> I wouldn't be shocked to see a retrospective on this in the future tell us that we've been seeing the spread of availability of the test rather than the disea

> I wouldn't be shocked to see a retrospective on this in the future tell us that we've been seeing the spread of availability of the test rather than the disease. Ok, I could buy into that (and I really hope that's the case - though I'm still doubtful). The main thing I didn't realise was that the tests didn't show who had had it. Thanks for taking the time to work your point through with me.