Coronavirus: Infection is likely if you stay in the UK, ONS says

People are now as likely to contract the coronavirus in England as they would be if they went abroad on vacation, official data suggests.

Before today, people were more likely to test positive for the infection if they had traveled overseas in the past 30 days.

But the Office for National Statistics (ONS) today revealed that “there is no more difference” in infection rates between those who were swabbed after returning from abroad and those who did not leave the UK.

ONS data was based on thousands of people who took Covid-19 tampons between September 25 and October 8 in England. No comparable data are available for Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland.

Vacationers involved in the study had returned from countries across Europe, including Spain, Greece and Italy, all of which have seen a spike in coronavirus cases over the past month, as well as from Hong Kong and South Africa.

It comes after Downing Street said it was investigating the possibility of reducing the travel quarantine time from half to seven days in order to increase compliance and encourage people to book holidays.

A spokesperson pointed out that no decision has been made, while Nicola Sturgeon confirmed that Scotland will not reduce its 14-day quarantine.

The ONS study found that, on average, between 0.46 and 0.53% of people who stayed in the UK for 30 days before being dabbed tested positive for Covid-19.

The figure for those who have traveled abroad stood between 0.41 and 0.81%, according to ONS data released today.

Statisticians insisted that the slight overlap in the range means that there is now “no more difference” in the case rate between people who traveled abroad and those who didn’t.

The ONS said this is the first time since mid-August that people staying at home are as likely to contract the coronavirus as those traveling overseas since mid-August.

They had previously been at the same level of risk between July 31 and August 13, the first period for which data was available.

But the figures have never managed to permanently contract the virus abroad.

Instead, they only suggest that travelers contracted the disease on vacation due to the difference in infection rates.

Experts never asked if the higher rates were due to those people actually taking more risks in everyday life.

The risk is calculated by calculating the percentage of positive swabs in those who went abroad in the 30 days preceding the swab.

This rate, known as test positivity, is then compared with the figure among participants who have never traveled.

Only 3% of the people who were swabbed for Covid-19 (5,259 out of 175,313) had actually traveled abroad, going to summer locations including Turkey, Portugal and Croatia.

This was a lower percentage than between the end of August and the beginning of September, when it was at 5%.

Professor Kevin McConway, an Open University statistician, pointed to a mid-August ONS estimate that found that people who had traveled overseas were seven times more likely to test positive.

But he added: “Since then, the difference in the rate of positive results has narrowed more and more.

“It is very tempting to assume that, at the beginning of the year, when infection rates were much lower than they are today, people were reporting infections from their travels abroad.

“In fact this could be the explanation, at least in part.

And one could go on to speculate that the reason there is no clear difference now is that infections brought from abroad simply do not statistically manifest beyond the much greater number of infections transmitted within the country.

“But that’s not the only possible explanation. The problem is that it is observational data and carries with it all the difficulties of interpretation that apply to any observational research. “

He warned that there would be “a lot of differences” between people who traveled overseas and people who didn’t. Professor McConway said: ‘Overseas travel itself may not be the cause of the positivity difference, or just part of the cause. We just can’t tell.

The ONS report also found that 55% of people who tested positive for the virus did not have any symptoms at the time of the test, causing fears that infections could be much more prevalent than previously thought.

They said only 45% of people tested in England between 28 September and 11 October had symptoms.

And only 33% of those who tested positive suffered from at least one of the three telltale symptoms: high fever, constant cough, or loss of taste and smell.

While this suggests that a large percentage of cases may be asymptomatic, experts point out that the swabs only had symptoms recorded at the time of testing.

It is possible that those who have been tested developed the telltale warning signs soon after being buffered.

The virus works by infecting the cells in the nose and deactivating their immune response, which means that the body’s immune system does not immediately detect an infection. This means that victims will continue their daily activities and spread the virus for several days before feeling sick.

Most infections between 25 September and 8 October were recorded between the ages of 17 and 24, highlighting the fact that the British second wave was led by a particular age group.

Up to 5% of those swabbed in this age group tested positive for the virus in the most affected regions, such as the North West, compared to less than 1% in people aged 50 and over.

Among people between the ages of 25 and 34, up to 1.3% tested positive.

Test positivity rates were also higher in urban areas than in rural areas. The ONS said the rate was between 0.56 and 0.88 for urban areas, but in rural areas this dropped from 0.35 to 0.62%.