Potholer has made a interesting nonpolitical piece where he just point out the importance to listen to science and what science has to say on matters.
stefan
Verified User
- Member since Aug 31st 2015
- Last Activity:
Posts by stefan
-
-
smoking
A French study found that only 4.4% of 350 coronavirus patients hospitalized were regular smokers and 5.3% of 130 homebound patients smokedThis pales in comparison with at least 25% of the French population that smokes A French study found that only 4.4% of 350 coronavirus patients hospitalized were regular smokers and 5.3% of 130 homebound patients smokedThis pales in comparison with at least 25% of the French population that smokesHmm, wondering if older people smoke much less than young ones and perhaps this is a confounding between age and smoking
-
In Sweden people 60,70,80 lives by they own and typically we do not meet with them unless e.g. outside I think that this group is well protected and that typically the spread, that spread like wild fire) is in the younger part of the population. Among 86-100 that typically live in the nurseries we have a big problem
as we have not been able to shield the young care givers form the old care takers. I think this is a common problem in the world.
Well atm under the current recommendations from the state we do not meet too closely
-
Link how the 0.15% was estimated. There are problems with all these estimates and maybe it is just wrong.
Or, it could be because Sweden is shielding their older population. If they have the capacity to do this really well, then those catching the disease will all be from a much younger population where 0.15% is very typical.
In Sweden people 60,70,80 lives by they own and typically we do not meet with them unless e.g. outside I think that this group is well protected and that typically the spread, that spread like wild fire) is in the younger part of the population. Among 86-100 that typically live in the nurseries we have a big problem
as we have not been able to shield the young care givers form the old care takers. I think this is a common problem in the world.
-
Link how the 0.15% was estimated. There are problems with all these estimates and maybe it is just wrong.
Or, it could be because Sweden is shielding their older population. If they have the capacity to do this really well, then those catching the disease will all be from a much younger population where 0.15% is very typical.
the report this comes form is as you know in swedish which is unfourtunate. But they are open with it and a flaw was corrected by multilple outsiders that checked the calculations. It is unfourtunate that it is in Swedish because I think you would have liked the approach. Any way the calibration comes from a study
-
It is heavily population dependent. Germany & Swiss North is also much lower. Here in Switzerland the death rate for age < 65 is below 0.05%. 97% of all death are older. For younger & children its below 0.01%, what means only a severe precondition might kill a child.
It's all about protection of the vulnerable. From the data it is now clear that 99.95% of all death did have preconditions. Even 100 so called younger deaths (section done in Hamburg Germany) with no known preconditions did all show multiple precondition during a section.
These younger on the surface healthy people are the most emotional cases as nobody can understand what happened.
USA has a mixed culture. E.g. some parts of New York have third world status regarding access to health. But the more wealthy white live in fully climates filtered air with no smog and dust. May be we once get the full insight into this social tragedy.
The official death rate for Sweden is 12.25% what is pretty high. But the real case number is at least 5x higher may be even 20x. Unless you don't know this ratio you must lucky to live in a save place.
The official death rate in sweden is high because of low testing. new figures say that one out of 75 infected becomes a statistic, which gives 0.15%
-
I'am a bit frustrated. The figured from folhälsomyndigheter indicates a death rate of 0.15% here But new york data indicate 0.75% The big question now with this differences is if correct, why the lower figures in Sweden,
Assuming somewhat correct figures, differences could be from (please add your ideas to this)
1. Different genes
2. Pollution
3. Obesity
4. Age distribution
5. How well risk groups are protected (elderly live with younger people due to powerty in new york)
6. powerty, bad medicated people that can't afford to treat cronic illness
7. medical treatment (My ímpression is that the quality in US is top notch)
8. Stress, Overwhelmed system (5X sweden in new york and in sweden we are at the limit)
9. Different mutation of corona
/Stefan
-
Doubt it. They count every death with a positive PCR test as a Covid death. Stage 4 cancer death + test -> Covid death. There are whistleblowers talking about this but hard to find. [most of you are scared to death on here because of fraudlent excel data - would you speak out if you could be fired because of it! No.]. I can't verify this guy, but he indicates in his facility any respiratory failure was Covid. Heart failure + Breathing problems -> Covid.
People die folks. Manipulation is rampant.Meanwhile Folkhälsomyndigheten fixed their flaw in the report And a new version should be available now or soon. They found that 1 out of 75 infected was not registred as infected. This gives death rate 1/75*2/16.8 = 0.16%. When it comes to the fraction of infected it looks like New York and Stockholm have similar numbers.
-
Shame. Google translate does not make this comprehensible alas.
https://www.medrxiv.org/conten….20066050v1.full.pdf+html
Tom Britten. Modelling, does not attempt to determine the IFR.
No I think that the swedish reoport is more interesting. The divided the population in compartments where one was mild conditions the dark fraktion and the other group severe symtoms and seen bu the publoc health. Also they speculate that there is different rates of spreading from the two groups. They also calibrated with a study of the number of infected at a weak in march. The studied 3 scenarious one where the dark group was 99% and for this group the spreading was the same as in population this was the best fit. now if you think about it 99% should determin the spread. Also 99.5% and 99.9% figures was tested but then a lower fraction of spreading was in the dark group. As you can see these is confounding factors and indeed if you look at the graphs there is not much difference. but the best error was from 99.9 whic is known to be a wrong answer and the presenter made a little fool of himself mensioning this number. As I said before the spread should be determined by the dark big group and therfore 99% seams right to me. Any how from reported cases to death there is another factor of 10 that gives 0.1%
-
This is news touted by the authority FolkHälsomyndigheten. If you want source code I think it's possible to get it. Unfourtunately in swedish.
There was similar result from a math professor Tom Britton. I do not have his report though.
-
Stefan, I'd be interested in this if real but I bet you it is not. I can't find any research that argues Sweden COVID IFR is 0.1%. Perhaps you could link it? What you quote (and I'd like the evidence and sample from which this was determined) does not prove that. You need to be sure that those who "don't know they are infected" stay asymptomatic after they are tested. Many of them will not.
PS - they have a policy of shielding older people. If they do this really well then IFR 7X lower than the current estimate 0.66% is very possible just based on the fact that only young and healthy people catch it. Risk double with every 7 years age increase.
This is news touted by the authority FolkHälsomyndigheten. If you want source code I think it's possible to get it. Unfourtunately in swedish.
-
"A new serological study by Stanford University found antibodies in 50 to 85 times more people than previously thought in Santa Clara County, California, resulting in a Covid-19 lethality of 0.12% to 0.2% or even lower (i.e. in the range of severe influenza). Professor John Ioannidis explains the study in a new video."
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.14.20062463v1
https://swprs.org/a-swiss-doctor-on-covid-19/#latest
"Stanford professor of medicine John Ioannidis explains in a new one-hour interview the results of several new studies on Covid19. According to Professor Ioannidis, the lethality of Covid19 is „in the range of seasonal flu“. For people under 65 years of age, the mortality risk even in the global „hotspots“ is comparable to the daily car ride to work, while for healthy people under 65 years of age, the mortality risk is „completely negligible“. Only in New York City was the mortality risk for persons under 65 years of age comparable to a long-distance truck driver."
External Content youtu.beContent embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.This is in line with a study in Sweden as well, around 0.1% death rate. They found that 1% of the ones infected knows they are infected e.g. led to a statistic.
-
Article on Sweden and the C.V.
I do not agree with this fellow.
It is really early too compare different countries as of date. The fast spread in essentially in Stockholm area, the rest of sweden is
closer to Denmark/Norway atm. And one reason for the fast spread is that a week of hollidays, that varied in time from one part
of the country to the next one and as an unlucky coinsidence, skiiers braught corona in from Italy to Stockholm. As the article also says,
we have dense poor areas in Stockholm where most of the spread have taken part. The article however paints it like there is a lot of people
who do not follow orders. That's not true. Stockholm is essentially dead if you ask for example my exwife who work and live in
Stockholm. People are a bit worried however, especially since the other end of the plateu is not visible yet. The article is interesting however
to shed light on the fact that the research community is splitted. But it's not true how the author paints it as it is one man show here
that dictates the measures. It's so that critics does not just say. I think that A is wrong because of B. They say A is wrong because of B and also
mr X is a moron. If I see such arguments I usually pass it into the dustbin and this article is a bit of too much for me. Actually recently people on
this side is complaining that they are ridiculed after saying A is not true because of B and moreover mr X is incompetent. Then mr X answers B
is obviously false because of simple math error and then the press and public rolled their eyes. Yes this is why it is important to humble and
always keep concentrating on the facts.
-
Interesting article. The results will tell the wisdom in the approach. I have my doubts. Especially keeping schools open.
Actually, I think sweden where both parents work suffer much more from closing schools, than many other countries. A good fraction of the workforce will temporarely quit their essential jobs or even more risky, the youngsters is taking cared of by grandma and grandpa if closing down the schools. Anyway
there is not much evidences for COVID to be spread by kids. Also Authorities manage a close eye on this and if there will pop up evidences then of cause measures will be taken. It's not 1/0. They prepared the law system to quickly do this.
-
About politisising.
Sweden's handling of the corona outbreak is run by experts and there is a daily update from these experts. The government
mostly just adapt for requests from these governments institutions in order to prepare laws so that e.g. closing schools
is possible. The Swedish people like the approach and the support is around 70%. The target is not to reach herd immunity
but we will reach that in the Stockholm area but probably not the rest of the country. Although the lock down is informally
done via recommendations, if I compare with friends in Illinois, the difference is not much in practice. The target is to keep
the cases down not to overwhelm the health care be sustainable, and protect the vulnerable. Pictures of people in the street
is miss-leading in practice most people e.g. a high fraction do not go to restaurants and pubs, but we do adapt and businesses
tend to take measures to keep the spread low. The death rate in Sweden is not much different to USA. The difference is that in
USA there seam to be a big pressure to open up, very politisized and stricter lock downs. This urgent need to open up is not seen
here and we can keep this kind of lock down going into august if we must. We think that the rest of Europe will land in this kind
of setup as more countries now open up. The modellers say that around 30% of Stockholm will have had the Corona in beginning
of may some other models suggests that it is already like this in Stockholm. One expert say that 99% is not noticing that they have
had the Corona virus. However people tend to loosen up now, the weather is extreamly nice now and people are longing to socialize
again so personally I expect the numbers to start climb again and we will see new measures taken to keep the social distance up.
-
I don't mean to be flip but oopsie... there goes relaxed restrictions Sweden:
https://e-markets.nordea.com/#…leration-in-sweden-and-uk
I suspect the Swedes might be a bit better at changing their policies effectively than Italy. They'd better hope so or they are looking at a disaster. Is this sort of curve what we want here (USA)? Unfortunately, to quote a character in Vonnegut's creepy novel "Cat's Cradle," "Death was never easier to come by..."
Thsi is reflecting that we have an epedimy in our nureries which is run as cheap as possible in a privateisation (lowest bidder get to run it) in sweden
and seam to have incompetnent management. If you look at the numbers in intensive care they have been stable for over a week and seam to delcline
-
If the figures from California are real (see link above) then this is a complete game changer. if only 1/50 gets symptoms then corona is just a cold or a mild flue with a real death rate of 0.01% at most.
Lets wait until this is verified. But the speed of covid-19 spread must be terrific and also the average immune reaction.
one more time: https://www.technologyreview.c…nfected-with-coronavirus/
I think that the correct figure is a death rate around 0.1% or more, number of death in city of new york is now 0.15% and effects of heard immunity seam to take place so
I believe so they maybe land on 0.2%. Of cause If a society can protect the volnurable the figure can very well be 0.1% or even lower. Smoking old population and things can go higher
So I think we are talking about a sever flue and not a light one
-
stefan - we, UK, locked down later than we should have and have seen our deaths rise as a consequence of infected cases two to three weeks ago. A plateau is now within sight. Maybe you Swedes have less fatalities but similar case numbers because of less pollution or other factors? None of the case numbers can be relied on because the tests have varying accuracy - deaths per million population are a better measure of whats really going on, you have only 150 whist we have more than twice that with 228. Spain is the worst with 429 whilst India has very low at 0.3 in common with Sub Saharan countries with endemic malaria. Greece is also remarkably low for a EU country with 11 deaths per million (they recently had a large malaria outbreak caused by their 'decade of debt'.)
,
Yes things happens faster in GB and it might be better to be proactive in such a case as a more analytic approach is too slow.
I think I seen figures that in the city of New York the death toll is now 0.15% but death rates is declining (probably due to heard immunity effects).
If your hospitals is not overwhelmed the difference between Sweden and GB should not in the end differ much, just that it goes quicker in GB.
Of cause not all parameters are the same so there will be differences but in large. Also an introduction of an effective treatment can change figures.
-
This is a sadly common misconception among non-medical people including prominent economists and politicians. Herd immunity needs to come from vaccines or infections treated effectively by an excellent treatment and not from untreated infections "in the wild." That method is mayhem!
Well the ones saying this is leading experts. We steer the rates so that we can give good care but not more than that. Keeping a tight look at the numbers, doing proper statistics
and statistical models to support the path forward you will as a consequence get heard immunity but the target is to make sure we can cope for a long time and keep the
numbers from exploding. There are experts that disagree with this approach and argue with a lock down but they seam to not running the show here. If numbers start to run away
they will take more measures. But only if there is proof that it is needed. This strategy seam to work, and will be helped by better treatment and tests. The experts believe that it is
impossible to wait for vaccines. And also that hard lockdowns is risking pushing the problems just forward in time and toll the economy badly and is difficult to maintain for a
longer time without strong police measures.
-
Simple. Because a lot of people would die in a horrible way completely unnecessarily. That's why. I have an idea. Why don't you volunteer?
Sweden is an interesting case, which practically is in a lock down due to individuals own descitions from the guidelines we have. But still much less stringent than
nearby countries. What we see is that we have a higher rate of deaths although stressing the health care is not overwhelming it. It is interesting to see how the
authority is thinking as they are transparent. For example we do not close schools up to 9th grade because they found that children did not transmit the decease
much e.g. basically they found that when teachers went ill it was due to visiting sick adaults and not the children. One could say that right now, as the infection rate has
stabilized. They talk about death rates about 0.1% which I think is low. everybody also say it's to early to say that we in sweden will have a higher death toll in the end
than our neighbours as they can get spikes again when removing the restrictions. The only severe mistake done was to not protect the nurseries properly which i
believe will in deed make a higher death toll here in the end. But the overall strategy is working it seams. The autorites expect that this kind of lockdown can stress out
towards august or into autumn they try hard to take measures so that we can sustain cautions for a long time both by the state not burning all the money to fast and also
through the measures that restrict our lifes. This is a marathon, people can start being careless and numbers spike again. Most probable as numbers go down the brave
(or stupid) ones will start life again, and keep the decline slow and so gently the society will startup again. Also we are awaiting immunity tests that will help startup
the country. At the moment we have a death toll at 0.015 this needs to go up to maybe 0,07 or probably higher before herd immunity so yes august seams
plausable.