Any and all updates regarding the COVID-19 will need a source provided. Please do your part in helping us to keep this thread maintainable and under control.
It is YOUR responsibility to fully read through the sources that you link, and you MUST provide a brief summary explaining what the source is about. Do not expect other people to do the work for you.
Conspiracy theories and fear mongering will absolutely not be tolerated in this thread. Expect harsh mod actions if you try to incite fear needlessly.
This is not a politics thread! You are allowed to post information regarding politics if it's related to the coronavirus, but do NOT discuss politics in here.
Added a disclaimer on page 662. Many need to post better.
On April 04 2020 02:03 TT1 wrote: Why would it be a good idea? What Sweden is doing is extremely irresponsible, regardless of the outcome. Any decision that puts society at risk is never a good idea..
I am not sure about that. You can always argue something is "irresponsible when lives are at stake" but in the end the hit the economy might take might be a bigger hit, people's overall well being and in worst case even people's lives considered.
Most experts say that a vaccine is at least a year away. Most experts also say that 60-70 % of the population will get corona eventually.
The real kicker is if you overload healthcare or not. We still have more than one third of ICU capacity left. If that, plus the reserve capacity, never goes critical then we should eventually get about the same result as everyone else. But without the full lockdown.
If it overloads. Well we know how that works out already.
Basically you can not hide forever so as long as you can flatten the peak below critical care it is fine.
I trust the goverment in that they do what they feel is best and that they do not think a full lockdown will have a significant impact in the end. But no one can know if they are right or wrong yet.
Like that's high level of cynisism(you do realize that if the healthcare overloads it means letting die the old, right?). NOBODY in the Europe can hide from the virus. We cannot stop it, we are trying to slow the spreading. Sweden has similar population as Cze: You have 6,5k detected/358dead We have 4,1k detected/51 dead. And if the person with corona is hit by a truck it is reported as death by corona as it is the #1 in the death priority in here. But maybe it will hit in the retirement homes, who knows, maybe we gonna get to your levels eventually.
The question is if 200 dead people is worth it. I say it is.
Edit: mind you we miss protective gear, testing capabilities and probably even more, I like to not follow news much, it's depressing. Yes, if we had the testing capabilities of Germany, we wouldn't have to be so strict. But we don't.
I'm not cynical. As I said I trust that the people in charge thought this through. Many things in this is complex. If we shut down primary schools our healthcare system would lose 38000 additional workers that need to take care of their kids. That would mean we can't take care of everyone. Other actions that countries have taken were deemed to have insignificant effect. Our politicians have thought this through and made a decision.
The die is cast already and we cannot go back in time. Whatever happens in the next three weeks is already decided by people being infected today. Either it was correct and in the end it works out just like most other countries, only earlier. Or it was the wrong call and shit goes bad.
So I wouldn't say I'm cynical at this point, I'm more fatalistic in my worldview.
On April 04 2020 04:06 Danglars wrote: Was there a reason the French responsible department was sequestering retirement home covid deaths from the national mortality count?
I can somewhat understand the healed number.
What Nouar said.
In hospital, you know the reason why people died. So you can update pretty easily what's going on on a daily basis. For EPHAD and diverse retirement homes, it's a bit more complicated. People can die from other things than covid. I lost two family members this week from those places, none of them related to covid (one cardiac arrest, and another one was in a terrible shape for a long time so it was just a matter of days or weeks). And spending tests on those who passed away is a waste of ressources towards people who still need it.
At least the government was open about the fact those numbers weren't included and they wanted to identify the causes of death before jumping the gun too quickly.
On April 04 2020 04:29 raynpelikoneet wrote: Well let me ask this deacon.frost; Why in you opinion the fatality rate of the virus is so much higher in France than let's say Germany atm?
A part of the answer is that Germany is testing, A LOT. So the real number of cases in Germany is probably much lower than ours. Now, that is only a partial answer, and I don't know why they have less cases, though this amount of testing allowed them to isolate more easily patients with milder symptoms (and all the people that had contact with them) that might have propagated the virus more.
I fail to understand how testing affects to the fatality ratio at least THAT drastically?
On April 04 2020 03:16 Nouar wrote: The numbers France is putting out are complicated to read...
Today, an additional number of deaths from the previous weeks in retirement homes was added. 588 deaths in hospital today, and total 1416 deaths in retirement homes (partial numbers from yesterday plus additional reported today).
Then you have the "healed" number. This one only includes people leaving the hospital. It doesn't include mild cases that were diagnosed, who stayed home, and who healed. That's probably the same for other countries.
We currently have 27k+ people hospitalised for Covid, including 6660 in ICU. 14k have already left hospitals, cured, but the amount of people in ICU, the most interesting metric, is not diminishing. There were 260 more total ICU patients today than yesterday. Again, it does not say what the turnover is, how many left ICU and how many needed ICU...
I read somewhere, sadly can't remember when or where so no source, that ICU stays for Covid can take up to 3 weeks. Which is why your likely not seeing turnover numbers, because they are rather low at this point. And also why ICU's are under so much stress, because people are entering but not leaving for an extended period.
Median time so far in Danish ICUs seem to be 18 days'ish based on purely anecdotal evidence. Mortality is high and new admissions are frequent so there is quite a bit of turnover.
On April 04 2020 04:29 raynpelikoneet wrote: Well let me ask this deacon.frost; Why in you opinion the fatality rate of the virus is so much higher in France than let's say Germany atm?
A part of the answer is that Germany is testing, A LOT. So the real number of cases in Germany is probably much lower than ours. Now, that is only a partial answer, and I don't know why they have less cases, though this amount of testing allowed them to isolate more easily patients with milder symptoms (and all the people that had contact with them) that might have propagated the virus more.
I fail to understand how testing affects to the fatality ratio at least THAT drastically?
Not directly the fatality ratio, but the amount of detected cases, which affects the ratio. If Germany tests and finds 3 times more cases than France, while France under-tests, the ratio appears skewed by a factor of 3.
Look at the amount of ICU cases in Germany, it's slightly more than half that of France. On March 26th when we had the number of people in ICU they have today, we had 1600 deaths. Germany currently has 1230.
On April 04 2020 04:41 raynpelikoneet wrote: I fail to understand how testing affects to the fatality ratio at least THAT drastically?
In average, an infected person will give it away to 3 person. That's an average, if you know you are sick, you can diminish that number to maybe 1 or less - if you are lucky. If you don't know anything, that can be way more than 3. Testing can't prevent everything but it can transform an exponential growth into something more linear.
On April 04 2020 04:29 raynpelikoneet wrote: Well let me ask this deacon.frost; Why in you opinion the fatality rate of the virus is so much higher in France than let's say Germany atm?
A part of the answer is that Germany is testing, A LOT. So the real number of cases in Germany is probably much lower than ours. Now, that is only a partial answer, and I don't know why they have less cases, though this amount of testing allowed them to isolate more easily patients with milder symptoms (and all the people that had contact with them) that might have propagated the virus more.
I fail to understand how testing affects to the fatality ratio at least THAT drastically?
Not directly the fatality ratio, but the amount of detected cases, which affects the ratio. If Germany tests and finds 3 times more cases than France, while France under-tests, the ratio appears skewed by a factor of 3.
Look at the amount of ICU cases in Germany, it's slightly more than half that of France. On March 26th when we had the number of people in ICU they have today, we had 1600 deaths. Germany currently has 1230.
I understand your point. But are you saying that for example France right now has actually 3x more (artificial number i put there) cases than Germany in reality? If that's the case in reality, why should we trust any numbers that we see other than deaths (i think those are counted quite accurately at least in western countries)?
On April 04 2020 03:16 Nouar wrote: The numbers France is putting out are complicated to read...
Today, an additional number of deaths from the previous weeks in retirement homes was added. 588 deaths in hospital today, and total 1416 deaths in retirement homes (partial numbers from yesterday plus additional reported today).
Then you have the "healed" number. This one only includes people leaving the hospital. It doesn't include mild cases that were diagnosed, who stayed home, and who healed. That's probably the same for other countries.
We currently have 27k+ people hospitalised for Covid, including 6660 in ICU. 14k have already left hospitals, cured, but the amount of people in ICU, the most interesting metric, is not diminishing. There were 260 more total ICU patients today than yesterday. Again, it does not say what the turnover is, how many left ICU and how many needed ICU...
Was there a reason the French responsible department was sequestering retirement home covid deaths from the national mortality count?
I can somewhat understand the healed number.
Yes, these are private sector retirement homes, from hundreds of providers. The number published by the government were for the public hospitals. They can probably manage to get the numbers for private hospitals and clinics more easily (they are still a bit underused), but it took a lot of time for all these providers to put out the numbers and for the government to aggregate them. There are around 18k suspected or proven cases in these homes... (out of 700k total) It's going to be ugly.
There is another scandal maybe brewing : labs. We have large-scales labs at the province level, used for water, animal, food hygiene testing etc... These are able to test, without the reagent limitation of small bio-labs as they have machines tuned with a variety of reagents. They just need their methodology validated to ensure their tests can detect Covid-19 (as they can run it on other coronaviruses) and could run dozens of thousands of tests per day with a 1-week advance notice.
On April 04 2020 02:03 TT1 wrote: Why would it be a good idea? What Sweden is doing is extremely irresponsible, regardless of the outcome. Any decision that puts society at risk is never a good idea..
I am not sure about that. You can always argue something is "irresponsible when lives are at stake" but in the end the hit the economy might take might be a bigger hit, people's overall well being and in worst case even people's lives considered.
Most experts say that a vaccine is at least a year away. Most experts also say that 60-70 % of the population will get corona eventually.
The real kicker is if you overload healthcare or not. We still have more than one third of ICU capacity left. If that, plus the reserve capacity, never goes critical then we should eventually get about the same result as everyone else. But without the full lockdown.
If it overloads. Well we know how that works out already.
Basically you can not hide forever so as long as you can flatten the peak below critical care it is fine.
I trust the goverment in that they do what they feel is best and that they do not think a full lockdown will have a significant impact in the end. But no one can know if they are right or wrong yet.
Like that's high level of cynisism(you do realize that if the healthcare overloads it means letting die the old, right?). NOBODY in the Europe can hide from the virus. We cannot stop it, we are trying to slow the spreading. Sweden has similar population as Cze: You have 6,5k detected/358dead We have 4,1k detected/51 dead. And if the person with corona is hit by a truck it is reported as death by corona as it is the #1 in the death priority in here. But maybe it will hit in the retirement homes, who knows, maybe we gonna get to your levels eventually.
The question is if 200 dead people is worth it. I say it is.
Edit: mind you we miss protective gear, testing capabilities and probably even more, I like to not follow news much, it's depressing. Yes, if we had the testing capabilities of Germany, we wouldn't have to be so strict. But we don't.
I'm not cynical. As I said I trust that the people in charge thought this through. Many things in this is complex. If we shut down primary schools our healthcare system would lose 38000 additional workers that need to take care of their kids. That would mean we can't take care of everyone. Other actions that countries have taken were deemed to have insignificant effect. Our politicians have thought this through and made a decision.
The die is cast already and we cannot go back in time. Whatever happens in the next three weeks is already decided by people being infected today. Either it was correct and in the end it works out just like most other countries, only earlier. Or it was the wrong call and shit goes bad.
So I wouldn't say I'm cynical at this point, I'm more fatalistic in my worldview.
We closed them. And opened centers for kids of health workers, which have lower kids per group to not spread the thing. C'mon, I shouldn't have written this I must say that many these centers were opened by hospitals or supporters, not sure if actually the government did anything in this, but I believe they were talking about it(again, I am not looking into it much)
On April 04 2020 04:29 raynpelikoneet wrote: Well let me ask this deacon.frost; Why in you opinion the fatality rate of the virus is so much higher in France than let's say Germany atm?
A part of the answer is that Germany is testing, A LOT. So the real number of cases in Germany is probably much lower than ours. Now, that is only a partial answer, and I don't know why they have less cases, though this amount of testing allowed them to isolate more easily patients with milder symptoms (and all the people that had contact with them) that might have propagated the virus more.
I fail to understand how testing affects to the fatality ratio at least THAT drastically?
If you test everyone you can, it means you can put people into the quarantine more quickly(thus lower the spreading) which protects the most vulnerable a lot(many 'kids' buy supplies for their parents).
Also the German healthcare system is not overloaded, not sure about France. And, as usual, do they report the dead the same way? (i don't mean tweaking numbers, but countries around the world report corona deaths differentally)
On April 04 2020 04:29 raynpelikoneet wrote: Well let me ask this deacon.frost; Why in you opinion the fatality rate of the virus is so much higher in France than let's say Germany atm?
A part of the answer is that Germany is testing, A LOT. So the real number of cases in Germany is probably much lower than ours. Now, that is only a partial answer, and I don't know why they have less cases, though this amount of testing allowed them to isolate more easily patients with milder symptoms (and all the people that had contact with them) that might have propagated the virus more.
I fail to understand how testing affects to the fatality ratio at least THAT drastically?
Not directly the fatality ratio, but the amount of detected cases, which affects the ratio. If Germany tests and finds 3 times more cases than France, while France under-tests, the ratio appears skewed by a factor of 3.
Look at the amount of ICU cases in Germany, it's slightly more than half that of France. On March 26th when we had the number of people in ICU they have today, we had 1600 deaths. Germany currently has 1230.
I understand your point. But are you saying that for example France right now has actually 3x more (artificial number i put there) cases than Germany in reality? If that's the case in reality, why should we trust any numbers that we see other than deaths (i think those are counted quite accurately at least in western countries)?
I don't know about other countries, but we are very limited in the amount of tests we can run, so people with mild symptoms are not tested at all, and are just sent home in isolation. Which is why our ratio of hospitalised people versus total detected cases is more than 50% (if you count the dead), while it should realistically be more around 15/20%.
So yes, there is a large underreporting. It is better to look at the number of people in hospitals or in critical condition, rather than detected cases.
And even then, the numbers are not reported accurately between countries. It is impossible that the US has 250k reported cases, but only 5k in ICU. Same for the UK, 700 deaths a day, but only 163 in ICU ? No. (looking at https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/ )
Looking at the deaths is only not good, since deaths are usually pretty delayed, probably by between 1 to 3 weeks.
Bill De Blasio joins Brian Kemp in not knowing the most basic of things. He says that it was only in the last 48 hours that the US learned that it can be transmitted via asymptomatic people. I think BDB gets the worst marks for me out of any leader so far in the US.
On April 04 2020 04:29 raynpelikoneet wrote: Well let me ask this deacon.frost; Why in you opinion the fatality rate of the virus is so much higher in France than let's say Germany atm?
A part of the answer is that Germany is testing, A LOT. So the real number of cases in Germany is probably much lower than ours. Now, that is only a partial answer, and I don't know why they have less cases, though this amount of testing allowed them to isolate more easily patients with milder symptoms (and all the people that had contact with them) that might have propagated the virus more.
I fail to understand how testing affects to the fatality ratio at least THAT drastically?
Not directly the fatality ratio, but the amount of detected cases, which affects the ratio. If Germany tests and finds 3 times more cases than France, while France under-tests, the ratio appears skewed by a factor of 3.
Look at the amount of ICU cases in Germany, it's slightly more than half that of France. On March 26th when we had the number of people in ICU they have today, we had 1600 deaths. Germany currently has 1230.
I understand your point. But are you saying that for example France right now has actually 3x more (artificial number i put there) cases than Germany in reality? If that's the case in reality, why should we trust any numbers that we see other than deaths (i think those are counted quite accurately at least in western countries)?
Numbers of confirmed cases means nothing. If anything look at number of confirmed cases divided by number of performed tests to get a better view. However this is not accurate either over long periods of time since the availability and methods of testing change.
Also if you look at deaths you need to consider if healthcare (ICU) is overloaded or not in any given region. And what is the makeup of the infected population. Swedens deathrate spiked partially because of increased infection but mainly because we failed to protect the elderly in Stockholm. As long as the spread was mainly in the younger population it looked far better.
What I am trying to say is simply; do not compare numbers. If you are not an expert it's a futile exercise that will give you very little. Look to your own city, region, country. Are you doing OK or not? Then look to what you can do yourself to improve on that.
On April 04 2020 02:03 TT1 wrote: Why would it be a good idea? What Sweden is doing is extremely irresponsible, regardless of the outcome. Any decision that puts society at risk is never a good idea..
I am not sure about that. You can always argue something is "irresponsible when lives are at stake" but in the end the hit the economy might take might be a bigger hit, people's overall well being and in worst case even people's lives considered.
Most experts say that a vaccine is at least a year away. Most experts also say that 60-70 % of the population will get corona eventually.
The real kicker is if you overload healthcare or not. We still have more than one third of ICU capacity left. If that, plus the reserve capacity, never goes critical then we should eventually get about the same result as everyone else. But without the full lockdown.
If it overloads. Well we know how that works out already.
Basically you can not hide forever so as long as you can flatten the peak below critical care it is fine.
I trust the goverment in that they do what they feel is best and that they do not think a full lockdown will have a significant impact in the end. But no one can know if they are right or wrong yet.
Like that's high level of cynisism(you do realize that if the healthcare overloads it means letting die the old, right?). NOBODY in the Europe can hide from the virus. We cannot stop it, we are trying to slow the spreading. Sweden has similar population as Cze: You have 6,5k detected/358dead We have 4,1k detected/51 dead. And if the person with corona is hit by a truck it is reported as death by corona as it is the #1 in the death priority in here. But maybe it will hit in the retirement homes, who knows, maybe we gonna get to your levels eventually.
The question is if 200 dead people is worth it. I say it is.
Edit: mind you we miss protective gear, testing capabilities and probably even more, I like to not follow news much, it's depressing. Yes, if we had the testing capabilities of Germany, we wouldn't have to be so strict. But we don't.
I'm not cynical. As I said I trust that the people in charge thought this through. Many things in this is complex. If we shut down primary schools our healthcare system would lose 38000 additional workers that need to take care of their kids. That would mean we can't take care of everyone. Other actions that countries have taken were deemed to have insignificant effect. Our politicians have thought this through and made a decision.
The die is cast already and we cannot go back in time. Whatever happens in the next three weeks is already decided by people being infected today. Either it was correct and in the end it works out just like most other countries, only earlier. Or it was the wrong call and shit goes bad.
So I wouldn't say I'm cynical at this point, I'm more fatalistic in my worldview.
We closed them. And opened centers for kids of health workers, which have lower kids per group to not spread the thing. C'mon, I shouldn't have written this I must say that many these centers were opened by hospitals or supporters, not sure if actually the government did anything in this, but I believe they were talking about it(again, I am not looking into it much)
They have had this exact scenario (closing schools/daycare for non-essentials) prepared here as well for about two weeks. But they haven't made that call yet. It's a good idea. But they have chosen not to do it (yet). We will see next week I guess.
On April 04 2020 05:07 Nevuk wrote: Bill De Blasio joins Brian Kemp in not knowing the most basic of things. He says that it was only in the last 48 hours that the US learned that it can be transmitted via asymptomatic people. I think BDB gets the worst marks for me out of any leader so far in the US.
On April 04 2020 02:03 TT1 wrote: Why would it be a good idea? What Sweden is doing is extremely irresponsible, regardless of the outcome. Any decision that puts society at risk is never a good idea..
I am not sure about that. You can always argue something is "irresponsible when lives are at stake" but in the end the hit the economy might take might be a bigger hit, people's overall well being and in worst case even people's lives considered.
Most experts say that a vaccine is at least a year away. Most experts also say that 60-70 % of the population will get corona eventually.
The real kicker is if you overload healthcare or not. We still have more than one third of ICU capacity left. If that, plus the reserve capacity, never goes critical then we should eventually get about the same result as everyone else. But without the full lockdown.
If it overloads. Well we know how that works out already.
Basically you can not hide forever so as long as you can flatten the peak below critical care it is fine.
I trust the goverment in that they do what they feel is best and that they do not think a full lockdown will have a significant impact in the end. But no one can know if they are right or wrong yet.
Like that's high level of cynisism(you do realize that if the healthcare overloads it means letting die the old, right?). NOBODY in the Europe can hide from the virus. We cannot stop it, we are trying to slow the spreading. Sweden has similar population as Cze: You have 6,5k detected/358dead We have 4,1k detected/51 dead. And if the person with corona is hit by a truck it is reported as death by corona as it is the #1 in the death priority in here. But maybe it will hit in the retirement homes, who knows, maybe we gonna get to your levels eventually.
The question is if 200 dead people is worth it. I say it is.
Edit: mind you we miss protective gear, testing capabilities and probably even more, I like to not follow news much, it's depressing. Yes, if we had the testing capabilities of Germany, we wouldn't have to be so strict. But we don't.
I'm not cynical. As I said I trust that the people in charge thought this through. Many things in this is complex. If we shut down primary schools our healthcare system would lose 38000 additional workers that need to take care of their kids. That would mean we can't take care of everyone. Other actions that countries have taken were deemed to have insignificant effect. Our politicians have thought this through and made a decision.
The die is cast already and we cannot go back in time. Whatever happens in the next three weeks is already decided by people being infected today. Either it was correct and in the end it works out just like most other countries, only earlier. Or it was the wrong call and shit goes bad.
So I wouldn't say I'm cynical at this point, I'm more fatalistic in my worldview.
We closed them. And opened centers for kids of health workers, which have lower kids per group to not spread the thing. C'mon, I shouldn't have written this I must say that many these centers were opened by hospitals or supporters, not sure if actually the government did anything in this, but I believe they were talking about it(again, I am not looking into it much)
They have had this exact scenario (closing schools/daycare for non-essentials) prepared here as well for about two weeks. But they haven't made that call yet. It's a good idea. But they have chosen not to do it (yet). We will see next week I guess.
The worst case is when the medicine workers start getting sick, but I believe you're the more responsible country in this.
On April 04 2020 05:11 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote: [...]
What I am trying to say is simply; do not compare numbers. If you are not an expert it's a futile exercise that will give you very little. Look to your own city, region, country. Are you doing OK or not? Then look to what you can do yourself to improve on that.
So, we've stayed at home for weeks. We've got lockdown but why are cases increasing? Why don't they fall? Do you think quarantine isn't followed because that's what I'm thinking right now. I have no other explanation why it's so bad..
On April 04 2020 06:01 SC-Shield wrote: So, we've stayed at home for weeks. We've got lockdown but why are cases increasing? Why don't they fall? Do you think quarantine isn't followed because that's what I'm thinking right now. I have no other explanation why it's so bad..
Do you go to work at Bulgaria or stay at home until you ahve to go for shopping? If it's not a full proper quarantine, then the numbers will slow down, but not stop or go lower, it's already out.
Also, do you test more? with more testing you have better detection
On April 04 2020 06:01 SC-Shield wrote: So, we've stayed at home for weeks. We've got lockdown but why are cases increasing? Why don't they fall? Do you think quarantine isn't followed because that's what I'm thinking right now. I have no other explanation why it's so bad..
?? Are you being serious ? Because the incubation times for the virus is 2-15 days, and people still work. You should not expect numbers to go down before 3 weeks at a minimum. It took China 2 monthes to reduce it to quasi-0 (which should not be a target).
If you had delayed the confinement, then the number would not stay stable, they would have increased exponentially, overloading your hospitals. You have currently very few cases in Bulgaria, which is good, so it gives time to ramp up testing capabilities and increase hospitals readiness.
Of course you won't be able to stay confined for a year until a vaccine, but you are gaining a headstart, and will be able to control the epidemic much better than countries who did it too late.
On April 04 2020 06:01 SC-Shield wrote: So, we've stayed at home for weeks. We've got lockdown but why are cases increasing? Why don't they fall? Do you think quarantine isn't followed because that's what I'm thinking right now. I have no other explanation why it's so bad..
In an ideal scenario you would interact solely with grocery stores and that's it. Unfortunately, there's a lot of jobs where people talk and interact with stuff around them, share info, public transit etc. This doesn't include the straight idiots that are doing stuff like hosting birthday parties, block parties, coronavirus parties, freedom parties etc.
I'm glad my province is doing well, but the projections are pretty dire.
3000-15000 deaths with full measures implemented versus 100,000 with 0 measures.
In the best case scenario, they squeak under the ICU bed limit, in the worst case, they blow right through it, so it's critical to implement strong measures to minimize spread now.
EPT
(i don't mean tweaking numbers, but countries around the world report corona deaths differentally)
