« So I ordered a shop crane | Main | Back to pondering a new workstation »

Monday, 27 April 2020


I don't think you need to test everyone but we ought to test a LOT of the people, people from all over the country. It's hard to make accurate guesses without good data.

A large random sample from all over would, in principle, be a good thing - preferably testing both for current infection and for antibodies - BUT we need to know, with decent accuracy, what the limitations of the test are.
If we don't know what inaccuracies the test and the associated processes introduce, we'll get a large amount of data but it'll be wrong. Which is pretty much where we are now: lots of data, with enough contradictions that most of it must be wrong.
Now, here's a cute idea: are there frozen blood samples, from whatever sources, spanning the past few years? Might be interesting to run the antibody test on them - if it comes up positive, either the virus has been around longer than we think or there's something wrong with the test.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

My Photo


  • Have you spotted a fnord lately?
  • The Secretary disavows any knowledge of my actions.
  • The Gnomes of Zurich are not responsible for any content on this site.

Blogroll: 2012!

Blog powered by Typepad