Covid - effect on bird tourism (1 Viewer)

Mysticete

Well-known member
United States
Yeah...the big tour companies I don't worry too much about, although a few of them DO operate lodges as well, like Tropical Birding.
 

James Lowther

Well-known member
There are no tests giving false positives 30% of the time. False negatives maybe. It’s impossible to accurately gauge false positive and false negative rates due to the lack of a gold standard test to compare against. However during the period of lowest transmission (late June) about 0.4% of “NHS” tests were positive. So that’s the absolute ceiling to the false positive rate (assuming there were no true positives at that time). In the same period the ONS community survey had a positivity rate of 0.05% using the same method. Current positivity rate of NHS tests is about 7%. So as an experienced interpreter of virus PCR tests I would estimate that the vast majority of positive test results at the moment are legitimate (certainly >90% probably >99%)
Cheers
James
 

peter.jones

Well-known member
There are no tests giving false positives 30% of the time. False negatives maybe. It’s impossible to accurately gauge false positive and false negative rates due to the lack of a gold standard test to compare against. However during the period of lowest transmission (late June) about 0.4% of “NHS” tests were positive. So that’s the absolute ceiling to the false positive rate (assuming there were no true positives at that time). In the same period the ONS community survey had a positivity rate of 0.05% using the same method. Current positivity rate of NHS tests is about 7%. So as an experienced interpreter of virus PCR tests I would estimate that the vast majority of positive test results at the moment are legitimate (certainly >90% probably >99%)
Cheers
James

yes, good maths.
 

Trystan

Well-known member
There are no tests giving false positives 30% of the time. False negatives maybe. It’s impossible to accurately gauge false positive and false negative rates due to the lack of a gold standard test to compare against. However during the period of lowest transmission (late June) about 0.4% of “NHS” tests were positive. So that’s the absolute ceiling to the false positive rate (assuming there were no true positives at that time). In the same period the ONS community survey had a positivity rate of 0.05% using the same method. Current positivity rate of NHS tests is about 7%. So as an experienced interpreter of virus PCR tests I would estimate that the vast majority of positive test results at the moment are legitimate (certainly >90% probably >99%)
Cheers
James

Although the test itself is not the only reason there might be a false positive. If you were a lab expected to churn out a certain number of tests per day and you couldn't cope, the safest thing to do would be to not complete the tests and just report a positive result.

One reason why we might be seeing a high rise in positive results without the same level of deaths as earlier in the year...
 

opisska

Jan Ebr
Poland
Although the test itself is not the only reason there might be a false positive. If you were a lab expected to churn out a certain number of tests per day and you couldn't cope, the safest thing to do would be to not complete the tests and just report a positive result.

One reason why we might be seeing a high rise in positive results without the same level of deaths as earlier in the year...

Unless you have concrete evidence, this is straight out conspiracy theory.
 

Trystan

Well-known member
Unless you have concrete evidence, this is straight out conspiracy theory.

I don't know how to explain the results of the tests. Either the tests are wrong, or the people doing the tests aren't doing them properly.
 

opisska

Jan Ebr
Poland
I don't know how to explain the results of the tests. Either the tests are wrong, or the people doing the tests aren't doing them properly.

Why would that be so?

Oh, you mean because of the anecdotal story you presented before? People with mild symptoms may have only a small amount of virus that's hard to detect and/or quickly cleared by the immune system, hence the lack of symptoms. Still doesn't guarantee they are not infectious There can be a small fraction of false positives, but tiny, as explained thoroughly above. Even if it's small, it can just happen that you witnessed a case, someone has to.

In the absence of actual evidence, you are just spreading wild nonsense that serves nothing but to undermine the public trust in the tests and epidemioligical measures.
 
Last edited:

Paul Chapman

Well-known member
One reason why we might be seeing a high rise in positive results without the same level of deaths as earlier in the year...

Daily hospital admissions are currently about a third of the peak (1,139/3,564), numbers in hospital are about 40% (7,850/19,617) and individuals on ventilators are about one quarter (743/3,247).

You can expect deaths to increase as well as all of those stats this week but treatments are better.

Of course, one of the main differences is the age demographic of infections which was also a major reason of the low German mortality in the first wave. The age demographic of the second wave is now changing.

All the best
 
Last edited:

dantheman

Bah humbug
Deaths follow cases by a couple of weeks anyway. In the first round/wave a lot of elderly/infirm folk who caught it in old people's homes etc and a lack of ppe in hospitals etc caused disproportionate death tolls. All incredibly sad and even with foresight preventable to a large degree (we even predicted it here on BF).

Think I read that Netherlands have started sending patients to Germany as they have reached capacity and situation is going to get worse all over Europe.

Obviously there is more testing and more asymptomatic people are being caught than first time around, but that doesn't take away from the fact that a second wave is occurring right now.
 

Trystan

Well-known member
Why would that be so?

Oh, you mean because of the anecdotal story you presented before? People with mild symptoms may have only a small amount of virus that's hard to detect and/or quickly cleared by the immune system, hence the lack of symptoms. Still doesn't guarantee they are not infectious There can be a small fraction of false positives, but tiny, as explained thoroughly above. Even if it's small, it can just happen that you witnessed a case, someone has to.

In the absence of actual evidence, you are just spreading wild nonsense that serves nothing but to undermine the public trust in the tests and epidemioligical measures.

No, I'm expressing my own lack of trust on a public forum in relation to concerns over travel and why I would choose not to do so right now.

Please moderate your tone when addressing me directly, you are very impolite.
 

opisska

Jan Ebr
Poland
No, I'm expressing my own lack of trust on a public forum in relation to concerns over travel and why I would choose not to do so right now.

Please moderate your tone when addressing me directly, you are very impolite.

You are spreading dangerous propaganda, I don't give a damn that you think I am "impolite" lol.
 

Trystan

Well-known member
You are spreading dangerous propaganda, I don't give a damn that you think I am "impolite" lol.

You are not just impolite, you are obnoxious. Since you seek to censor others opinions, then I will censor you.

Welcome to my ignore list
 

dantheman

Bah humbug
Back (more or less) on topic, is there much point in travel restrictions between countries, when travel within countries is essentially not being restricted? And it is everywhere, anyway?

(I can understand it with vulnerable communities which are otherwise being protected, or a few island nations which are or are trying to be, covid free.)
 
Last edited:

Trystan

Well-known member
Back (more or less) on topic, is there much point in travel restrictions between countries, when travel within countries is essentially not being restricted? And it is everywhere, anyway?

(I can understand it with vulnerable communities which are otherwise being protected, or a few island nations which are or are trying to be, covid free.)

Yes apologies for that, I didn't expect to be attacked for raising a point about testing accuracy when it's being used to determine travel.

I looked at some destinations where there are internal travel restrictions such as Costa Rica and this would be prohibitive for a birding trip, also it was possible to go to Antigua, but you would have to be there for 14 days before being allowed to go to Barbuda, also a non starter.

I think the first time round when we were moving into lock down and flights were still coming in from China, Italy etc, it was crazy because they had so many more cases than us.

Now the quarantine maybe less useful for countries with similar R rates but if the testing or the data gathering are not uniform, you end up comparing apples with oranges so the quarantine does make sense.

I wonder if some countries heavily reliant on tourism will have to decide to risk it though. The balance between the virus and the economy cannot be ignored forever
 

James Lowther

Well-known member
Although the test itself is not the only reason there might be a false positive. If you were a lab expected to churn out a certain number of tests per day and you couldn't cope, the safest thing to do would be to not complete the tests and just report a positive result.

One reason why we might be seeing a high rise in positive results without the same level of deaths as earlier in the year...

Or the lizard men are hacking into the PCR machines?
 

dantheman

Bah humbug
Spain did, or tried to, open up to tourism as soon as it could after its own heavy lockdown after the first wave iirc.

That recent Ireland rarity thread exposed the issue - but the number of new cases per head of population is currently comparable to the UK. So all rather a moot point unless travel was heavily restricted within Ireland itself. (EDIT: I think it may have been though?)

Moving further afield (intercontinental) with sensible precautions being taken, and large numbers of people travelling for non-tourism purposes ecotourists, if they take sensible (and people now know what is sensible) precautions ...

Of course, if it's all about trying to reduce possible frivolous interactions/travel as part of a wider plan then it makes sense, but it does all seem a bit like trying to close the door after the horse has bolted ..
 
Last edited:

Trystan

Well-known member
Spain did, or tried to, open up to tourism as soon as it could after its own heavy lockdown after the first wave iirc.

That recent Ireland rarity thread exposed the issue - but the number of new cases per head of population is currently comparable to the UK. So all rather a moot point unless travel was heavily restricted within Ireland itself.

Moving further afield (intercontinental) with sensible precautions being taken, and large numbers of people travelling for non-tourism purposes ecotourists, if they take sensible (and people now know what is sensible) precautions ...

Of course, if it's all about trying to reduce possible frivolous interactions/travel as part of a wider plan then it makes sense, but it does all seem a bit like trying to close the door after the horse has bolted ..

And yet in Italy tourism also resumed without the issues Spain had initially, though beginning to accelerate now.

What was different?

For me it boils down to accepting its not going away and deciding what is an acceptable level of control to apply to reduce impact on health services versus economic and psychological damage of too much control.

Unlikely to get any consensus on that nationally, let alone internationally.
 

Paul Chapman

Well-known member
Deaths follow cases by a couple of weeks anyway. In the first round/wave a lot of elderly/infirm folk who caught it in old people's homes etc and a lack of ppe in hospitals etc caused disproportionate death tolls. All incredibly sad and even with foresight preventable to a large degree (we even predicted it here on BF).

Think I read that Netherlands have started sending patients to Germany as they have reached capacity and situation is going to get worse all over Europe.

Obviously there is more testing and more asymptomatic people are being caught than first time around, but that doesn't take away from the fact that a second wave is occurring right now.

21 days after daily admissions peak:-
01.04.20 - 3,564 peak daily admissions
10.04.20 - 19,617 peak numbers in hospital
18.04.20 - 3,247 peak ventilators
21.04.20 - 1,224 peak daily deaths

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/

Travel is of course difficult from/through Europe because Europe is out of control and will be for the winter as no economy can 'afford' a full lockdown:-

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

Hopefully, a vaccine will come but it is currently difficult to imagine birding tourism without tests to travel and quarantine on return.

Stay safe all.
 

James Lowther

Well-known member
No need. The sheeples are already subservient and accept everything at face value.

Indeed. For example your entire thesis of labs dealing with a heavy backload by inventing positive tests seems to rest on the fact you uncritically believed your friends when they told you they tested positive then later on tested negative (shocker). But, maybe they were lying to you? Maybe they are Russian agents trying to sow discord in the UK? Trust no-one.

Anyway, pointless to engage with this sort of stuff.
Kids, if you believe this whole thing is a conspiracy then nothing I say will make any difference.

If you’re interested in the scientific perspective then let me reassure you that false positive results are very infrequent. There is ample data in the public domain to demonstrate this.

Cheers

James
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top