I live in Toronto, in the province of Ontario. Canada's largest city (2.5 million) and most populous province (14.5 million). We are trying our best but have almost 500 new cases today and 43 new dead (Over 4k active cases and over 300 dead). Many of our dead are elderly folks who live in care homes and every day there are more stories of dozens of deaths being reported by these institutions. The whole country is loked down, some provinces perhaps more than others. In Ontario only essential business are allowed to be open but some critics say the list is pretty generous.
SARS CoV-2 coronavirus / Covid-19 (No tin foil hat silliness please)
- Thread starter Don't Kill Bill
- Start date
A lot of people find it incredibly hard and uncomfortable to question their own beliefs.
Vast majority of us believe that our governments' are doing the right thing by imposing lockdown, more or less.
Therefore if Sweden succeeds with lockdown, it'll force people into the uncomfortable position of having to question what exactly what we've been forced to do by our governments. People feel scared of confronting something like that, for various reasons.
There's something in the tone of some posts on here that oozes spite and a sense of 'can't wait to tell you you were wrong' rather than 'your country really needs to listen, here'.
yup, my thoughts also.
What works for Sweden isn't certain to work for any other country. Think @Regulus Arcturus Black himself has been saying this.
Your post suggests you'd rather not have lockdowns in your own country and you're piggybacking.
Regarding Gothenburg's low numbers compared to Stockholm is combination of coincidence and timing (I presume).
I'm guessing it's coincident that Stockholm got hit worse than Gothenburg initially, but after the situation unfolded in Stockholm more restrictions were put in place which has had a good effect in other places in Sweden (timing).
Sad to see the swedish numbers go up again today after relatively low numbers last 3 days...
Oh and Gothenburg is much smaller than Copenhagen in population. Copenhagen = Stockholm...
I'm guessing it's coincident that Stockholm got hit worse than Gothenburg initially, but after the situation unfolded in Stockholm more restrictions were put in place which has had a good effect in other places in Sweden (timing).
Sad to see the swedish numbers go up again today after relatively low numbers last 3 days...
Oh and Gothenburg is much smaller than Copenhagen in population. Copenhagen = Stockholm...
It really does look like Remdesivir is the best hope we have at the moment. Initial reports are very promising. Do we know how quickly can the production be scaled up for this provided the randomised trials go well?
Hell it might turn out that what works for Gothenburg doesn’t work for Stockholm!
I don’t think that’s the case as I think it’s just likely that Stockholm had so much more of the virus circulating in mid-March, just like they did in Belgium and that lockdown wouldn’t have had any massive difference compared to the measures Stockholm put in so far.
I also think that both Stockholm and Belgian will level off with the current restrictions, the fact that ICU in Stockholm has been around the 200 mark for three weeks now makes me feel quite confident of that.
You would think the two year timeline is optimistic on the vaccine development and roll out time, but also pessimistic on any other advancements that might be achieved in the meantime. Improvements in treatments, testing, capacities of healthcare systems, even just the general understanding of the virus, etc. can all expedite the abolishment of some measures.
I also think humans are generally decent at pulling solutions out of their arse when the pressure is on, so I somewhat hopeful.
I also think humans are generally decent at pulling solutions out of their arse when the pressure is on, so I somewhat hopeful.
Sweden’s numbers didn’t jump up today,
it’s been quite consistent for a week now, it’s just the weekend thing catching up now, seems to be the case with many countries.
Will be a rather large number again tomorrow which will also then get allocated into the correct days if you look at the Swedish health site.
CPH = 790k
GOT = 600k
STHLM = 974k
Second paragraph is just wishful thinking. It also ignored all available evidence.
Irrespective of the number of cases that originally enter a country from abroad, lockdown will 100% slow the spread of the virus from those initial cases. So an early lockdown in Stockholm would absolutely have saved lives. That shouldn’t even be up for debate. The only unknown here is whether the decision not to lock down might have saved lives due to the reduction in economic hardship. And whether those potential saved lives outnumber those killed by the virus.
I suspect not but it’s almost impossible to prove, one way or another.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
778 is still a bad total for one day.
But for a Tuesday, it's not as big a jump as the last few weeks. If we can keep in this sort of range for the next few days, I think we can talk about the UK having reached and passed its peak.
Yeah but feck me how many of those deaths were in Oslo and how many of those deaths were in Helsinki? The vast majority right? You can’t compare it to the whole of another country.
At least when this is over i won't have to see a constant barrage of facts about Swedens population density 
In other news our neighbours have seemingly decided it's a good idea to have a load of children around.
In other news our neighbours have seemingly decided it's a good idea to have a load of children around.
Now think catching the virus to time of death, what is the timeline on that on average? That’s why I wrote so far in bold underline.
Dont know man. I just hope to god the randomized trials go well.
Mixed reports coming out about hydroxychloroquine and some other medication combination.
But yea Remdesivir looks our best hope at the moment.
Fingers crossed.
Got to remember too, Monday was a Bank Holiday so again, weekend staff pretty much. Tomorrow will be the crucial numbers
Ah, shit, yeah. Totally forgot about that.
That shouldn't be a problem if the trials go well I'd imagine with a global concerted effort to mass produce and a pharma company with dollar signs in their eyes.
It's the most promising in my opinion, will find out end of May/early June I'd imagine what results are going to be given the trials underway for patients with moderate COVID 19 (its got 2400 participants estimated so good sample size to extrapolate from). Probably results and findings earlier if overwhelmingly positive or clinically significant.
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04292899
I'm a bit pessimistic there because it's a 'weird Tuesday' isnt it, because of the Bank Holiday weekend. I'm almost expecting Wed/Thurs to be this week's Tuesday if that makes any sense. Fingers crossed though - I'm sure some pretty clued up people pointed at the 17th of April being our peak so we are probably around it now.
Have you ever looked into that specifically? I ask that because it seems so many people take for granted that recessions cost lives (myself included, until very recently) whereas it seems the issue is a lot more complex than that. It's certainly true for very poor countries where famine is already an issue, but when it comes to wealthier countries the issue becomes a lot complex. For a bit on this (what actually made me question that hypothesis) there's this study and others. Food for thought.
Life and death during the Great Depression
https://www.pnas.org/content/106/41/17290
Abstract
Recent events highlight the importance of examining the impact of economic downturns on population health. The Great Depression of the 1930s was the most important economic downturn in the U.S. in the twentieth century. We used historical life expectancy and mortality data to examine associations of economic growth with population health for the period 1920–1940. We conducted descriptive analyses of trends and examined associations between annual changes in health indicators and annual changes in economic activity using correlations and regression models. Population health did not decline and indeed generally improved during the 4 years of the Great Depression, 1930–1933, with mortality decreasing for almost all ages, and life expectancy increasing by several years in males, females, whites, and nonwhites. For most age groups, mortality tended to peak during years of strong economic expansion (such as 1923, 1926, 1929, and 1936–1937). In contrast, the recessions of 1921, 1930–1933, and 1938 coincided with declines in mortality and gains in life expectancy. The only exception was suicide mortality which increased during the Great Depression, but accounted for less than 2% of deaths. Correlation and regression analyses confirmed a significant negative effect of economic expansions on health gains. The evolution of population health during the years 1920–1940 confirms the counterintuitive hypothesis that, as in other historical periods and market economies, population health tends to evolve better during recessions than in expansions.
Recent events highlight the importance of examining the impact of economic downturns on population health. The Great Depression of the 1930s was the most important economic downturn in the U.S. in the twentieth century. We used historical life expectancy and mortality data to examine associations of economic growth with population health for the period 1920–1940. We conducted descriptive analyses of trends and examined associations between annual changes in health indicators and annual changes in economic activity using correlations and regression models. Population health did not decline and indeed generally improved during the 4 years of the Great Depression, 1930–1933, with mortality decreasing for almost all ages, and life expectancy increasing by several years in males, females, whites, and nonwhites. For most age groups, mortality tended to peak during years of strong economic expansion (such as 1923, 1926, 1929, and 1936–1937). In contrast, the recessions of 1921, 1930–1933, and 1938 coincided with declines in mortality and gains in life expectancy. The only exception was suicide mortality which increased during the Great Depression, but accounted for less than 2% of deaths. Correlation and regression analyses confirmed a significant negative effect of economic expansions on health gains. The evolution of population health during the years 1920–1940 confirms the counterintuitive hypothesis that, as in other historical periods and market economies, population health tends to evolve better during recessions than in expansions.
I think people are aware that Easter will have distorted the figures some what.
I have a bad feeling that the figures we'll see this week will be horrendous.
Fasten your seatbelts.
Cheers, makes sense.
It doesn’t actually even make sense, I do wonder if it’s a case of now people in here just don’t like Regulus’ ’ways’ which I sort of get because he did become massively annoying in the Ole threads come to think of it.
But yeah if it’s not that then I’m confused as to why Sweden are supposedly getting it so wrong? .. based on the timeline of the general thread consensus and logical thinking.
- everyone was in agreement that the lockdown cannot last longer than a few months and that after full lockdown we needed to have measured social distancing.
Isn’t this exactly what Sweden are already doing? They’ve just skipped the full lockdown. Maybe they’ll do it later who knows? It’s not as if they’re in Belarus mode and casually acting as if nothing is happening.
- everyone said the full lockdown was to prevent health services being overrun and to get more testing measures/equipment .
Sweden’s is currently not being over run.
I struggle to see the point in comparing their current death numbers to nearby countries in full lockdown unless it gets completely ridiculous (Italy). At some point these countries will stop the lockdown and go into Sweden’s current partial lockdown and when that happens more people are unfortunately going to die than when these countries were in full lockdown. Correct?
The UK had to go into full immediate lockdown because our services would have been bent over if we didn’t. The countries are not even comparable when you consider our capital has about eight times as many millions in it as Sweden’s. Were a lot higher risk, not only because of the many more people but were a much more unhealthier nation.
There’s been a lot of talk that the lockdowns will be partially on and off for the foreseeable future. If that is the case why is it so imperative Sweden do it now? Why does everyone’s timeline have to be the same?
Yeah the Sweden debate has basically taken over the thread. It’s got to the point where it doesn’t even seem as if the debate is for the right reasons and the arguments are not even making sense or they’re moving goalposts and that’s from both sides.
We won't develop herd immunity in 18 months unless we open up completely and allow thousands to die.
Aren’t there reports of people in Singapore who’ve recovered and got it again, as there’s more than 1 strain out there?
It’s 90% because I’m an annoying cnut 5%, they don’t want to be wrong and 5% something else.
Apparently not everyone is immune but I imagine there's some immunity. If there's not strong immunity and we can't develop vaccine, we will have to figure something else out. I don't think it will be that bad though.
All this talk about how people my age having it good/bad and I'm sitting here with two degrees but still renting, good local government private pension but shite British pension, Hagen daas ice cream in the freezer but no butter in the fridge. Meanwhile my parents have their own homes paid off and strong pensions but ill health and bugger all to do to pass the time.
And while all this is going on some billionaires are rubbing their hands together and whispering "good...good....hate each other...." as they steal anything that isn't nailed down. Like all the fecking Freddos
Let's just all agree that everyone will be affected by this for the worse except a small few and unless we all come together and put our differences aside there will be no more Freddos left forme us.
And while all this is going on some billionaires are rubbing their hands together and whispering "good...good....hate each other...." as they steal anything that isn't nailed down. Like all the fecking Freddos
Let's just all agree that everyone will be affected by this for the worse except a small few and unless we all come together and put our differences aside there will be no more Freddos left for
AFAIK there's no real indication that there's no immunity, so far. Most cases that tested positive again after recovery are suspected to be because of the test's unreliability rather than an actual reinfection. There's not enough information to make any meaningful conclusions of course, as is the case with most things related to this pandemic.
2972 new infections in Italy, the lowest number in weeks!
602 deaths unfortunately which is an increase on yesterday.
602 deaths unfortunately which is an increase on yesterday.
No one is going to be a tourist in Italy this year, wasting their money. They’d be better making plexi glass protection for taxi drivers or something like that. Plus, wouldn’t those things be like giant heat conductors?
Domestic tourism will be much bigger this year. I don't know what kind of restrictions will be in place this summer but I think more people will go on holiday within their own country. I know people are gagging to go out all over Europe and a trip to the beach or wherever will be much sought after.
UK Update now, I feel Rishi Sunak is the only person who will give answers properly and ones we can believe
Question for the doctors - we’ve been quarantining in the house for 5 weeks now but using our back garden which is made private with high fences all around. Apart from receiving deliveries to our doorstep we haven’t had any contact from anyone else.
May wife, the kids and i all seem to be getting a common cold; sniffles, sneezing, itchy throats and occasional cough.
how is it possible considering we haven’t been near anyone?
May wife, the kids and i all seem to be getting a common cold; sniffles, sneezing, itchy throats and occasional cough.
how is it possible considering we haven’t been near anyone?
Hayfever? I'm no doctor btw. Mine has started to flare up last week.
Common cold.
We've got similar and for us it is pollen I am sure it's been really high the last 5 days or so. *Disclaimer* I am not a doctor by any means this is just one possibility.
Interesting link, thanks. I always suspected reality was going to be way more complicated than loads of people suddenly dropping dead from poverty as soon as a country enters lockdown.
Another factor which gets overlooked in the economy vs lockdown debate is the cost to the economy (mortality and morbidity of key employees etc) of letting the virus do its thing.
I sense affluence and like-mindedness.