Will this end up being the pandemic that cried wolf?

[cobright]

The fatality rate from this virus in Sweden as of yesterday is .015% while the US as of yesterday was .011%. Both these numbers are way way way below the model forecasts of fatalities that kicked this off. Sad to think that people are so invested in this quarantine that they consider the results in Sweden to be catastrophic but there you have it.

Current CFR in Sweden is 10%, 5%in the US.
Deaths/1M pop in Sweden is 156, the 8th highest nation. The US, hardly a model to follow either, is at 128 deaths/ 1M pop. Neighboring countries Norway and Finland only 33 and 18 respectively.

When your people are dieing off 5-9 times as fast as your neighbors, catastrophic seems like an apt description.

Sweden is also low on the list for number of tests administered/1M pop. Sweden has always been regarded in Europe as one of the more standoffish members of the EU, like they see what it's doing in Spain and Italy and just figure the virus will treat Swedes differently.

 

[godisney14]

The fatality rate from this virus in Sweden as of yesterday is .015% while the US as of yesterday was .011%. Both these numbers are way way way below the model forecasts of fatalities that kicked this off. Sad to think that people are so invested in this quarantine that they consider the results in Sweden to be catastrophic but there you have it.

if you consider the general quarantine in the US to be analogous to not allowing a child to play with a gun then I am speechless.

That is not how you calculate fatality rate.

 

[pahoben]

The number of medical professionals that have died from covid-19 gives me pause. Despit


Fatality rate is meaningless for a novel virus that is 2 months into its spread. Case fatality rate gives the better picture, it is also volatile since this is early days, but less so than fatality (really, mortality) rate.

It is not meaningless. You have a certain number of deaths in a country with a certain population. In the US you have general quarantine imposed to minimize positive cases while in Sweden you have herd immunity measures in place that do not try to minimize cases. Nothing will ever be 100% certain until the last person dies but you can certainly draw reasonable conclusions before that last death. To say the death rate in Sweden at this time is catastrophic has no basis at all in the fatalities per million.

 

[cobright]

The model forecasts were based on total population and the population of Sweden is 10,000,000. These percentages are based on total population of Sweden and the US.

That would only be useful if everyone in Sweden has already contracted the virus. Something that's not going to happen. Or at least it doesn't have to.

The percentage of the total pop that ends up contracting the virus before a vaccine is produced is largely determined by the quality of social isolation in place.

 

[pahoben]

Current CFR in Sweden is 10%, 5%in the US.
Deaths/1M pop in Sweden is 156, the 8th highest nation. The US, hardly a model to follow either, is at 128 deaths/ 1M pop. Neighboring countries Norway and Finland only 33 and 18 respectively.

When your people are dieing off 5-9 times as fast as your neighbors, catastrophic seems like an apt description.

Sweden is also low on the list for number of tests administered/1M pop. Sweden has always been regarded in Europe as one of the more standoffish members of the EU, like they see what it's doing in Spain and Italy and just figure the virus will treat Swedes differently.

But Sweden has better prospects going forward unless general quarantine was completely ineffective in neighboring countries. The strategy of a general quarantine is to minimize positive cases. The Swedish rate of .015% of fatalities is much lower than the model forecasts that kicked all of this off.

 

[Heather07438]

b) The model the US gov was using was 100,000 dead by August and we are at 42k today. So we don’t know where we’ll be in August, especially as the model assumed sheltering in place until June.

I won't be relying on that model either.

 

[pahoben]

That is not how you calculate fatality rate.

What in the world do you mean. The percentage versus total population is no different then the deaths per million.

 

[pahoben]

I won't be relying on that model either.

The model with no quarantine that was the basis of the call between Trump and Boris Johnson was 2.2 million or .7% of the US population.

With quarantine it was 100,000-200,000.

 

[cobright]

In the US you have general quarantine imposed to minimize positive cases

In the US you have a pastiche of stay-at-home orders (suggestions) that are largely ignored and rarely enforced.

The best we can hope for is a flatter curve and a bottom of the prediction transmission rate by the time this thing is done.

Sweden has decided that it's better to get whatever the final mortality rate is going to be over with on 70% of its people than spend the money and take that same mortality rate on 20 or 40%

 

[godisney14]

What in the world do you mean. The percentage versus total population is no different then the deaths per million.

It might help you to understand once you start using the correct terminology.
I can tell science and medicine is not your background.

 

[cobright]

The Swedish rate of .015% of fatalities is much lower than the model forecasts that kicked all of this off.

It's not surprising that 5 weeks into the pandemic, Sweden's percentage of the total population killed by the virus is much lower than the predictions for the total number of the population that will be killed by it. 5 weeks, that's how long ago Sweden had it's first death. Still a lot of weeks to go.

 

[pahoben]

That would only be useful if everyone in Sweden has already contracted the virus. Something that's not going to happen. Or at least it doesn't have to.

The percentage of the total pop that ends up contracting the virus before a vaccine is produced is largely determined by the quality of social isolation in place.

There has been no successful vaccine to date for a Coronavirus. The only vaccine tested for SARS actually sensitized people to Coronavirus infection and testing was stopped and then money dried up to continue testing. An effective vaccine is no sure thing but certainly not in the immediate future.

 

[CarolAnn856]

Anyone that wants to self isolate is free to do so.

You keep saying that, but it really isn’t just black-and-white. I’ve already illustrated a couple of points, at least I think it was in this thread. What you are suggesting simply cannot work.

 

[pahoben]

It's not surprising that 5 weeks into the pandemic, Sweden's percentage of the total population killed by the virus is much lower than the predictions for the total number of the population that will be killed by it. 5 weeks, that's how long ago Sweden had it's first death. Still a lot of weeks to go.

But you can look at the data and very easily see deaths and new cases are not increasing at this time. Deaths have remained about 100/day since April 1st and new cases have leveled.

 

[pahoben]

You keep saying that, but it really isn’t just black-and-white. I’ve already illustrated a couple of points, at least I think it was in this thread. What you are suggesting simply cannot work.

I don’t agree. There are specific medical conditions that elevate risk enormously. The people that have those risk factors should self isolate. Most people have no symptoms at all or very minor.

 

[low-key]

wrong thread

 

[pahoben]

It might help you to understand once you start using the correct terminology.
I can tell science and medicine is not your background.

Thank you for your kind comments.

 

[Cogswel_Cogs]

wrong thread

I've felt that way for a couple of hours now

 

[cobright]

no successful vaccine to date for a Coronavirus

To be fair, there have been 2 other human corona virus' and both were self-isolating. Meaning, people shows symptoms within a day or so of getting it and were easy to identify and treat. We didn't develop a vaccine for Sars and Mers because models predicted their roughly 8k and 3k case count. We got concerned enough about SARS to be worried, but once China started torching chicken farms and the new cases started dropping, the incentive dropped.

 

[CarolAnn856]

I don’t agree. There are specific medical conditions that elevate risk enormously. The people that have those risk factors should self isolate. Most people have no symptoms at all or very minor.

I think the difference in our views may relate to how many people we believe would want to isolate. I think the number is fairly high, as it would include not only high-risk individuals, but their entire households as well. There‘s no point in isolating if your spouse goes to work and your kids go to school, for example. And as someone else mentioned, companies are not going to pay for people to isolate. If they’re eligible to work but choose not to, and they run out of paid leave, they won’t be eligible for unemployment. Again, it isn’t as simple as “just stay home.”