Sero survey

-- or nearly 1 in every 4 - have had the disease and recovered till June end, manifold more than the 126,323 confirmed till Wednesday. They also suggest that the disease kills only 0.07% of people infected, as opposed to the 2.94% fatality rate in the city.

The findings led experts to conclude that the peak of infections in the Capital was definitely over. “The biggest silver lining is that if we have such high population that was exposed in the past but did not largely display serious symptoms or succumbed -- then it is as good as a vaccine,” Dr Sujeet K Singh, director, NCDC, told HT on Tuesday.

But, experts maintain that there is no room for complacency and people need to continue with precautionary measures such as social distancing and wearing masks.

Epidemiologists believe an infection prevalence rate of 40-65% in a particular population could be adequate to reach a level known as herd immunity, when the number of people who have never had the disease (and are not protected by antibodies that infected people build) dwindle to such an extent that an infectious disease dies out due to a lack of vulnerable hosts.

Jain, when asked about herd immunity by reporters he was interacting with, said even experts differ on this concept. “Usually, it is perceived as a stage when around 40% to 70% people have recovered from the disease. We cannot comment on herd immunity at this stage. We will get a better picture of that after the numbers of fresh cases stop emerging,” he said.

The minister added that “there definitely was spread in the community”. “Whether one can call it community spread is a very technical thing as per the guidelines and protocols that are followed,” he said, asking people to remain cautious.

“Around 77% of people are still vulnerable and we cannot be complacent. We should be serious about maintaining social distance, wearing masks and washing our hands regularly.”

According to Jain, the protocol for the new surveys is still being finalised. “We are chalking out a strategy. It will be spread across the city, cover both containment zones and normal areas, include individuals of different age groups and the sample size will not be less than the previous survey,” he said.

Officials in the health department, who asked not to be named, said the survey will be carried out by district surveillance teams and health department officials between the 1st and 5th of every month.

The teams will fan out across neighbourhoods from where they will pick out people according to the stratification they need to follow, varying samples by age, gender and locality to represent as random a set as possible, this person said. The tests will be done through the Covid Kavach kit developed by Gujarat-based Zydus Cadila.

NCDC, which carried out the previous survey on behalf of the Delhi government, is unlikely to be involved this time. The local teams carrying out the process will report to the district magistrates.

“The sero surveys need to be repeated periodically to be able to establish a trend with respect to the disease spread. When ICMR approved antibody (blood) testing, it had advised all states to conduct sero-surveillance using the test from time to time to get a sense of how the disease has spread within the community. This is to be done by states and the Centre will pitch in if they require assistance, especially those with high disease burden,” said a Union health ministry official, requesting anonymity.

Dr Lalit Kant, the former, former head of epidemiology and communicable diseases department in the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR), said: “Sero-survey done periodically can help the government focus their efforts – both in terms of speed and scale – in protecting the population still vulnerable to exposure to the Sars-cov-2 virus.”

“As far as the sample size is concerned, it is determined through a formula that primarily depends on prevalence rate of the disease. In Delhi, the prevalence rate has gone up, so the sample size for the upcoming survey is likely to be higher,” he added.

Experts cautioned that Covid-19 still is scantly understood, especially with how it can lead to no symptoms in large proportions of the infected population, and that antibody testing in itself was a complicated process due to the way the virus behaves.

“We are dealing with a new virus here and there is a lot of unknown. For instance, at this juncture, we do not know how long antibodies would stay in the human body after recovery from Covid. That is what makes trend analysis important,” said Puneet Misra, professor of community medicines in the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) Delhi.

“Methodology and sample selection will play a crucial role in the upcoming sero-surveys and the government should consider involving experts and specialists in this regard,” he added.

(With inputs from Rhythma Kaul) stays the disqualification proceedings before the speaker, which is in conflict with the Kihoto judgment and, hence, we have approached the Supreme Court to stay the high court order”, Fernandes said.

That case stemmed from disqualification of some MLAS of the Nagaland Legislative Assembly and crystallised many principles regarding the powers of the speaker.

In his press conference, Joshi too referred to the case, Kihoto Hollohan vs Zachillhu and Others, dating back to 1992, and that in it, the Supreme Court ruled that till the speaker takes a decision on disqualification applications, injunction orders aren’t passed related to members against whom applications are pending. “I am disappointed with the court’s directions,” he added. “This matter is of urgent nature. The order has reduced my constitutional authority, which is prima facie against the apex court’s decision.”

In that case, the top court ruled that the judicial review should not cover any stage prior to the making of a decision by the speaker/chairman. No interference would be permissible at an interlocutory stage of the proceedings, the court said then. Joshi’s petition emphasises that.

“In view of the aforesaid, the (high court) order is ex-facie illegal, perverse, and in derogation of the powers of the Speaker under the Constitution and hence deserve to be set aside,” it said.

The Rajasthan high court, on Tuesday, directed the speaker not to take any action against Pilot and other MLAS till July 24.

This order was passed after Pilot and the other MLAS had approached the high court on July 15, challenging the speaker’s notice which had asked them to furnish an explanation by July 17 on why they shouldn’t be disqualified from the assembly for their conduct, which the Congress party alleged was detrimental to the interest of the party and showed their intention to quit the party. “I am bound to pass orders on these applications as a constitutional authority,” Joshi said in the press conference.

Pilot and Rajasthan chief minister Ashok Gehlot have been at odds since the Congress government came to power in 2018. Gehlot was made CM while Pilot had to settle for the post of Deputy CM. Gehlot blamed Pilot for the party’s rout in the Lok Sabha elections in Rajasthan last year; Vaibhav Gehlot, the chief minister’s son, lost from Jodhpur in the election. Pilot, in turn, believed that he had no powers, with even appointments in ministries under him being made by Gehlot.

The tussle became public earlier this month after Rajasthan police sought to question Pilot over allegations of attempting to pull down the Congress government in Rajasthan. Pilot was eventually sacked as deputy CM.

The speaker’s notice to Pilot was based on the disqualification petition filed by the chief whip of the Congress in Rajsthan, Mahesh Joshi. Joshi, in his plea, cited the absence of the MLAS from two Congress legislature party meetings, held on July 13 and 14, despite specific instructions to attend it. This, he claimed, showed their intention to leave the Congress.

Pilot and the other dissident MLAS have maintained they never had the intention to leave the Congress and were exercising their right to criticise the leadership and the functioning of CM Ashok Gehlot. In a democratic set-up, voicing disagreement with policies or decisions made by the party doesn’t amount to acting against the interests of the party, so as to lead to disqualification, they said in their high court petition.

“Kihoto Hollohan is very specific that no quia-timet actions (injunctions to prevent wrongful acts) can be entertained. The speaker under the 10th schedule, may act as a tribunal, but judicial review is available only after the final judgment. Courts do not get into the internal functioning of legislatures is the principle of law since Bradlaugh v Gosset (UK judgment of 1884) and Keshav Singh case (of 1964) in India”, senior counsel Sanjay Hegde told HT.

The matter will be heard by a three-judge bench headed by justice Arun Mishra and also comprising justices BR Gavai and Krishna Murari. “The petition by the speaker is pre-mature since the honourable high court has only reserved its order. It is only appropriate that the party to the case wait for the high court order before approaching the Supreme Court in appeal,” Pilot’s lawyer S Hariharan told HT.