RNA and the testing values don't account for sampling differences etc.
You'll see huge variability in the ELISA and other immunoassays. They are all over the place. So far I think I've seen SN and SP from the 60s to 99%.

 

[Carolina Red]

SC Gov. Henry McMaster - "we're going to open up beaches and some retail stores"

Reporter - "have we met the federal guidelines for entering Phase 1?"

McMaster and the Dept. of Health rep - "no, we have not"

 

[Regulus Arcturus Black]

Don't be so precious. When we talk about Stockholm, do you mean city with 1m or greater area with 2.3m

You do understand that a sample of 100 blood donors fails both in sample size and in being unbiased.

Not my study, I “mean” nothing. Just passing it on as I did with the pregnant women study.
Not gonna get pulled into shitty debates again about studies I have nothing to do with.

 

[Hansa]

11 of 100 blood donors in Stockholm have had it.
Prof Jan Albert in clinical microbiology at Karolinska reckons it’s over 20% as the antibody test doesn’t catch all cases by any stretch.
Karolinska did this test last week.

https://www.svt.se/nyheter/inrikes/11-procent-av-stockholmarna-har-antikroppar-mot-covid-19

Encouraging news. Will be interesting to see the numbers needed to get herd immunity for a city of that size. The one unknown factor is: Apart from the older populace, how many of the general population have gone into hiding? The Apple tracker indicates a sharp decline in movement around the same time as the rest of the Nordics (far less movement in Stockholm than Sweden in general), so we might see smaller outbreaks later on when these people return to normal daily life.

 

[Regulus Arcturus Black]

Encouraging news. Will be interesting to see the numbers needed to get herd immunity for a city of that size. The one unknown factor is: Apart from the older populace, how many of the general population have gone into hiding? The Apple tracker indicates a sharp decline in movement around the same time as the rest of the Nordics (far less movement in Stockholm than Sweden in general), so we might see smaller outbreaks later on when these people return to normal daily life.

Enough to make a difference I’d say, from what I see anyway.
Younger people in City not caring as much as they should but still enough people doing the “right thing”.
So yeah, prob enough to make a difference when they return to normal life also.

 

[massi83]

Not my study, I “mean” nothing. Just passing it on as I did with the pregnant women study.

Not surprised that you aren't willing to put your money where your mouth is. Looking forward to more personal attacks instead

 

[Pogue Mahone]

11 of 100 blood donors in Stockholm have had it.
Prof Jan Albert in clinical microbiology at Karolinska reckons it’s over 20% as the antibody test doesn’t catch all cases by any stretch.
Karolinska did this test last week.

https://www.svt.se/nyheter/inrikes/11-procent-av-stockholmarna-har-antikroppar-mot-covid-19

Thoughts @Pogue Mahone & especially @massi83 who doubted my 7.5% optimism last week as “pregnant women are at higher risk”.

Is that literally 11 out of 100? Or another way of saying 11%? If the former, that's an absolutely tiny sample so wouldn't read much into it at all. In medical science, the bigger the sample size the more reliable the results. A study of 100 people would be a pretty useless way to learn about anything, never mind studying the way a virus is spreading through the population of an entire country! Think about it. How could 100 people (possibly all from the same location?) be in any way representative of the whole of Sweden?

There have been bigger (and hence more reliable) blood donor studies in other countries which have come up with lower prevalence. We already mentioned the Danish one, where 1500 donors were tested earlier in this thread (1.5% positive) and a similar study in Scotland found 6 out of 1000 tests were positive (0.6%)

https://figshare.com/articles/Serol...CoV2antibodiescollectedinMarch2020/12116778/2

Blood donors (like pregnant women) are more likely to have been around hospitals or have family members who are regular patients in hospital. The best possible analysis would be people randomly selected from the general public. In Iceland they did that study, randomly selecting a cohort of nearly 7000 people to be screened. 0.6% of them tested positive.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2006100?query=featured_home

So yeah, I'm still highly skeptical about what you're hoping to see in Sweden, in terms of prevalence in the community. I mean, it is possible that 1 or 2 million Swedes all got infected in the space of, what? 4 to 6 weeks? I'd have to say that's very very unlikely. Not with the mortality rates we're seeing in every other country. You'd be digging mass graves by now, if that was the case.

 

[Regulus Arcturus Black]

So yeah, I'm still highly skeptical about what you're hoping to see in Sweden, in terms of prevalence in the community. I mean, it is possible that 1 or 2 million Swedes all got infected in the space of, what? 4 to 6 weeks? I'd have to say that's very very unlikely. Not with the mortality rates we're seeing in every other country. You'd be digging mass graves by now, if that was the case.

Is it possible that 11% of 975,000 Stockholmers got infected in 6 weeks?.. absolutely I’d say.
Considering schools have remained open I’d imagine it’s rife in school kids, teachers and parents.

No-one knows the mortality rate still Pogue.

 

[Revan]

Is that literally 11 out of 100? Or another way of saying 11%? If the former, that's an absolutely tiny sample so wouldn't read much into it at all. In medical science, the bigger the sample size the more reliable the results. A study of 100 people would be a pretty useless way to learn about anything, never mind studying the way a virus is spreading through the population of an entire country! Think about it. How could 100 people (possibly all from the same location?) be in any way representative of the whole of Sweden?

There have been bigger (and hence more reliable) blood donor studies in other countries which have come up with lower prevalence. We already mentioned the Danish one, where 1500 donors were tested earlier in this thread (1.5% positive) and a similar study in Scotland found 6 out of 1000 tests were positive (0.6%)

https://figshare.com/articles/Serol...CoV2antibodiescollectedinMarch2020/12116778/2

Blood donors (like pregnant women) are more likely to have been around hospitals or have family members who are regular patients in hospital. The best possible analysis would be people randomly selected from the general public. In Iceland they did that study, randomly selecting a cohort of nearly 7000 people to be screened. 0.6% of them tested positive.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2006100?query=featured_home

So yeah, I'm still highly skeptical about what you're hoping to see in Sweden, in terms of prevalence in the community. I mean, it is possible that 1 or 2 million Swedes all got infected in the space of, what? 4 to 6 weeks? I'd have to say that's very very unlikely. Not with the mortality rates we're seeing in every other country. You'd be digging mass graves by now, if that was the case.

Totally agree with this.

100 is such a small sample to make it useless for anything.

Iceland's one is a bit worrying though. Officially, 0.5% of the population has been confirmed to have been infected. If a random testing showed only 0.6% being infected, it means that they did an almost perfect job on diagnosing cases (only 20% of the infected people were missed). Which might well be the case, considering the insane number of testing they have been doing (126k for 1 million people, compare it to 12k for the US, and 7k for the UK). It is bad news, but at the same time, it should be higher in the other countries where there was not enough testings, and consequently, many infected people were missed. Though I would bet, it is closer to 2-3% rather than 10-15%.

 

[Dumbstar]

SC Gov. Henry McMaster - "we're going to open up beaches and some retail stores"

Reporter - "have we met the federal guidelines for entering Phase 1?"

McMaster and the Dept. of Health rep - "no, we have not"

So enough Americans are now fully aware of the threat of covid. It's no longer something happening in a foreign terrorist land. Regardless of what Trump, OAN or their own community echo chambers are telling them.

The inevitable deaths that will come to their own doorsteps for visiting the beaches is all on them. Will reduce some of the Idiocrats living in those lands.

 

[Revan]

Is it possible that 11% of 975,000 Stockholmers got infected in 6 weeks?.. absolutely I’d say.
Considering schools have remained open I’d imagine it’s rife in school kids, teachers and parents.

No-one knows the mortality rate still Pogue.

No way. That would mean 200k people got infected. Yet there are less than 1000 deaths in Stockholm. For comparison, the province of Bergamo who has around the same population has had more than 4500 deaths at the beginning of April (likely raised since then). Why they should have 5 times more deaths than Stockholm? The only way for the numbers to match, is if every person there was infected (if you imagine Stockholm having 20% infections).

 

[Maagge]

Is that literally 11 out of 100? Or another way of saying 11%? If the former, that's an absolutely tiny sample so wouldn't read much into it at all. In medical science, the bigger the sample size the more reliable the results. A study of 100 people would be a pretty useless way to learn about anything, never mind studying the way a virus is spreading through the population of an entire country! Think about it. How could 100 people (possibly all from the same location?) be in any way representative of the whole of Sweden?

There have been bigger (and hence more reliable) blood donor studies in other countries which have come up with lower prevalence. We already mentioned the Danish one, where 1500 donors were tested earlier in this thread (1.5% positive) and a similar study in Scotland found 6 out of 1000 tests were positive (0.6%)

https://figshare.com/articles/Serol...CoV2antibodiescollectedinMarch2020/12116778/2

Blood donors (like pregnant women) are more likely to have been around hospitals or have family members who are regular patients in hospital. The best possible analysis would be people randomly selected from the general public. In Iceland they did that study, randomly selecting a cohort of nearly 7000 people to be screened. 0.6% of them tested positive.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2006100?query=featured_home

So yeah, I'm still highly skeptical about what you're hoping to see in Sweden, in terms of prevalence in the community. I mean, it is possible that 1 or 2 million Swedes all got infected in the space of, what? 4 to 6 weeks? I'd have to say that's very very unlikely. Not with the mortality rates we're seeing in every other country. You'd be digging mass graves by now, if that was the case.

Denmark tested for antibodies in 3989 blood donors and found 72 of them had developed them. They estimate that about 1.9 % of the population have had it when taking into account the uncertainty of the antibody test and geography of the tested, and that's looking through their most rose coloured glasses. Don't know what Sweden's playing at with that sample size.

 

[Carolina Red]

So enough Americans are now fully aware of the threat of covid. It's no longer something happening in a foreign terrorist land. Regardless of what Trump, OAN or their own community echo chambers are telling them.

The inevitable deaths that will come to their own doorsteps for visiting the beaches is all on them. Will reduce some of the Idiocrats living in those lands.

It just blows my mind that we are blatantly not following the guidelines of the Trump administration when our governor LOVES Trump.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Denmark tested for antibodies in 3989 blood donors and found 72 of them had developed them. They estimate that about 1.9 % of the population have had it when taking into account the uncertainty of the antibody test and geography of the tested, and that's looking through their most rose coloured glasses. Don't know what Sweden's playing at with that sample size.

That’s the most peculiar thing about it. Why a serious scientist would even try to draw conclusions about such a trivial amount of data.

 

[Arruda]

For the RT-PCR they are basically the same at or very near to 100% depending on the test in question. But remember the "positives" were contrived by spiking old swab specimens with various amounts of RNA and the testing values don't account for sampling differences etc.
You'll see huge variability in the ELISA and other immunoassays. They are all over the place. So far I think I've seen SN and SP from the 60s to 99%.

Yeah, but in practical terms the sensitivity must be limited by the sampling process... Whilst the specificity is not, I presume.

I say that because we had a patient (assymptomatic) whom went from positive to negative very shortly, unless we caught him exactly at the time of "recovery/cure" one of those should be false. I was arguing with my colleagues that it was much more likely that the negative was the false result.

I've seen at least one patient going pos-pos-neg-pos-neg-neg (cured) and that 4th test was very hard on him psychologically.

 

[Revan]

Denmark tested for antibodies in 3989 blood donors and found 72 of them had developed them. They estimate that about 1.9 % of the population have had it when taking into account the uncertainty of the antibody test and geography of the tested, and that's looking through their most rose coloured glasses. Don't know what Sweden's playing at with that sample size.

Yep, it has to be something like this. Maybe 5-10% in heavy hit areas like Lombardy or New York, but in most countries, it has to be around 2-3%.

Sweden might be somewhere in between. The death per capita there is much heavier than in Denmark (around 2-2.5 more), so you can also expect a higher percentage of the population to have been infected, which would put it around 5%.

 

[massi83]

Is that literally 11 out of 100? Or another way of saying 11%? If the former, that's an absolutely tiny sample so wouldn't read much into it at all. In medical science, the bigger the sample size the more reliable the results. A study of 100 people would be a pretty useless way to learn about anything, never mind studying the way a virus is spreading through the population of an entire country! Think about it. How could 100 people (possibly all from the same location?) be in any way representative of the whole of Sweden?

There have been bigger (and hence more reliable) blood donor studies in other countries which have come up with lower prevalence. We already mentioned the Danish one, where 1500 donors were tested earlier in this thread (1.5% positive) and a similar study in Scotland found 6 out of 1000 tests were positive (0.6%)

https://figshare.com/articles/Serol...CoV2antibodiescollectedinMarch2020/12116778/2

Blood donors (like pregnant women) are more likely to have been around hospitals or have family members who are regular patients in hospital. The best possible analysis would be people randomly selected from the general public. In Iceland they did that study, randomly selecting a cohort of nearly 7000 people to be screened. 0.6% of them tested positive.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2006100?query=featured_home

So yeah, I'm still highly skeptical about what you're hoping to see in Sweden, in terms of prevalence in the community. I mean, it is possible that 1 or 2 million Swedes all got infected in the space of, what? 4 to 6 weeks? I'd have to say that's very very unlikely. Not with the mortality rates we're seeing in every other country. You'd be digging mass graves by now, if that was the case.

Stockholm had a random sample study end of March, result was 2,5% on that time had it (not antibody). So 5-8% when including recovered. So 11% isn't impossible at all in Stockholm city (1m), impossible for Sweden and unlikely for Greater stockholm (2.3m). And it isn't contradictory to what I have said before. But in general the more biased and smaller the sample the more Regulus likes it.