Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - pietkuip

Pages: [1] 2 3
1
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: May 24, 2020, 04:35:16 AM »


New York Times covers front page with 1,000 Covid-19 death notices

The New York Times has filled the entire front page of Sunday’s paper with the death notices of victims from across the country.

--------------------------------------

Trump Plays Golf at His Virginia Club as U.S. Coronavirus Death Toll Nears 100,000
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/05/trump-plays-golf-virginia-club-coronavirus-deaths-rise.amp

On a day when the number of deaths in the United States from the coronavirus got close to reaching the 100,000-mark, the presidential motorcade arrived at the Sterling club at 10:27 a.m. Reporters at the scene noted that while Secret Service members were all wearing masks, Trump and his golfing buddies went mask free. Footage from the golf outing appeared to show Trump riding in his golf cart by himself without a caddy. And there were at least some exceptions to social distancing rules as Trump could be seen patting another golfer on the shoulder at one point.

Trump’s lack of golf has clearly been on his mind lately. “I’d really like to play golf but it’s too busy right now,” he told reporters earlier this month. He also called into a PGA golf program on NBC last weekend and talked about how much he yearned for the sport. “I do miss it. I haven’t played, really, since this problem that we have started. I haven’t been able to play golf for a while. I’ve been very busy, and I think that it’s just one of those things, but we’re getting back to normal,” Trump said.

Andrew Kaczynski posted a clip on Twitter of Trump calling into Fox and Friends to complain Obama was playing golf when there were a whopping two cases of Ebola in the United States.

https://mobile.twitter.com/KFILE/status/1264224632976150529

----------------------------------------


2
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: May 23, 2020, 03:12:53 PM »
She didn't predict that. She said it was possible, but there is no way of telling, because there are still so many unknowns, on so many levels.

Qusetion (paraphrased): Do you have an IFR estimate?

Answer:"I think the epidemic has largely come and gone in this country, so it would be definitely less than 1/1000, probably closer to 1/10000."

You see the 'I think'? And can you post everything she says in that particular segment, instead of minequoting?

What's the problem with a lower IFR? Why does it have to be maximized? The data is still very incomplete and possibly faulty. That's why there's a lot of pushback from serious scientists, and I can guarantee you they aren't white supremacist Trumputin conspiracy theorists.

I suppose I should take her seriously but not literally? 

This conversation has gotten quite ridiculous.  You accuse everyone of inflating the severity of this crisis, then you promote sources that do the opposite. 

IFR is very likely greater than 0.5.  A much lower IFR means a different policy response is warranted.  Promoting a much lower IFR than reality corresponds to promoting, above honest appraisal, a policy response that is appropriate for that lower IFR.


3
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: May 23, 2020, 01:21:47 AM »
To throw some science onto the pile, here is a preprint meta-analysis of IFR estimates:

A systematic review and meta-analysis of published research data on COVID-19 infection-fatality rates
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.03.20089854v2.full.pdf

Quote
The meta-analysis demonstrated a point-estimate of IFR of 0.75% (0.49-1.01%) with high heterogeneity (p<0.001).

...

Within distinct study types, there was a difference in the point-estimates for IFR. Published research had  a  much  lower  point-estimate  (modelling:  0.57%,  0.22-0.69%,  observational:  0.46%,  0.14-0.90%) than  pre-prints  (1.06%,  0.81-1.3%),  although  the  lowest  heterogeneity  was  seen  in  the  pre-print research.

4
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: May 23, 2020, 12:07:12 AM »
As of May 22nd, New York City has posted the following COVID-19 attributed deaths (from https://www1.nyc.gov/site/doh/covid/covid-19-data.page):

18333 confirmed deaths
4753 probable deaths

The 2019 Census estimate for New York City's population is (from https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/newyorkcitynewyork,bronxcountybronxboroughnewyork,kingscountybrooklynboroughnewyork,newyorkcountymanhattanboroughnewyork,queenscountyqueensboroughnewyork,richmondcountystatenislandboroughnewyork/PST045219):

8336817

If we assumed that everyone in NYC had been infected and there is no undercounting, this gives an IFR of:

Confirmed Only: 18333 / 8336817 = 0.22%
Confirmed + Probable: (18333 + 4753) / 8336817 = 0.27%

That is the absolute floor for what the IFR could be. Claiming that the IFR is 0.2% or below is complete rubbish when we already have observations demonstrating that it is higher.

5
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: May 22, 2020, 05:42:08 PM »
I just wanted to pull that detail out.  IFR right now is about 0.05% assuming everyone in the UK has been infected already and no one else will die.

If IFR is 0,05% then 40 million people out of a total of 8,6  million in NYC were infected.

(since they had cca 20000 dead, which is 0,25% of the population)


...she should be reading this forum, we settled on cca 1% a month ago :)

6
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: May 21, 2020, 04:16:12 AM »
Covid-19 Has Cut the Life Expectancy of New Yorkers by 5 Years, Report Estimates
https://gizmodo.com/covid-19-has-cut-the-life-expectancy-of-new-yorkers-by-1843571085

A report released Wednesday provides some early insight into the damage covid-19 has already wrought on one of the hardest-hit regions: New York City. It concludes that the first wave of the outbreak has shaved five years off the life expectancy of NYC residents.

https://preventepidemics.org/covid19/science/insights/life-expectancy-in-new-york-city/

To come up with its estimate, the report’s authors first looked at excess deaths reported in New York City between March and May of this year, meaning deaths above the average baseline reported in previous recent years.

The authors tried to calculate the impact that these excess deaths, up until May 14, have had on the life expectancy of New Yorkers, using the latest 2017 figures. That year, life expectancy for someone born in New York City was estimated to be 81.2 years. But the outbreak, the authors estimated, has led to a drop in life expectancy of five years.

“This should be seen as a preliminary estimate of the potential scale of the impact as there will be more deaths due to covid-19, our methods were simple and the limited amount of publicly available data required us to make many assumptions,” the authors wrote.

... Past massive outbreaks of disease, like the 1918-1919 pandemic flu and outbreaks of HIV in Africa, have similarly led to temporary drops in life expectancy, the authors noted.

Some people, including politicians and health officials, have argued or implied that those dying from covid-19 were already in poor health and unlikely to live for much longer anyway. Leaving aside the cruelty of devaluing a person’s life based on their age or health, that probably isn’t even true: Studies have tried to estimate the average years of life lost to covid-19, finding that people who were killed by the disease may have typically have lived up to a decade longer.

----------------------------------

Critical Illness Common In New York COVID-19 Inpatients: Study
https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/05/critical-illness-common-new-york-covid-19-inpatients-study

Of 1,150 COVID-19 adult patients hospitalized in New York City from Mar 2 to Apr 1, 257 (22%) were critically ill, and 101 (39%) of them died, according to the largest known US prospective study of coronavirus patients.

In the prospective cohort study, published yesterday in The Lancet, researchers from Columbia University and two affiliated NewYork-Presbyterian Hospitals in Manhattan reviewed electronic medical records and lab and radiographic findings of COVID-19 patients in respiratory failure.

The most common symptoms of the 257 patients included shortness of breath, fever, cough, muscle pain, and diarrhea. Median time from symptom onset to hospitalization was 5 days; black, Hispanic, and Latino patients sought care later in their illness than white patients. Ninety-four (37%) of the patients were still hospitalized as of Apr 28. Median observation period after hospitalization was 19 days.

Fifty-nine (62%) were Hispanic or Latino, and 13 (5%) were healthcare personnel. Of the total, 82% had one or more underlying illness, the most common of which were high blood pressure (162 [63%]) and diabetes (92 [36%]); 119 (46%) were obese, including 39 (71%) of 55 patients younger than 50 years.

Of the 257 patients, 203 patients (79%) required mechanical ventilation for a median of 18 days, 170 (66%) received vasopressors for low blood pressure, and 79 (31%) needed dialysis.

Median time to clinical deterioration after hospitalization was 3 days. Using the multivariable Cox model, the authors determined that advanced age, chronic heart disease, chronic lung disease, and elevated levels of inflammatory marker interleukin-6 (IL-6) and the blood clot indicator D-dimer were independently associated with in-hospital death.

Median age was 62 years, and 171 of 257 (67%) were men.

The vast majority of patients (229 of 257 [89%] received antibiotics, and 208 (81%) were prescribed antiviral drugs: 185 (72%) were given hydroxychloroquine, and 23 (9%) received remdesivir. Sixty-eight (26%) patients received corticosteroids, and 44 (17%) were given IL-6 receptor antagonists for inflammation.

... The study helps characterize the effect of COVID-19 on critically ill patients.

"Of particular interest is the finding that over three quarters of critically ill patients required a ventilator and almost one third required renal dialysis support," he said. "This has important implications for resource allocation in hospitals, where access to equipment and specialised staff needed to deliver this level of care is limited."

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31189-2/fulltext

7
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: May 13, 2020, 09:16:03 AM »
Leaked White House Data Shows Infections Spiking More Than 1,000% In Rural Areas That Backed Trump
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/unreleased-white-house-report-shows-coronavirus-rates-spiking-heartland-communities-n1204751?cid=sm_npd_ms_tw_ma

https://www.salon.com/2020/05/12/leaked-white-house-data-shows-infections-spiking-more-than-1000-in-rural-areas-that-backed-trump/

A leaked unreleased White House coronavirus task force report showing cases spiking in areas across the country has undercut President Donald Trump's claim that cases are declining across the nation.

"You know, the numbers are coming down very rapidly all throughout the country, by the way," Trump declared at a Monday news conference. "There may be one exception, but all throughout the country, the numbers are coming down rapidly."

This is, of course, not true. Though cases are decreasing in 14 states, they are rising in nine states, according to The New York Times. A lack of widespread testing in 27 other states, plus Washington and Puerto Rico, suggests that cases in those areas are being undercounted.

But a leaked coronavirus task force report obtained by NBC News shows that some parts of the country — rural counties in Tennessee and Kansas — have seen cases balloon by more than 1,000% in a matter of one week. Other counties in Missouri, Nebraska, Minnesota and Wisconsin saw increases of more than 400%.

Dr. John Ross, a professor at Harvard Medical School, pointed out that all but one of the top 10 counties that saw the largest increases voted for President Donald Trump in 2016.

The top 10 cities in the report, which was produced on May 7, saw cases increases by more than 72% over seven days. Some areas, like St. Louis and Central City, Ky., saw cases skyrocket by 650% over that span. St. Cloud, Minn., saw cases increase by more than 400%. Other cities like Gainesville, Ga., Racine, Wisc., and Nashville saw increases of more than 100% over a single week.


https://mobile.twitter.com/cfarivar/status/1259996575620710400

A separate graph listing "locations to watch" include Kansas City, Mo., and Charlotte, which saw increases of more than 200% over the previous week.

The report found that statewide cases in Minnesota increased by nearly 100% over a single week while New Mexico, Tennessee, Wisconsin and the nation's capital saw increases of more than 40%.

Despite the alarming increases, Trump has continued to publicly and falsely claim that cases are falling nearly everywhere.

"Coronavirus numbers are looking MUCH better, going down almost everywhere," he tweeted Tuesday.

Medical professionals criticized Trump's attempts to spin rising death counts.

"Anybody that claims we're on a downward trajectory nationally is out of touch with reality," Dr. Irwin Redlener, the director of the Columbia University National Center for Disaster Preparedness, told NBC News, adding that even the rising numbers do not tell the full story. "There isn't a single state in the union that has sufficient testing."

Trump has also complained to advisers about the way that deaths are counted, arguing that the "real numbers are actually lower," Axios reported last week.

But medical experts, including those on Trump's own task force, say the opposite is true.

"Most of us feel that the number of deaths are likely higher than" the 80,000 that is currently reported, Dr. Anthony Fauci, the head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, testified to a Senate committee on Tuesday. "The number is likely higher. I don't know exactly what percent higher, but almost certainly, it's higher."



--------------------------------

Arizona Responds to Projected Rise In COVID-19 Cases by Ordering Experts to Stop Making Models
https://www.salon.com/2020/05/07/arizona-responds-to-projected-rise-in-covid-19-cases-by-ordering-experts-to-stop-making-models/

GOP Gov. Doug Ducey isn’t letting data get in the way as he plows toward an aggressive reopening despite warnings

--------------------------------

Donald Trump Has No Plan
https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2020/05/donald-trump-has-no-plan/165336/

It’s been 111 days since the first reported case of the coronavirus in the United States. It’s been 57 days since President Trump issued social-distancing guidelines, and 12 days since they expired.

Yet the Trump administration still has no plan for dealing with the global pandemic or its fallout. The president has cast doubt on the need for a vaccine or expanded testing. He has no evident plan for contact tracing. He has no treatment ideas beyond the drug remdesivir, since Trump’s marketing campaign for hydroxychloroquine ended in disaster. And, facing the worst economy since the Great Depression, the White House has no plan for that, either, beyond a quixotic hope that consumer demand will snap back as soon as businesses reopen.

As for the cratering economy, which on Friday produced the worst jobs numbers on record, Trump shrugged. “We’re in no rush, we’re in no rush,” he said.



--------------------------------

Brazil Reports More Cases Than Germany; Daily Deaths Reach Record

Brazil's confirmed cases of coronavirus surpassed Germany on Tuesday as the country recorded 881 deaths in 24 hours - the highest since the outbreak began.

Brazil has confirmed 177,589 cases of coronavirus, compared with 170,508 in Germany.

The country's president, Jair Bolsonaro, has sought to downplay the disease and is now battling with state governors over a presidential decree he signed on Monday designating beauty salons and gyms as "essential" services that would allow them to open during lockdowns.

At least 10 governors have said they will not comply with Bolsonaro's decree.

"Bolsonaro is walking towards the precipice and wants to take all of us with him," Rio de Janeiro Governor Wilson Witzel wrote on Twitter.

8
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: May 12, 2020, 08:29:22 AM »

Any updates on Sweden's antibody prevalence?

The Swedes always quote absurdly high numbers for antibodies. But given the number of their dead (3256) it is safe to say that cca 300k-500 k has been infected, ie 3-5% of the population. Definitely below 10%.

The antibody testing on Danderyds Hospital showed that 20% of the staff had antibodies mid-april.
Hospital staff is more exposed than the general population but antibodies in mid-april should indicate that they had the infection at least two weeks earlier? The results of a much larger study will be presented next week I think.

9
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: May 10, 2020, 05:51:17 PM »
For those of you who don't know, I am an American. I have often been discouraged by discussions on this site but have spent a great deal of time here over the past 7 years and learned a great deal as a result. This thread has done something to me, can't really explain it but I have become discouraged in a way that does not happen when I listen to Rush Limbaugh or catch a bit of FOX news.

I thought I might post something that captures a bit of who I am. It is not comprehensive but does provide a glimpse of who I am to others. It is not original but my daughter has a yard sign she posted several years ago saying most of this and it inspired me.

I Believe in Science
Black Lives Matter
No Human is Illegal
Love is Love
Women's Rights are Human Rights
Water is Life
We All Share a Common Fate
Injustice Anywhere is a Threat to Justice Everywhere

Would like to thank Neven for hosting this wonderful site and thank others for participating in these thoughtful and thought provoking conversations.

I am signing off.

10
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: May 10, 2020, 09:50:50 AM »
The reason that this thread has been somewhat derailed is that most of the science is close to final

- We know that IFR is 0,5-1,5% depending on healthcare and age
- We know furthermore that mortality is very much age dependent, cca 5-10% for above 75, 1-3% for 60-70, and below 0,1% for under 45/50.
- We also know that comorbidities increase mortality at least 2-3 times and very few healthy die of this disease (but of course some do)
- We know that European quarantines reduced R(t) to 0,6-0,9 from an original 2,5-4 (in China they went as low as 0,4-0,5)
- We know that it takes an average of 2-3 weeks and often more to die of COVID
- We know that once you are infected you need to be quarantined for at least two weeks to stop viral shedding
- We know that earlier antibody tests are very unreliable especially if you want to know the number of infected in that population but only a small percentage of the population has been infected
- The biggest known unknown is how long immunity lasts

But we now know most everything we need to know , so not much remains other than quarelling :)

11
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: May 10, 2020, 12:42:57 AM »
So what's really on your mind, Neven?

Because it sure as hell isn't the virus.

What's on my mind, is that we are doomed. And it's not because of the virus, it's because of the reaction to it.

But I'll make room again for the official narrative. There's no point in going against official narratives. It isn't bad as it is. It must be worse.

12
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: May 10, 2020, 12:05:39 AM »
Being ignorant of IT I have no means to judge the veracity of this, https://lockdownsceptics.org/code-review-of-fergusons-model/ and it's conclusion "Conclusions. All papers based on this code should be retracted immediately. Imperial’s modelling efforts should be reset with a new team that isn’t under Professor Ferguson, and which has a commitment to replicable results with published code from day one. "

One does not need to know much IT for that. I am just a physicist. Experimental, but published together with quantum chemists.

And I agree that this looks horrible. Code that does this is not is unusable.

Incredible. Really incredible that this was a highly regarded research group.

https://lockdownsceptics.org/second-analysis-of-fergusons-model/
Quote
It’s unbelievable that a decision of this magnitude was based off a single model“
On a single ramshackle computer implementation of the model.

The research group was highly regarded because it provided the wanted alibi. Right after that, the research group leader was banging someone else's wife during the lockdown, which shows just how seriously he was taking his own advice. Or maybe this was his excuse for stepping off and take off for the shadows.

Quote
It was also disturbing to find out that Ferguson has a lot of form for making highly exaggerated claims with his computer models.

In the 2001 foot and mouth epidemic millions of cows and other livestock were killed and burned based on his models. But Professor Michael Thrusfield, an expert in animal diseases, said Ferguson’s models were ‘not fit for purpose’ (2006) and ‘seriously flawed’ (2012).

The 2009 Swine Flu outbreak turned out to be one of the most overhyped non pandemics in the history of medicine. Ferguson got that one wrong as well, saying it would probably kill 65,000 people in the UK, but in fact 457 people died.

Are there any links between Ferguson and Big Pharma and/or the Gates Foundation?

13
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: May 09, 2020, 10:46:24 PM »
On the ground evaluations of transmission incidents.

https://erinbromage.wixsite.com/covid19/post/the-risks-know-them-avoid-them

I considered not posting this out of concern that I would be accused of fear mongering.

14
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: May 09, 2020, 10:02:41 PM »
Being ignorant of IT I have no means to judge the veracity of this, https://lockdownsceptics.org/code-review-of-fergusons-model/

and it's conclusion "Conclusions. All papers based on this code should be retracted immediately. Imperial’s modelling efforts should be reset with a new team that isn’t under Professor Ferguson, and which has a commitment to replicable results with published code from day one. "

<removed FB spy tag. kassy>

15
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: May 09, 2020, 07:21:11 PM »
Remember 'Yuck, wet markets... How can the Chinese do that?'?

Turns out, there are

Quote
At least 70 legally-operated live animal markets in New York City — also known as "wet markets".

Link >> https://www.cbsnews.com/news/coronavirus-pandemic-animal-wet-market-new-york-city-protests/

16
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: May 09, 2020, 02:29:18 PM »
As of 5/6, according to NY DOH, NYC had 47 deaths. 47!!!! Down from 171 the week prior. My statement that NYC deaths are nearing zero is absolutely CORRECT, considering we are now at 47 a day, which is 72% down from the number a week prior.

https://www1.nyc.gov/site/doh/covid/covid-19-data.page

From your link: "Due to delays in reporting, recent data are incomplete".

Using the history data of their github repository, this is how their data changed over the past 10 days:


17
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: May 07, 2020, 07:33:07 AM »
Covid-19 alert level 2 details: What you need to know

Quote
Battles. Wars. Fighting talk. Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern today outlined what the next front looks like if we move to alert level 2.

The guiding principle remains to "play it safe". We may even be doing this in a two-step process. A level 2.5 if you will.

Remember, we aren't there yet - with a decision due on Monday.

Here's the basics, with much more to come over the next few days as more detail emerges (p.s., that's code for we can't answer everything right now).

What remains unchanged?
The basic public health measures. If you are even slightly sick, stay at home. If you have any symptoms - a runny nose or sore throat - stay at home and get a test. Wash those hands and clean surfaces regularly. Don't share your phone.

The border remains closed to all except Kiwis returning home. On arrival, they will spend 14 days in an isolation facility.

Keep your distance. Two metres remains the gold-standard for strangers but in your workplace or with people you know the prime minister says we can "live with less" because tracing can be done if needed.

Can I throw the doors open to my workplace?
Generally speaking, yes. Businesses can re-start for staff and customers but it's slightly different strokes for different folks. The Ministry for Business, Innovation and Employment will be providing more advice in the coming days but here are some starters for 10s:

If you can work from home it's something to talk to your boss about. The PM was encouraging it where possible.
All businesses must observe the appropriate hygiene and distancing rules.
Retail outlets need to follow the example already set by supermarkets, with physical distancing and regular cleaning.
Hair-dressers and beauticians need to wear PPE.
Bars, cafes and restaurants, stick with me here as this is quite a lot, must work under the three Ss: People must be seated. You can only have as many people as you can safely seat. No one can have more than 100 - regardless of venue size. People must be separated - physical distance is a must. This and the seating makes it easier to trace people. Tables must have a dedicated server. So seat, separate, serve.
Contact tracing is also key. While the government is working on a nationwide technical fix for now businesses should be able to detail who has visited.
If there are queues outside venues these must also be managed with the suitable social distancing.
Those who don't follow the rules will be shut down.
Again, we will learn more from MBIE in the coming days.

What about other gatherings?
You won't be raging it up with hundreds of your best mates anytime soon. Indoor and outdoor gatherings are limited to a maximum of 100. It is the same for churches and other venues. Social distancing rules must be followed too.

Can we see some of our family and friends though?
Your bubble can grow. But hang on to the same principles mentioned above in reference to hospitality and the basic social distancing and health measures.

You can have friends and family to your home but keep the numbers small. More specific guidance is still coming.

Director-General of Health Ashley Bloomfield said while he may hug a few close family members he wouldn't be going beyond that - stick to the East Coast wave.

Can I take a holiday elsewhere in NZ?
A trip from Wellington to Napier to see your mum is fine. A trip to Napier for a conference with an open bar is not. So, you can gad about the place a bit more. However, keep to the social distancing rules. It's key.

What about getting back to the gym and pool?
They, and other public facilities like playgrounds, will re-open as long as the right rules are followed (more to come here).

Professional sport can resume - rugby and netball will be doing so - but given the rules about mass gatherings it won't be with crowds. In some cases, you won't notice the difference from before!

Lower level sport is back on the cards but we can expect more information on that later.

Can I send my child back to school?
All education facilities, including early learning, will re-open. These will liaise directly with parents. Distance learning will remain in place too.

If an education facility has a confirmed case it will close for 72 hours to allow for tracing and then, potentially, another 14 days.

When a decision about level 2 is made, schools won't open mid-week but at the start of the following week.

Again, sick children should be kept at home and regular basic healthcare steps taken.

What happens to the more vulnerable groups?
Those in higher risk groups need to think about their own personal safety when outside and continue to apply social distancing and basic healthcare steps.

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/416095/covid-19-alert-level-2-details-what-you-need-to-know

As at 9.00 am, 7 May 2020
    Total          Change in last 24 hours
Number of confirmed cases in New Zealand   1,139   1
Number of probable cases   350   0
Number of confirmed and probable cases   1,489   1
Number of cases currently in hospital   2   0
Number of recovered cases   1,332   16
Number of deaths   21   0
https://www.health.govt.nz/our-work/diseases-and-conditions/covid-19-novel-coronavirus/covid-19-current-situation/covid-19-current-cases

My thoughts.
I am proud to call NZ home. A modern liberal society at the fore front of freedom internationally  and successfully addressing the Covid 19 pandemic  with a well lead and well followed response to this crisis.






18
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: May 07, 2020, 03:19:41 AM »
UK Study Finds Higher Risk of Virus Deaths for Ethnic Minorities
https://www.time.com/5832807/coronavirus-race-analysis-uk/

The risk of dying from coronavirus is "two to three times higher" for the UK's black and minority ethnic communities, according to an academic analysis of health service data.

The study, by University College London (UCL), finds the average risk of death for people of Pakistani heritage is 3.29 times higher, for a black African background it's 3.24 times higher and 2.41 times higher for Bangladeshi.

Black Caribbean communities are 2.21 times more at risk, and Indian groups 1.7 times. In contrast, the researchers find a lower fatality risk for white populations in England.

"Rather than being an equaliser, this work shows that mortality with COVID-19 is disproportionately higher in black, Asian and minority ethnic groups," says UCL's Delan Devakumar, the study's co-author.

"It is essential to tackle the underlying social and economic risk factors and barriers to healthcare that lead to these unjust deaths."

----------------------------------

Brazil Hits New Daily Record for Novel Coronavirus Cases, Deaths
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/05/brazil-minister-floats-idea-coronavirus-lockdown-live-updates-200506233629569.html

Brazil, one of the world's emerging coronavirus hot spots, is reporting a record number of cases and deaths with the health minister flagging the possibility of strict lockdowns in particularly hard-hit areas.

Official figures show 10,503 new confirmed cases of the novel coronavirus in the last 24 hours, well above the previous record of 7,288 cases on April 30. There are 615 deaths, up from the previous record of 600 on Tuesday.

Health Minister Nelson Teich tells reporters for the first time that an increasing number of local authorities may have to institute "lockdowns," as the coronavirus growth curve does not appear to be flattening. He is not naming any specific cities or states.

While authorities have ordered non-essential services and businesses closed in most states, residents are still allowed to circulate. A lockdown, which so far has only been implemented in the city of Sao Luis in the country's northeast, prohibits people from leaving their homes except for certain necessary activities.

Teich's comments stand in stark contrast to comments over the past two months from President Jair Bolsonaro, who has called the virus a "little flu" and criticised business shutdowns ordered by governors as more damaging to the country's economy than the virus itself.

Teich took office last month as virus cases started surging in Brazil. He pledged to save both lives and the economy and said at the time that he and Bolsonaro saw eye to eye.

19
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: April 30, 2020, 02:07:45 PM »
A decent op-ed about the Swedish approach. Not sure if this is paywalled or not:
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/28/opinion/coronavirus-sweden.html
...
It has come with a high cost, though. As USA Today noted: “Sweden has a population of 10 million people, about twice as large as its nearest Scandinavian neighbors. As of April 28, the country’s Covid-19 death toll reached 2,274, about five times higher than in Denmark and 11 times higher than in Norway.” Nursing home residents account for more than a third of all deaths.

2 thoughts on that

1) The approach states that the old must be isolated for this to work. As a lot of nursing home deaths happen, this does not seem to be working
2) They have still a long way to go. NY City, with a population less than Sweden has 20 000 deaths. Swedes have 2 000. Go figure!

20
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: April 29, 2020, 01:11:07 AM »
Personally, I think there is a problem with this study. Why only include people aged 20-65...?
because that is the ages of the employees?

21
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: April 29, 2020, 12:02:03 AM »
As The Walrus suggested below, the Y axis is just wrong.  25/1000 is approximately the total mortality of the 1918 pandemic.  That is, that should be the total area under the curve, not the peak weekly mortality.  The image is on Wikipedia, but not with any source I could find./

Edit:  I think the total area under the curve might exceed 1,000/1,000.  I'm quite sure we didn't lose more than 100% of the country's population in that pandemic.

Figure 1 from the 2006 CDC report below is the same as blumenkraft copied, so it's from a reputable source, but I agree there are problems with it.

https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/12/1/05-0979_article
1918 Influenza: the Mother of All Pandemics

The CDC paper gives the source for their graph as "Jordan  E. Epidemic influenza: a survey. Chicago: American Medical Association, 1927," which is available online from the University of Michigan:
https://quod.lib.umich.edu/f/flu/8580flu.0016.858/55/--epidemic-influenza-a-survey?page=root;rgn=full+text;size=175;view=image

Page 108 of this book has the second graph below, which appears to be the source for the 2006 CDC graph.

A 2002 paper in the Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers has a different graph, the third below.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/3804472?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents
The Spatial Anatomy of an Epidemic: Influenza in London and the County Boroughs of England and Wales, 1918-1919

The 1927 book and the 2002 paper have a common source: Registrar-General 1920 Report on the mortality from influenza in England and Wales during the epidemic of 1918-19: supplement to the eighty-first annual report of the Registrar-General of Births, Deaths, and Marriages in England and Wales HMSO, London.

Because the 2002 paper is more recent, peer reviewed, and from scholars in the UK, I think it's more reliable than the 1927 American book. The 2006 CDC report should have created a graph based on this data instead of the source they used.

22
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: April 28, 2020, 09:24:54 PM »
One last chart. By my calculations, Italy pushed the R to cca 0,85. Any "opening" will likely increase this number, of course it is anybody's guess how high the reproduction rate goes. I modelled this to go to 1 in May, then 1,1-1,2 during summer and 1,3 from Sep 1. This is what I get, Italy daily dead:

23
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: April 28, 2020, 09:17:59 PM »
OK then, given Steve's point, what matters is that if the fall peak was actually 5 times the spring peak, and we get a second peak of a similar multiple, we are in deep trouble.

I have been trying to model this thing for a couple of weeks and think that the most likely outcome is actually a very strong second wave except in places where they are close to herd immunity (NY City) or almost eradicated this thing. Most of Europe and the USA will likely get a very strong second wave unless they do something very well in the next few weeks. Hokkaido is a case in point:

https://time.com/5826918/hokkaido-coronavirus-lockdown/

"Japan’s northern island of Hokkaido offers a grim lesson in the next phase of the battle against COVID-19. It acted quickly and contained an early outbreak of the coronavirus with a 3-week lockdown. But, when the governor lifted restrictions, a second wave of infections hit even harder. Twenty-six days later, the island was forced back into lockdown"

24
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: April 28, 2020, 05:45:51 PM »


As The Walrus suggested below, the Y axis is just wrong.  25/1000 is approximately the total mortality of the 1918 pandemic.  That is, that should be the total area under the curve, not the peak weekly mortality.  The image is on Wikipedia, but not with any source I could find./

Edit:  I think the total area under the curve might exceed 1,000/1,000.  I'm quite sure we didn't lose more than 100% of the country's population in that pandemic.

25
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: April 28, 2020, 02:46:36 PM »

26
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: April 28, 2020, 10:31:23 AM »
Why, may I ask, are masks in a different thread and talk about them is banned from this thread?


This is partially on me.

After about 150 comments of reading about whether masks are worth it or not, and with it becoming a repeated "They are worth it/ They are not worth it" situation, I complained about it and Tom set up a place for that discussion to take place.... and it did take place.

For historical records, masks are well and truly covered, but it needed to be dealt with independently of this thread, in my opinion, because it was drowning out every other piece of good information in the process.

27
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: April 26, 2020, 02:52:51 AM »
https://gis.cdc.gov/grasp/fluview/mortality.html
Pneumonia and Influenza Mortality Surveillance from the National Center for Health Statistics Mortality Surveillance System

Also allows selecting at a state and regional level. Graphs below are for:
  • New York City
  • Michigan
  • Louisiana
  • Massachusetts
This might be another way for dnem to track the progress of the pandemic as it moves across the US; we're still in the early stages of this.

28
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: April 26, 2020, 01:24:01 AM »
That graph is incomplete

Yes gandul, the graph IS incomplete and it's not from the CDC.

The reason Hefaistos didn't provide a link to that chart is because it's source is ...

Dr Roy Spencer

https://www.drroyspencer.com/2020/04/correcting-recent-u-s-weekly-death-statistics-for-incomplete-reporting/

With the pandemic sucking all the air out of the room, poor Roy has to peddle his lies and misinformation wherever he can. Sharing this sort of misinformation is not appropriate.

The actual chart looks very different ...

Actual CDC Weekly Pneumonia and Influenza Mortality Graph for Current Week


https://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/#S6

Based on National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) mortality surveillance data available on April 23, 2020, 11.4% of the deaths occurring during the week ending April 18, 2020 (week 16) were due to P&I. This percentage is above the epidemic threshold of 6.9% for week 16.

--------------------------------

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/preliminary-in-season-estimates.htm

CDC does not know the exact number of people who have been sick and affected by influenza because influenza is not a reportable disease in most areas of the U.S. However, CDC has estimated the burden of flu since 2010 using a mathematical model that is based on data collected through the U.S. Influenza Surveillance System, a network that covers approximately 8.5% of the U.S. population (~27 million people).

Limitations

The estimates of the cumulative burden of seasonal influenza are subject to several limitations.

First, the cumulative rate of laboratory-confirmed influenza-associated hospitalizations reported during the season may be an under-estimate of the rate at the end of the season because of identification and reporting delays.

Second, rates of laboratory-confirmed influenza-associated hospitalizations were adjusted for the frequency of influenza testing and the sensitivity of influenza diagnostic assays. However, data on testing practices during the 2019-2020 season are not available in real-time. CDC used data on testing practices from the past influenza seasons as a proxy. Burden estimates will be updated at a later date when data on contemporary testing practices become available.

Third, estimates of influenza-associated illness and medical visits are based on data from prior seasons, which may not be accurate if the seriousness of illness or patterns of care-seeking have changed.

29
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: April 24, 2020, 11:03:06 PM »
https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1253272389602983936
John Burn-Murdoch

Important new study:

Analysis by @PHanlon17, @JonMinton and co estimates more than 10 years of life are lost for each UK Covid death on average, and much more in some cases.

More evidence against "they were going to die soon anyway" line.

How does this compare to YLL due to influenza during a severe outbreak? It might be good to keep in mind that a lot more children die due to influenza than SARS-CoV-2.

What is the impact on general life expectancy for the entire population, compared to other diseases and environmental factors like air pollution?

In other words, what is the context? Or should I just be afraid?

I think we should all be looking at the future now. Confinements will be falling like a domino little by little so I would desire from each country government the following:
- measures to protect elderly people and people at risk
- measures to test proactively
- measures to establish level of antibody
- measures to enforce or strongly recommend the use of mask, hand hygiene, and public spaces hygiene. Social distancing at every work space except hospitals.

The rest is talk talk talk
Leave Sweden alone, to me it seems they have a sort of social distancing by default that we Spaniards lack of. Are we worse for that? No but it makes things harder for such a contagious disease. In turn, this only happens every 100 years and we enjoy a wonderful weather year round. And it is still out if the Swedish model will work or not.
 
Leave all behind and face a tough future that requires heightened levels of discipline. 20 million Taiwanese in an island just twice Tenerife size can! Only 6 death there and they got the first wave. Ideally we should too.

To start with, my fucking government is testing but not as much as I hoped.

31
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: April 17, 2020, 12:49:52 AM »
Indoor transmission of SARS-CoV-2

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.04.20053058v1

Quote
Home outbreaks were the dominant category (254 of 318 outbreaks; 79.9%), followed by transport (108; 34.0%; note that many outbreaks involved more than one venue category). Most home outbreaks involved three to five cases. We identified only a single outbreak in an outdoor environment, which involved two cases. Conclusions: All identified outbreaks of three or more cases occurred in an indoor environment, which confirms that sharing indoor space is a major SARS-CoV-2 infection risk.

My bold. The big difference from pandemics of the past, climate control.

Ventilation of indoor spaces and surface disinfection are a must.

32
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: April 17, 2020, 12:30:18 AM »
We cannot afford not to extend lockdown longer. It is fatal to business as well as to individuals to restart soon. Doing that causes the disease to come back and spread. That then either extends the lockdown (bad), or increases the deaths (worse) AND extends the lockdown (much worse). We must focus on the primary problem - the virus and its spread - not the secondary, tertiary and subsidiary problems. Those are important. But they are ONLY solved if we solve the first problem first.

I personally don't believe there is any type of lockdown that can be enforced that will eradicate the virus. Maybe in a place like China, but not on a global scale. After weeks of lockdown, there is now some talk here and there of herd immunity in the single digit percentages (well below 5%). So, all lockdown does, is buy time.

But when you buy something, there is obviously a cost, and at some point the cost becomes larger than what you're getting. In other words, besides lockdowns most likely not being able to eradicate the virus, they also have a breaking point. They simply cannot last too long, because 1) they may cause more damage than the virus will and 2) cascading effects could cause civilisational collapse.

So far, the desired perception has been based on fear, desired by the media for ratings, and desired by governments to make sure people comply. But if lockdowns don't solve the problem, and you cannot risk those cascading effects to civilisational collapse either, you have to move away from fear.

Because the psychological effect of that fear, is that it breeds insecurity and paralysis,which only increases the risk of cascading effects, whether there are lockdowns or not! For the simple reason that people will not buy the goods and services that make the system work (more or less).

I'm very unhappy with the system, I hate consumerism and want it to stop, I'm as radical as they come in this respect, but I prefer to see a gradual transition, rather than a house of cards going up in flames. Because, just as Gandul, I fear for loved ones.

If it needs to happen, so be it, but rather not because everybody is shitting their pants because of the perfect 'invisible enemy'.

Quote
But failure means ultimately infecting about 90% of the population. And that means killing circa 3-9+% of the population in the first wave. And if this virus only provides two year immunity as it appears to, it means killing something like 2-6% in a second wave, and 1-5% in a third wave etc...  Each wave depletes the society of older and vulnerable people, presumably lessening the impact of each wave. But over a decade, this likely sums to 12-15% of the population dying, unless massive controls are put in place, or successful treatments or vaccines are developed. That then might limit the dying to 4% over the decade.

So far, I didn't want to say too much because it's a delicate subject, and there wasn't enough data to say anything really substantive, but I think enough is known now to state that these numbers aren't realistic. I don't believe this virus can cause civilisational collapse just through the amount of people it will kill. But the fear of this 'invisible enemy' might. I could be wrong.

33
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: April 16, 2020, 11:26:50 PM »

I know you like the Sweden example ('they are going to die anyways'). Well fuck that model.


Yeah the Sweden model again.

This picture illustrates just how reckless the Swedish strategy is. If the government had any sense they would immediately close down the Stockholm subway system. Shocking picture of peak rush hour this morning at 8:20 AM, look at all those people spreading corona virus, working hard on that herd immunity.

34
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: April 16, 2020, 01:42:33 PM »
A study of Dutch blood donors has found that around 3 percent have developed antibodies against the new coronavirus, health authorities have said, an indication of what percentage of the Dutch population may have already had the disease.
"This study shows that about 3 percent of Dutch people have developed antibodies against the coronavirus," Van Dissel said. "You can calculate from that, it's several hundred thousand people" in a country of 17 million.

The RIVM has previously said that an immunity level of about 60% is required for herd immunity to take effect.

There are 28,158 confirmed coronavirus cases in the Netherlands, but only the very ill and healthcare workers are currently being tested.
Back of the envelope calculation gives 3% x 17M = 500k true infections count in the Netherlands. Official death count is 3134 but true death count probably around 5000-6000 based on total mortality. (If anyone can provide actual mortality data it would be better...).
5000-6000 / 500k is ~1% true infection fatality rate IFR.
It seems the legend of asymptomatic cases skewing the apparent IFR is wrong. There's indeed a huge number of unconfirmed cases, probably mostly because not enough tests are administered, but the IFR still remains what it was estimated to be in the beginning. It's certainly not 0.1%
To get to herd immunity of 60% one would get 120k deaths. Herd immunity of 80-90% would get even more dead. I hope and pray that other strategies are adopted.
Note: the above is just a semi-educated guess.

35
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: April 14, 2020, 06:36:25 PM »
<snipped>
122 new death lower then 234 last week but this includes the easter effect.
<snipped>
Getting accurate fatality counts on easter weekend has proven difficult for milenia. ::)
Terry

36
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: April 13, 2020, 10:03:06 PM »
The official Swedish statistics is posted on:

https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/09f821667ce64bf7be6f9f87457ed9aa

The graph "Avlidna/dag" shows deceased/day on the correct day. Other sources only update the number of deceased on the day of the report (such as https://c19.se/).

Example: 112 deaths were reported on april 7. On c19.se this is shown as 112 deaths on that very day. In reality, these cases occured on april 1 to april 6 and have been assigned on the correct days on the official site. The official number of deaths on april 7 is 60. The opposite is also true on some days. 37 deaths were reported on april 5, this is the number shown on c19.se. In reality, 75 Covid-19 deaths occured this day, it's just that they were reported later.

This concept seems incredibly hard to grasp. The internet trolls are going completely apeshit and thinks the Swedish death numbers are being manipulated somehow. In reality, they are trying to be as accurate as possible.

Tomorrow, I'm fairly sure there will be a substantial surge of deaths since there has been four non-working days in a row. Quite possibly over 200. These will be allocated to the correct day in the official statistics but reported as a huge spike in deaths on other sites. I can already hear he screams of the Twitter and Facebook epidemiologists.


37
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: April 10, 2020, 01:51:22 PM »
Coronavirus Traces Found in Massachusetts Wastewater at Levels Far Higher Than Expected
https://www.statnews.com/2020/04/07/new-research-wastewater-community-spread-covid-19/

In a paper posted Tuesday to the preprint server medRxiv, researchers collected samples in late March from a wastewater treatment plant serving a large metropolitan area in Massachusetts and found that the amount of SARS-CoV-2 particles in the sewage samples indicated a far higher number of people likely infected with Covid-19 than the reported cases in that area.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.05.20051540v1

Researchers from biotech startup Biobot Analytics, working with a team from Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Harvard, and Brigham and Women’s Hospital, estimate there were at least 2,300 people infected with Covid-19 in the area around the treatment facility. But at the time of analysis, which has not yet been peer-reviewed, there were 446 cases officially reported in that area.

In another preprint, which has also not yet been peer-reviewed and that was posted last week to medRxiv, researchers in the Netherlands similarly described detecting the novel coronavirus in sewage samples — sometimes even before public health officials reported the first diagnosed case of Covid-19 in a given community.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.29.20045880v1

38
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: April 10, 2020, 01:18:59 PM »
I have a question that perhaps belongs in the Stupid thread. I'm struggling with the concept of R0.  Humans live in such vastly different arrangements with such vastly different patterns of movement and behaviors across the planet. How can there be a single R0? I can see coming up with some sort of standardized number for a population with a given set of parameters, but a single number for how a disease moves among "people"? It doesn't make sense to me. People live at such different densities and have such different cultural norms around touching, kissing, hugging, hand-holding, hygiene, etc., etc.

39
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: April 07, 2020, 07:43:47 PM »
One more to go!  ;)

40
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: April 07, 2020, 06:12:13 PM »

(deleted nonsense)

Sigh.  If you've been reading this thread, you'd know that virtually identical strains have been isolated from bats and pangolins in China.  What, some dastardly lab scientist purposely infected wildlife?

The coronavirus did not escape from a lab. Here's how we know.
https://www.livescience.com/coronavirus-not-human-made-in-lab.html

41
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: April 07, 2020, 05:46:24 PM »
Harpy, the linked article confirmes you are a conspiracy theorist.

You didn't even read it, did you? OMG, how pathetic you are...

42
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: April 06, 2020, 01:22:43 PM »
I'm sure C19 not only overwhelms hospitals, but it also overwhelms government capacity to count the dead. The weeks of flatness were actual peaks but the extra fatalities were undercounted. I'm sure governments know, but they choose to ignore the extra fatalities for their own sake.

With luck, the numbers will be hidden by statistics and lies. It happens every time.
Not necessarily lies. Take a random family doctor. He/she has been treating the patient for years, for heart or lung problems. Now they're dead, as expected, from heart or lung problems. What's the right thing to do? Take a sample and send it away for analysis, meanwhile telling the next of kin that the death certificate can't be issued yet. Maybe not for weeks.

Extra work for the doctor; extra work for the laboratories; families unable to start the paperwork involved in registering a death/proving a will. Why should they? The patient isn't going to be any less dead. The cause of death really was pneumonia/heart failure/whatever. Possibly Cov-19 was a contributory factor, but why waste time that they haven't got? Easier to simply sign the death certificate and move on to the next patient.

43
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: April 06, 2020, 12:04:14 PM »
Despatches is a new blog from the ASI (Adam Smith Institute in this instance!) featuring insights from a senior NHS doctor who has returned to a hospital to support the fight against COVID19.

https://www.adamsmith.org/despatches

Quote
The hospital is now almost full – the constant drip drip of Coronavirus patients hour-by-hour, shift-by-shift is taking its toll. After almost two weeks of eerie quiet, the last couple of days has seen a significant acceleration in the number of patients arriving.

Corridor conversations are abuzz with talk of how we will decide which patients to ventilate. Coronavirus can cause lungs to fill up with fluid that can take weeks to clear and give rise to secondary bacterial infections. Many of these patients also have multiple underlying medical problems which all adds up to the grim statistics we keep hearing of only 50% (an uncomfortably round number) of patients surviving to get off ventilators. These statistics make open heart surgery look like a Sunday picnic where a mortality of 10% would raise eyebrows and a referral to the GMC [General Medical Council].

44
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: April 04, 2020, 08:35:23 PM »
The recovery seems like not a recovery:

Quote
The dark side of ventilators: Those hooked up for long periods face difficult recoveries

People who survive the most dire cases of disease caused by the novel coronavirus are about to learn one of the cruelest lessons of the pandemic: After defeating the virus, the really hard part begins.

Those saved through extreme medical interventions, including being attached to mechanical ventilators for a week or two, often suffer long-term physical, mental and emotional issues, according to a staggering body of medical and scientific studies. Even a year after leaving the intensive care unit, many people experience post-traumatic stress disorder, Alzheimer’s-like cognitive deficits, depression, lost jobs and problems with daily activities such as bathing and eating.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/04/03/coronavirus-survivors-recovery/
By Carolyn Y. Johnson and Ariana Eunjung Cha
April 3, 2020 at 12:49 p.m. CST

A relevant observation. Not everything is like on TV shows where everyone arriving in the ER are intubated and revived miraculously.

Statistics from Sweden regarding Covid-19 patients:
Age   Hospitalised/ICU/Deaths
0 to 9  36/0/0
10 to 19  139/0/0
20 to 29  452/16/3
30 to 39  582/21/0
40 to 49  838/64/1
50 to 59  1182/123/15
60 to 69  913/162/26
70 to 79  932/112/101
80 to 89  942/21/157
90+  424/1/70

Only 1 case of the 424 patients aged 90+ has been treated in an intensive care unit (outcome not revealed in the statistics). Judging from the data, it seems like most 80+ patients aren't treated in ICU either.

45
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: April 02, 2020, 01:42:18 PM »
PCR-pooling to the rescue?

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/colby-cosh-israeli-researchers-offer-hope-for-more-efficient-coronavirus-testing

This has also been suggested by Hungarian researchers.

The basic idea is that you pool 64 people (presumably those who live together, in the same street, work together, etc) and analyse their pooled samples together. If you have a positive then you can either test them one by one or tell all 64 of them to quarantine for 2 weeks. The rest can get back to their lives.

Our researchers calculate that the whole country could be tested in 5 days with the resources already at hand.

Ain't this genius?


46
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: April 02, 2020, 12:55:56 PM »
People, I have not been posting Chris Martenson's (or John Campbells's) daily updates because they were mentioned here before and I figure you can watch them if you want to. But this might be the most important one of all. He says that he heard from a couple White House sources that Trump blames China for the pandemic and, after the peak, he is going to "take the gloves off" with regards to them. Meanwhile, China has been destabilized by this and is doubtlessly tempted to blame "foreign devils" for any problems. It is conceivable that Trump could blunder us into World War Three, a war which could kill hundreds or even thousands of millions. He would make Buchanan look good. He would make Hitler look good. If I had had a Private Revelation that he would actually do this on November 1, 2016 I would have voted for Hillary.

I like the videos and science-based conclusions of this guy but he's too covid-alarmist in the economic implications even for my taste. He thinks gold, silver, and lands are the real wealth. He has accumulated an incredible number of acres and yes, planted a little garden. He calls these assets real wealth. Well, I don't think so. Creativity and persistence are real wealth of humans, not minerals and underdeveloped lands.
And I suspect why. He is associated with a website to invest in gold and silver, and gives investment advice to members of his web.

So take his videos with a grain of salt especially when he prognosticates Covid doom and misery and widespread hunger absolutely everywhere. This guy is not an oracle.

47
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: April 02, 2020, 09:44:43 AM »
It's creepy and insensitive to say, but the economic impact of this group dying will be relative small; Most of them would have costed society more in the rest of their live then what they pay.

This line of thinking is really beginning to piss me off.
It shows a callous way of looking at human life.

Maybe I have been skewed because I spend a few years living in a Samoan village where the elders were held in high regard, given respect and given due courtesy for the things they have done, and for the wisdom they share that holds much more value than anything a stupid economy has to offer.

Seriously, people just need to stop thinking that it isnt a problem if it only kills old people.

That's why you should read the whole post and not a single sentence.

48
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: April 02, 2020, 09:24:07 AM »
Yes.
This is a horrible pandemic.
We must look back to the 1918 influenza to grasp its severity. 

And, our focus should be on the science rather than the blame.

We may never forget those who've failed,  but we must also move on, and right now. 

Support your local healthcare workers if you can.   If the doctors die... what have we???

I think 1918 was much worse. Especially economically. But these days we don't expect such diseases anymore. We aren't, luckily, used to it anymore because our healthcare is and vaccination programs are much better then they were a decade ago.

Spanish Flu:
50-200M deaths, and the young people (20-40 years) were hit hard. World population was around 1.8B, so 3-11% died;

Corona:
Mortality on the whole population without health care collapsing around 1% at most I think. Based on Taiwan and South Korea numbers, who have the most thorough testing going on.
With health care collapsing it's around 3-5%, but mostly elderly people with a large part of those having health issues already.
In the Netherlands they tested medical staff one of the hospitals and of that group 97% had mild symptoms/ no hospitalization required. And yes, that is a younger aged group, since above 65 most people are retired

So I think the 1% if the whole population gets infected and health care won't collapse is a realistic/ maybe even too high percentage. And when it collapses it will probably 3-5 times as high, with mostly the elderly (65+) and those with health problems won't survive.

It's creepy and insensitive to say, but the economic impact of this group dying will be relative small; Most of them would have costed society more in the rest of their live then what they pay. I don't say we should just let the virus run! But I think the economic impact of this crisis will be minor, if it doesn't take too long.

And yeah, it won't surprise me if western countries will probably be hit harder than developing countries. Because even though we have better health care, it won't be enough in a lot of countries. If you can't help 50% of those who need hospitalization, it doesn't matter for those if your health care is brilliant or the worst of the worst. So then the population composition will have a huge impact. And in the west we are older, have more people having old age ailments and we live unhealthy (lot's of people to heavy f.e.).

49
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: April 02, 2020, 01:24:06 AM »
The Wuhan coronavirus will be orders of magnitude worse than the 1918 Spanish flu. 

A better example of our future is to look at the Boubonic plague outbreaks in Europe, and the Smallpox pandemic on the Native Americans.

Industrialized civilization is collapsing, as society collapsed for the Europeans for the Boubonic plague, and the Native Americans during Smallpox.

This is our Smallpox, whether people want to acknowledge that the death rate and the numbers are just a very rough estimate, at best.


Those who are now in denial, will have the worst psychological outcomes, and will probably not adequately prepare for what comes next.

Covid is not worse then the 1918 H1N1 pandemic.

Covid kills the old and weak while 1918 H1N1 replicated at such levels that it killed the young and healthy.

The bubonic plagues are a totally different (but interesting) story. Can´t compare them.

And the smallpox for native indians worked totally different too. Somewhere upthread someone cited an R0 for smallpox which was probably for european or asian populations but that is not valid for a population with no exposure. The death rate was horrific. It was the best example of biological warfare bar none and the collapse that resulted can not really be compared to what we see now.

This thing freaks you out so try to freak out less. It´s probably better.


50
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: April 01, 2020, 09:12:50 PM »
Not long ago Sweden and Denmark had similar coronavirus deaths per million ratios but after today's figures Sweden is pulling away.

Sweden 24 deaths p.million (last three days 36,34,59 deaths)
Denmark 18 deaths p.million (last three days 5,13,14 deaths)
Many have questioned the Swedish laissez-faire strategy and for good reason as your figures point out.

My guess is Sweden is aiming for a herd immunity with limited economic consequences and they trust their efficient health care system to handle the peak of the epidemic. I sincerely hope they are right
They can't. ICUs and hospital beds per habitant are comparable to the rest of Europe. It's a relatively big population. They will suffer a lot of government-caused pain, and COVID will become the first cause of death for a few weeks as it has happened in other countries. Hospitals will be swamped, we already know what happens then.

You don't have any clue how the Swedish health care system works that's for sure. This is a prime example of someone not having a clue about something just pulls a random graph or table from the internet and draws a grossly incorrect conclusion from it. It happens all the time on climate change denial forums and it certainly happens here as well.

In many other countries you are admitted to hospital for things that are handled by the primary care system in Sweden. This has resulted in fewer hospital beds per capita.

Now, the big question is, does this mean anything in regard to the current Covid19 outbreak?

For ICU capacity certainly the answer is a big YES. This is very important. All countries are increasing capacity in this regard. Sweden is no exception, it's been doubled and by next week it will be tripled. No upper limit has been set, capacity will be increased as much as possible by all means possible.

Now, the question is down to the "hospital beds" capacity. What kind of treatment is given? Can it be done from home? Can the primary care doctors and nurses administer the necessary treatment while the patient remains at home, or by a daily visit to a primary care facility? Can necessary treatments be performed in nursing homes?

As I said in a previous post, I think it's currently impossible to draw any conclusions or know what's right or wrong in the middle of the outbreak. Each country has it's own health care system, maybe vastly different from another country even if the number "hospital beds per capita" is identical.

I know one thing though, and that is that I'd hate to live in a country where media, fear, internet experts or populist parties get to decide how to handle the Covid-19 situation. That would be a true nightmare.

Pages: [1] 2 3