> There's some evidence for the former due to a few random population > sampling exercise
The random population sampling exercises I've seen say that *MAYBE* there are a small fraction of people who have had it: say 3% of the population. (plus minus, but call it more than 1% and less than 10%) I find that most likely, but hope it isn't true, as that number would be too large for containment to be applicable, and too small for hopes for herd immunity (without a vaccination program, which would require a vaccine) to be anything but wishful thinking. -Dave In Switzerland we've actually been testing, and counting, dead (as well as symptomatic) people. And we have enough of them: currently ~200/million in my region. We have also had random population antibody tests ongoing (designed for six weeks, running for four), but as I understand it, they're waiting for the results of the studies on the accuracy of the antibody tests themselves before they're going to publish anything. Srijith, we're planning to reopen primary schools 11 May (only if the first reopening step on 27 April goes well). As I understand it, that decision was based on (a) looking at sweden, where they don't test enough and have a (for a nordic country*) lousy death curve, but have kept schools open (providing a useful pediatric control), and (b) our own experiences, that most children have been infected by their parents rather than by each other. In any case, we'll have a few weeks to see what happens to *other* country's children before we experiment with our own. (sorry if I'm behind; I'm on digest. do we have archives anywhere now?)
