To quote that great scientific oracle, Sesame Street:-
One of these things is not like the others
One of these things just doesn't belong
Can you tell which thing is not like the others
By the time I finish my song?
Did you guess which thing was not like the others?
Did you guess which thing just doesn't belong?
If you guessed Spoiler:
is not like the others
Then you're absolutely...right!
Re: COVID-19
Posted: Wed Apr 01, 2020 10:55 am
by shpalman
It's going to be very interesting to watch Sweden over the next couple of weeks.
Re: COVID-19
Posted: Wed Apr 01, 2020 11:08 am
by Bird on a Fire
I've not seen much mention of Sweden - what are they doing differently?
Re: COVID-19
Posted: Wed Apr 01, 2020 11:11 am
by shpalman
That's the thing. They don't seem to be doing very much at all.
Trying to protect the economy by not shutting down seems problematic on its own terms, leaving aside any ethical question of lives vs. economy. If people are self-isolating anyway, businesses are going to suffer, but because it's not an official thing they're not receiving government support to help them keep afloat. On top of which, of course, a massive healthcare crisis will be expensive and I'd assume that a load of deaths isn't great for the economy either (even if the deaths are mostly retired people).
Re: COVID-19
Posted: Wed Apr 01, 2020 12:12 pm
by greyspoke
Of course lives vs the economy is not purely an ethical question - they are related (but over different timescales, different ways of dying and at different times). Perhaps the ethical question is more along the lines of "deaths now or deaths later".
Re: COVID-19
Posted: Wed Apr 01, 2020 12:34 pm
by Martin Y
greyspoke wrote: Wed Apr 01, 2020 12:12 pm
Perhaps the ethical question is more along the lines of "deaths now or deaths later".
Interesting observation on More Or Less this week, that the risk of an individual dying if they get Covid-19 seems closely to match their general risk of dying in the next year (considering age, health etc). So it's as if one year's worth of risk is compressed into a couple of weeks. The question then arises to what extent we could say this is the next year's worth of deaths happening all together. Obviously we're not going to find that people just stop dying for the following year, but there's going to be some proportion of overlap.
lpm wrote: Tue Mar 31, 2020 2:10 pm
I joined as "iPhone", at the bottom of the list on the right. Was easy to join - meeting number 539-544-323. Now I've got the names of the other joiners, I'll be able to evesdrop even more easily next time.
Umm, no you didn't. Top right of the screen shows "Cabinet Room (Host, me)", so its a screen shot from whoever was running the meeting from the Cabinet Room.
You got me. Everyone else but you thought I was on the call.
hahahaha, this might be the best bit in the thread
Re: COVID-19
Posted: Wed Apr 01, 2020 12:53 pm
by TopBadger
Sweden isn't a typical place though... population a little larger than London but the country is almost twice the size of the UK - or something like that.
greyspoke wrote: Wed Apr 01, 2020 12:12 pm
Perhaps the ethical question is more along the lines of "deaths now or deaths later".
Interesting observation on More Or Less this week, that the risk of an individual dying if they get Covid-19 seems closely to match their general risk of dying in the next year (considering age, health etc). So it's as if one year's worth of risk is compressed into a couple of weeks. The question then arises to what extent we could say this is the next year's worth of deaths happening all together. Obviously we're not going to find that people just stop dying for the following year, but there's going to be some proportion of overlap.
That is interesting, but I was also thinking about the relationship between wealth/social stability and health outcomes - if the economy really tanks then people will die sooner than otherwise.
Re: COVID-19
Posted: Wed Apr 01, 2020 1:21 pm
by Little waster
TopBadger wrote: Wed Apr 01, 2020 12:53 pm
Sweden isn't a typical place though... population a little larger than London but the country is almost twice the size of the UK - or something like that.
But even then 87% of the population live in less than 2000 urban areas where urban is defined as 200+ inhabitants.
The latest numbers are in. 563 new deaths, taking the total to 2,352. This is pretty much exactly in line with the trend (the doubling rate hasn't changed at all from yesterday). Expected rise tomorrow is around 600. At this rate, we should hit 10,000 deaths in less than a week.
Our latest count is around halfway between those for Italy on the 16 March (2,158) and 17 March (2,503), so we're around 14.5 days behind them.
Re: COVID-19
Posted: Wed Apr 01, 2020 1:39 pm
by raven
lpm wrote: Wed Apr 01, 2020 9:22 am
To take an extreme imaginary scenario, imagine we all wear bracelets. They flash red the moment we are infectious. They are green when we are immune. Go red and you'd run like a Cummings for home, see someone red and you jump out their way. Greens would approach reds without constraint. You would thus create herd immunity artificially, because the virus would be living in a world where 99% of people it met were green immunes. It would be extinct within a couple of weeks.
That makes me imagine a Pandemic version of Logan's Run: flash red on the street, you get shoved in a van and whisked away to quarantine-heaven, never to be seen again.
Slightly more seriously, I imagine immediate avoidance/shunning of the infected was perhaps what Singapore was aiming for with the release of people's addresses. Oh, someone's tested positive in that apartment block, I'm not going in there today - that kind of thing.
Re: COVID-19
Posted: Wed Apr 01, 2020 1:43 pm
by TopBadger
El Pollo Diablo wrote: Wed Apr 01, 2020 1:35 pm
The latest numbers are in. 563 new deaths, taking the total to 2,352. This is pretty much exactly in line with the trend (the doubling rate hasn't changed at all from yesterday). Expected rise tomorrow is around 600. At this rate, we should hit 10,000 deaths in less than a week.
Our latest count is around halfway between those for Italy on the 16 March (2,158) and 17 March (2,503), so we're around 14.5 days behind them.
Which sounds the same as what folk were saying last week and the week before.
It's almost as if there is an inescapable mathematic relationship at work...
Re: COVID-19
Posted: Wed Apr 01, 2020 1:47 pm
by shpalman
The Lombardy region's civil protection agency has an app which usually lets you see the risk of avalanche or forest fires or flooding or whatever in the various areas. As of today, you can also fill in your location (at the council level) and whether you've had any contact with any known covid cases recently (or been in places which have been since closed due to outbreaks) and also your body temperature if you have any symptoms, that sort of thing.
As of 9am 1 April, a total of 152,979 people have been tested of which 29,474 tested positive.
What does this mean. If they are only testing people in hospital who have the virus symptoms of cough and high temperature, why is the positive rate <20%. What is wrong with the other 80% of testees?
Re: COVID-19
Posted: Wed Apr 01, 2020 2:47 pm
by El Pollo Diablo
Many of the originally tested people didn't have any symptoms yet, but were simply people who had been in contact with those who had tested positive. By the time the restrictions were added on testing, a lot already had been.
The daily rate of positive testing has been rising pretty steadily for nearly two weeks - it's now at about 44% from today's figures. Nonetheless, 56% of people who are tested haven't had it yet. I assume that most fevers and coughs are still being caused by other illnesses.
Re: COVID-19
Posted: Wed Apr 01, 2020 2:59 pm
by AMS
El Pollo Diablo wrote: Wed Apr 01, 2020 2:47 pm Nonetheless, 56% of people who are tested haven't had it yet. I assume that most fevers and coughs are still being caused by other illnesses.
N=1 and all that, but a colleague in the US had a fever recently. As his wife worked in university virology lab, they managed to get tested: it was influenza type A.
Re: COVID-19
Posted: Wed Apr 01, 2020 3:21 pm
by Woodchopper
El Pollo Diablo wrote: Wed Apr 01, 2020 2:47 pm
Many of the originally tested people didn't have any symptoms yet, but were simply people who had been in contact with those who had tested positive. By the time the restrictions were added on testing, a lot already had been.
The daily rate of positive testing has been rising pretty steadily for nearly two weeks - it's now at about 44% from today's figures. Nonetheless, 56% of people who are tested haven't had it yet. I assume that most fevers and coughs are still being caused by other illnesses.
Yes, a lot of people get bacterial pneumonia, or pneumonia caused by influenza.
El Pollo Diablo wrote: Wed Apr 01, 2020 2:47 pm
Many of the originally tested people didn't have any symptoms yet, but were simply people who had been in contact with those who had tested positive. By the time the restrictions were added on testing, a lot already had been.
The daily rate of positive testing has been rising pretty steadily for nearly two weeks - it's now at about 44% from today's figures. Nonetheless, 56% of people who are tested haven't had it yet. I assume that most fevers and coughs are still being caused by other illnesses.
Yes, a lot of people get bacterial pneumonia, or pneumonia caused by influenza.
I certainly hope the rate of viral infections is reduced in general, otherwise it doesn't say much about how well people are doing with the measures designed to avoid spreading COVID.
Re: COVID-19
Posted: Wed Apr 01, 2020 3:42 pm
by MartinDurkin
El Pollo Diablo wrote: Wed Apr 01, 2020 2:47 pm
Many of the originally tested people didn't have any symptoms yet, but were simply people who had been in contact with those who had tested positive. By the time the restrictions were added on testing, a lot already had been.
The daily rate of positive testing has been rising pretty steadily for nearly two weeks - it's now at about 44% from today's figures. Nonetheless, 56% of people who are tested haven't had it yet. I assume that most fevers and coughs are still being caused by other illnesses.
El Pollo Diablo wrote: Wed Apr 01, 2020 2:47 pm
Many of the originally tested people didn't have any symptoms yet, but were simply people who had been in contact with those who had tested positive. By the time the restrictions were added on testing, a lot already had been.
The daily rate of positive testing has been rising pretty steadily for nearly two weeks - it's now at about 44% from today's figures. Nonetheless, 56% of people who are tested haven't had it yet. I assume that most fevers and coughs are still being caused by other illnesses.
Yes, a lot of people get bacterial pneumonia, or pneumonia caused by influenza.
I certainly hope the rate of viral infections is reduced in general, otherwise it doesn't say much about how well people are doing with the measures designed to avoid spreading COVID.
Hopefully. There is though a lot of bacterial pneumonia about. For example someone with COPD might get it several times a year.
Re: COVID-19
Posted: Wed Apr 01, 2020 4:31 pm
by shpalman
I think Italy's numbers are still on an exponential growth. The doubling time this week is about 16.9 days, which is fairly long, but it means we're not at the peak.
