EPTCoronavirus and You - Page 177
| Forum Index > General Forum |
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. | ||
|
Slydie
2007 Posts
| ||
|
Nouar
France3270 Posts
Brazil removes online data on pandemic, hiding soaring deaths Here is a further update from Reuters on Brazil, which has removed from public view months of data on its Covid-19 epidemic. The health ministry in Brazil - which has the world’s second-largest coronavirus outbreak - removed the data from a website that had documented the epidemic over time and by state and municipality. The ministry also stopped giving a total count of confirmed cases, which have shot past 672,000, more than anywhere outside the United States, or a total death toll, which passed Italy this week, nearing 36,000 by Saturday. “The cumulative data ... does not reflect the moment the country is in,” Bolsonaro said on Twitter, citing a note from the ministry. “Other actions are underway to improve the reporting of cases and confirmation of diagnoses.” Bolsonaro has played down the dangers of the pandemic, replaced medical experts in the health ministry with military officials and argued against state lockdowns to fight the virus, hobbling the country’s public health response. Neither Bolsonaro nor the ministry gave a reason for erasing most of the data on the covid.saude.gov.br website, which had been a key public resource for tracking the pandemic. https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2020/jun/07/coronavirus-uk-to-partly-reopen-churches-australia-blm-protests-defy-health-pleas-live-updates?page=with:block-5edc4be78f083999a26db664#block-5edc4be78f083999a26db664 | ||
|
CuddlyCuteKitten
Sweden2891 Posts
From the outset the promise was that the strategy would be science based and adaptable to changes in knowledge. However from the position we are in now several failures are evident. - excessive deaths from failure to protect the elderly (lack of knowledge/overconfidence in the care provided in care homes) - lack of testing. This was not part of the initial strategy but the government promised that they would increase testing capacity in case it would be needed as well as doing random sampling to track disease spread. There was a clear failure in making both of these things happen. - lack of disease tracing. The conclusion (without evidence) after only a few weeks was that disease tracing was impossible and it was never really attempted after that. For the initial phase that is understandable but for weeks we have known that it is very possible and most of the country has very low levels of infection that are suitable for this strategy. Yet there are no real tracing today that I am aware off. Even measures for self tracing that were developed (an app similar to the one used in other countries) were pulled back by the government. - no scientific approach. Because of the many unique situations around our approach a strong scientific approach would have been good to get actual numbers of the spread in schools, workplaces etc. Yet very little data have been gathered by the goverment. However social distancing worked fine. In my personal opinion the largest problem was that despite early promises the government went all in on the belief that the virus had an extremely high spread with many asymptomatic and despite saying that other measures would be worked on they never really did. When it turned out that the assumptions were wrong actions have been very slow and there is no obvious change in strategy. I think this is mostly due to a failure in leadership from both the government, ministers in charge and involved agencies. I should be noted that much of the recent changes are pushed by either the scientific communities (doing antibody tests on their own and publishing results forcing the government to do the same at a more rapid pace) or private companies (starting to offer antibody testing to anyone). At the moment the situation is not terrible but it's not great either and it's incredibly reckless to not beat down the infection where it's small and at the same time lifting the internal travel recommendations keeping people in place. However with the promised more scientific approach and a quick change of strategy I think things could have worked out better since social distancing has proven to be enough to stop the exponential spread. | ||
|
Artisreal
Germany9235 Posts
On June 07 2020 20:22 Slydie wrote: One thing I absolutely hate about the "failed" Sweden strategy is that letting people work, not imprisoning the whole population and letting kids go to schools seems to have no value at all. It is all about that virus, and Sweden's death toll is still comparable to a flu season. An important caveat is missing in your analysis though. You have no risk assessment regarding side or long term effects of am infection, even a mild one. Thus you cannot take that into account in your reasoning which makes it rather flawed in my opinion. | ||
|
Harris1st
Germany7410 Posts
On June 06 2020 16:32 arbiter_md wrote: I see 4 ways to get out of this virus: 1 - Test, trace and isolate until the virus disappears from the country, like in New Zealand. 2 - Vaccine. 3 - Efficient treatment. 4 - Herd immunity. I think 1 is the best case. And it could be achieved pretty much everywhere if we had cheap and fast testing available. South Korea and Australia are doing quite well and might have success there. Unfortunately most of the money have gone to 2 & 3. Cases 2 and 3 look like a gamble currently. There are money in, but nobody knows if we will get there. Case 4 is looking like the most countries expect to be in. And that's the worst case scenario. I don't know what kind of math the people estimating it are doing, but having reached 5% in Spain in half a year, and needing to reach 70% means it will take 7 years! If the case 4 is the final result in the most of the countries, then the Sweden approach is the best here. Even if it was faster than 7 years, herd immunity seems quite impossible at this moment. I imagine the virus changes, developing further from the original one, as well as antibodies in humans disappear again. Or are they lifelong? No idea how that works | ||
|
Slydie
2007 Posts
On June 07 2020 23:22 Artisreal wrote: An important caveat is missing in your analysis though. You have no risk assessment regarding side or long term effects of am infection, even a mild one. Thus you cannot take that into account in your reasoning which makes it rather flawed in my opinion. Children barely even get mild infections. I strongly disagree that accounting for every improbable worst-case scenario is a good way to make decisions which are that impactful for personal freedom and everyday life. This is a way to justify any surpressive policy. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Longshank
1648 Posts
On June 07 2020 23:22 Artisreal wrote: An important caveat is missing in your analysis though. You have no risk assessment regarding side or long term effects of am infection, even a mild one. Thus you cannot take that into account in your reasoning which makes it rather flawed in my opinion. Are the increased numbers of cancer deaths for instance that will inevitably come, factored in to the numbers of the countries that went into lockdown? Every number and projection you see is flawed, we're years from understanding the effects of this pandemic. | ||
|
L1ghtning
Sweden353 Posts
The east asian countries have had 3 primary strategies, lockdowns being neither of them. Firstly, you need to protect the borders either by not allowing ppl from certain countries to get in, or by testing them or forcing them to quarantine. Secondly, you encourage the population to take measures to restrict the spread, like keeping a distance and using face masks. A lockdown can be used to achieve this artificially. Thirdly, you conduct large scale testing and tracing so that you can locate clusters and then isolate them. If you look at the western countries that have been effective at suppressing the virus, then testing and tracing have been a vital part of their strategy. Germany and Iceland stands out in Europe when it comes to testing. Iceland didn't even implement lockdowns, but they quarantined those who entered the country. Australia and New Zealand have also taken a more offensive east asian inspired approach, but with lockdowns. The nordic countries have done an ok job tracking and they have also benefited from having a less significant initial infection and a lower population density. If you look at things that way, then Sweden does stand out. All their neighbours have done an excellent job and have pretty much stopped the spread. Sweden's passiveness when it comes to the borders and tracing the spread lead to the virus getting a big foothold in Stockholm. So why does it look even worse in Belgium and the UK? Two primary reasons is that they being closer to the european center of the pandemic got the virus earlier and it took a deeper foothold faster. Their much higher population density also ensured that it escalated faster. The thing about Sweden is that Stockholm have been hit just as hard as similar cities in Belgium and the UK, while most parts of the country were not really affected at first. But we have seen rising numbers in other major cities over the last month or two. USA and Canada seems to be somewhere inbetween the two extremes. Some parts like New York and Quebec are doing as poorly as the worst examples in Europe, while it gradually gets better and better as you go westward. Anyway, this huge eastward bias in the NA pretty much proves that the pandemic reached NA mainly via Europe, and not via China as many want to claim. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/21/world/coronavirus-missing-deaths.html Here is a link that shows that all countries with significant reported covid19 deaths have had unusually big overall death spikes, while every country that have been mildly affected by the virus (like Germany and Norway) looks pretty normal. This proves that the pandemic is real and that its effects have been extraordinary. When it comes to herd immunity and antibody studies, it's possible that the tests don't report everybody that have been infected, since many who didn't have symptoms may not develop antibodies. But by looking at the most affected cities and countries, we can make a best case prediction on the assumption that they're close to achieving herd immunity. Doing that, you arrive at maybe 1 per 1000 dying out of the total population, which is already really bad. This is the current death rate in San Marino. Belgium is pretty close. Many major cities like Stockholm, London and New York are around there or higher. We should be careful about comparing cities and countries though, since different cultures and population densities will lead to different herd immunity rates. | ||
|
Laurens
Belgium4558 Posts
Our hospitals didn't even get close to full capacity, everything felt fairly well controlled from the start. It's just the high death count due to including all care homes or however you call that in English. | ||
|
Slydie
2007 Posts
When it comes to herd immunity and antibody studies, it's possible that the tests don't report everybody that have been infected, since many who didn't have symptoms may not develop antibodies. No. I saw an article in a Norwegian paper about a study showing that 99% do indeed develop antibodies. It is interesting how quickly the narrative changed from "not overloading the HC system" to "stopping the pandemic completely." I guess it is because it is far less contagious than first feared, but also that death tolls of 0,2-2% of all infected in the end was considered morally unacceptable, even with an average victim around 80 years old. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
L1ghtning
Sweden353 Posts
On June 10 2020 05:41 Slydie wrote: No. I saw an article in a Norwegian paper about a study showing that 99% do indeed develop antibodies. It is interesting how quickly the narrative changed from "not overloading the HC system" to "stopping the pandemic completely." I guess it is because it is far less contagious than first feared, but also that death tolls of 0,2-2% of all infected in the end was considered morally unacceptable, even with an average victim around 80 years old. Yeah, I've heard experts make claims in both directions when it comes to antibodies. Since I'm no expert, I don't know who I should believe. But it certainly makes sense that the tests would catch everybody, because what would even be the point otherwise? If these antibody studies are accurate, if Spain and Sweden were both under 10% when they did those tests, then it's looking really bad for the future in those countries that doesn't aim to stop the spread. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
On June 10 2020 05:41 Slydie wrote: No. I saw an article in a Norwegian paper about a study showing that 99% do indeed develop antibodies. It is interesting how quickly the narrative changed from "not overloading the HC system" to "stopping the pandemic completely." I guess it is because it is far less contagious than first feared, but also that death tolls of 0,2-2% of all infected in the end was considered morally unacceptable, even with an average victim around 80 years old. New Zealand completely defeated it. It can be done, we're all just too shitty. | ||
|
Belisarius
Australia6233 Posts
Again, the presence of antibodies does not guarantee that the person is immune. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22610 Posts
On June 10 2020 06:59 Mohdoo wrote: Small island nation with no land borders and low population density can totally be compared to something like Europe or the US...New Zealand completely defeated it. It can be done, we're all just too shitty. | ||
|
warding
Portugal2397 Posts
On June 10 2020 06:07 JimmiC wrote: That seems like misinformation to me. While it is true that people 80 and higher are at the highest risk there is no way the mean is around 80. This is from May 13th and is just for New York. of the 15230 people that died 7419 were over 75, 3788 65-74, 3413 45-64, 18-44 601, and 9 0-17. https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-sex-demographics/ I would like to know where you got the average age is 80 because I hear people say stuff like this fairly frequently and I see no data to support it. It is like people don't understand the difference between a average and most cases. It would be near impossible for the average to be 80 when there is less than 50% of the dead 75 and above. In Portugal, 1009 out of 1492 deaths were 80+ years old. 284 were between 70-79. I'm quoting straight from the daily reports. And we've got a pretty low CFR, so it's not the case that nursing home infections were rampant over here. I'd probably bet the US covid death demographics are heavily impacted by obesity and diabetes. | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
On June 07 2020 20:27 Nouar wrote: Absolutely nothing to see in Brazil, Bolsonaro decided to remove the statistics and tracking of cases and deaths published by the government. Nothing to hide, like, AT ALL. Of course. https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2020/jun/07/coronavirus-uk-to-partly-reopen-churches-australia-blm-protests-defy-health-pleas-live-updates?page=with:block-5edc4be78f083999a26db664#block-5edc4be78f083999a26db664 Looks like they at least provide data for the last day, so folks who are keeping track can put it all together. Seems like Worldometers, at the very least, is still keeping up its standard data. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
ZigguratOfUr
Iraq16955 Posts
On June 10 2020 08:23 LegalLord wrote: Looks like they at least provide data for the last day, so folks who are keeping track can put it all together. Seems like Worldometers, at the very least, is still keeping up its standard data. A Brazilian supreme court judge has also issued an order to resume publishing the statistics the way they were published before. They've also pulled the data on death certificates for the past few years (which apparently fluctuated wildly) which means no one can figure out the excess death statistics. | ||
| ||
