Coronavirus Sars-CoV-2/Covid-19 Megathread

[Tamas]

I think that Tyr likes to over-estimate the bad faith of political actors he doesn't like, and that's what he meant.

I am not sure it applies to me though. Do I literally mean the Swedish government wants to eradicate old people? Of course not. But if you are not enacting measures to prevent them dying in roves of a pandemic, then you consider them expendable. Which is again, not EXACTLY as bad as actively trying to kill them, but not a LOT better.

[viper37]

I haven't found a source, but credible rumours has it that around 30% of Stockholm has already had it. Swedish CDC is on record claiming that we approach herd immunity.

Doesn't herd immunity need something like 60-80% of the population to have it?

Approach |= There.

If herd imminuty is 60-80%, at 30%, you hare at 50%-62.5% of your target.  I would not describe it as "approaching".

[DGuller]

NY is going to do a statistical sample with antibody tests, starting today.  Anyone care to make a prediction as to what the statewide positive percentage will be?  My guess is 25%, +/- 5%. 

I think that about 7%-10% of New Yorkers would test positive if they lived in a place that tests everyone with symptoms.  From what I'm hearing, New York is not testing people unless they're on the verge of hospital admission or are first responders, as a general rule.  I also think that we're collectively way underestimating how many people are either asymptomatically sick, or maybe were sick for a day but immediately expelled the infection.  For that reason I'm judgmentally slapping a factor of three on my initial estimate.

[Sheilbh]

I don't know if Sweden's approach is right. But I think that's a bit unfair.

I think the Swedish view is: this disease is out of the box and will continue to circulate, it cannot be eliminate so there will be multiple waves and we now need to manage a world with coronavirus; and people will not tolerate long-term strict lockdowns (even China has only lasted about 2-3 months) longer than that and people will want change because of social, economic, mental health reasons or just boredom.

In addition I think you have a set of relatively uniquely Swedish circumstances. So for example I think Sweden has the highest rate of single-occupier residences in Europe if not the world, so you can socially distance (and they are) more easily than countries with lots of shared properties (either with families, multi-generational or flatmates).

If those assumptions are right and you have economic and cultural factors (like type of property) that make voluntary distancing achievable (and again this is happening - people are distancing in Sweden) - then the Swedish approach could be right and the rest of may all be able to get cases down but then suffer multiple waves, with multiple lockdowns (I imagine each, slightly less adhered to than the previous). But they could be wrong.

As I say my understanding is that the Swedish response isn't determined by politicians, it's determined by the public health authorities in a situation like this - it's the apolitical experts who take decisions. So it does, for me, feel like almost an extreme cold, bloodless technocratic choice - but it could be right we won't know until the rest of us have (or haven't) been hit by multiple waves. And it highlights that this is a situation where there are no good choices. I think  the Swedish experts think this approach is sustainable and will reduce the number of deaths over the course of the entire disease; the alternative which most other countries have gone for is unsustainable and will have a higher number of deaths over the course of the entire disease. As I say it's definitely cold but I don't think it's quite not prevent people from dying as taking measures which may mean more people die now, but in 12-8 months time will mean a lower death rate. They could be right, I don't know.

My suspicion is it won't be the path Europe goes down, but bits of it will inform Europe's approach when we start to exit lockdowns it will be with a pick and mix of South Korean, Israeli and Taiwanese style bio-surveillance with Sweden as a way of trying to deal with any second waves, rather than doing this again and having cycles of lockdowns (unless there's a really big outbreak). But I could be totally wrong.

[viper37]

NY is going to do a statistical sample with antibody tests, starting today.  Anyone care to make a prediction as to what the statewide positive percentage will be?  My guess is 25%, +/- 5%. 

I think that about 7%-10% of New Yorkers would test positive if they lived in a place that tests everyone with symptoms.  From what I'm hearing, New York is not testing people unless they're on the verge of hospital admission or are first responders, as a general rule.  I also think that we're collectively way underestimating how many people are either asymptomatically sick, or maybe were sick for a day but immediately expelled the infection.  For that reason I'm judgmentally slapping a factor of three on my initial estimate.

7-10% for the entire State.

[Admiral Yi]

10% for the state.

[Sheilbh]

NY is going to do a statistical sample with antibody tests, starting today.  Anyone care to make a prediction as to what the statewide positive percentage will be?  My guess is 25%, +/- 5%. 

I think that about 7%-10% of New Yorkers would test positive if they lived in a place that tests everyone with symptoms.  From what I'm hearing, New York is not testing people unless they're on the verge of hospital admission or are first responders, as a general rule.  I also think that we're collectively way underestimating how many people are either asymptomatically sick, or maybe were sick for a day but immediately expelled the infection.  For that reason I'm judgmentally slapping a factor of three on my initial estimate.

No idea. NY State is, I think now the worst regional outbreak and I think it's been around since mid-February when it came from Europe. Plus that hospital that tested women coming in for labour - which is presumably reasonably random - I think had 14% infected at that time. So I think it could be higher than people are anticipating for the city. No idea for the state as a whole.

[DGuller]

I also assume that antibodies will pick up more people than nose tests.  I wouldn't be surprised if some of the mildest of mild cases wouldn't even create enough material for nose tests to go positive, but the immune system response should still show up.

[celedhring]

I also assume that antibodies will pick up more people than nose tests.  I wouldn't be surprised if some of the mildest of mild cases wouldn't even create enough material for nose tests to go positive, but the immune system response should still show up.

Still lots of question marks on current antibody tests.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/19/us/coronavirus-antibody-tests.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage

[Tamas]

I don't know if Sweden's approach is right. But I think that's a bit unfair.

I think the Swedish view is: this disease is out of the box and will continue to circulate, it cannot be eliminate so there will be multiple waves and we now need to manage a world with coronavirus; and people will not tolerate long-term strict lockdowns (even China has only lasted about 2-3 months) longer than that and people will want change because of social, economic, mental health reasons or just boredom.

In addition I think you have a set of relatively uniquely Swedish circumstances. So for example I think Sweden has the highest rate of single-occupier residences in Europe if not the world, so you can socially distance (and they are) more easily than countries with lots of shared properties (either with families, multi-generational or flatmates).

If those assumptions are right and you have economic and cultural factors (like type of property) that make voluntary distancing achievable (and again this is happening - people are distancing in Sweden) - then the Swedish approach could be right and the rest of may all be able to get cases down but then suffer multiple waves, with multiple lockdowns (I imagine each, slightly less adhered to than the previous). But they could be wrong.

As I say my understanding is that the Swedish response isn't determined by politicians, it's determined by the public health authorities in a situation like this - it's the apolitical experts who take decisions. So it does, for me, feel like almost an extreme cold, bloodless technocratic choice - but it could be right we won't know until the rest of us have (or haven't) been hit by multiple waves. And it highlights that this is a situation where there are no good choices. I think  the Swedish experts think this approach is sustainable and will reduce the number of deaths over the course of the entire disease; the alternative which most other countries have gone for is unsustainable and will have a higher number of deaths over the course of the entire disease. As I say it's definitely cold but I don't think it's quite not prevent people from dying as taking measures which may mean more people die now, but in 12-8 months time will mean a lower death rate. They could be right, I don't know.

My suspicion is it won't be the path Europe goes down, but bits of it will inform Europe's approach when we start to exit lockdowns it will be with a pick and mix of South Korean, Israeli and Taiwanese style bio-surveillance with Sweden as a way of trying to deal with any second waves, rather than doing this again and having cycles of lockdowns (unless there's a really big outbreak). But I could be totally wrong.

That is all fine but it all comes down to what the individual healthcare systems can handle. I guess if Sweden will be able to handle the severe cases without overloading the hospitals, and the frail people who die would die eventually of COVID-19 during subsequent waves anyways, then great.

But for countries like the UK where they could not have stayed below capacity limit without lockdown, there was no other option.

In addition, I accept economic concerns re. lockdown length, but not boredom/mental health issues.

[Agelastus]

I would treat every assumption out of Sweden with a great pinch of salt. There must be tremendous desire to justify their care home eugenics program they opted for instead of a lockdown.

Tamas, can you drop the "bargain-basement Tyr" Shtick please; it's becoming increasingly wearing as the weeks go by.

Woo! Two personal attacks for the price of one.

Jealous? 

You were supposed to aim for 3 in one post.

My apologies for not meeting your high standards.

[Sheilbh]

That is all fine but it all comes down to what the individual healthcare systems can handle. I guess if Sweden will be able to handle the severe cases without overloading the hospitals, and the frail people who die would die eventually of COVID-19 during subsequent waves anyways, then great.

But for countries like the UK where they could not have stayed below capacity limit without lockdown, there was no other option.

Sure, my point isn't that Sweden's right for everyone but that it is still based on the idea of reducing the total number of deaths - and absolutely it depends on their health care system not being overwhelmed (which is a factor like them having lots of single people living alone in flats). But it's not that they're willing to tolerate this disease killing lots of people, it's that based on their assumptions this is the best way to actually reduce the deaths - but it does take a sort of fairly cold set of decisions to go for this approach.

In addition, I accept economic concerns re. lockdown length, but not boredom/mental health issues.

Rage, rage, rage against human nature

People will get bored and stop behaving at some point.

On mental health I think it will have an impact - there's normally a significant increase in suicides during recessions I think that'll be stronger at the minute because it won't just be economic pressure, but all-the-time-all-family-can't-escape pressure - plus, possibly the other "deaths of despair" will increase. And I think mental health is going to be one of the biggest challenges for the elderly who are being far more severely isolated, cut off from their family and friends - that's a hell of a challenge and I think maybe part of why elders have been resistant to stay in despite all-family pressure. If they give on this now, I feel like they kind of know they're probably not seeing their grandkids or anyone else for that matter this side of Christmas.

[Brazen]

First coronavirus casualty in my family - going to my uncle's (social distancing) funeral on Friday.

He was already quite ill recuperating from a fall in a care home. Slightly worried about attending as my cousin was a bit gung-ho about visiting his father when he was ill and is still going to the care home to help out a 100-year-old man with a colostomy bag, which doesn't sound advisable. I'm going to have to bring a 2m long broom handle and poke anyone who comes close away.

My 90-year-old dad is still going strong and being very good about self-isolation. He won't let me into the house so I just wave through the window once a week.

[Oexmelin]

In addition, I accept economic concerns re. lockdown length, but not boredom/mental health issues.

Why?

[Agelastus]

I think that Tyr likes to over-estimate the bad faith of political actors he doesn't like, and that's what he meant.

I am not sure it applies to me though. Do I literally mean the Swedish government wants to eradicate old people? Of course not. But if you are not enacting measures to prevent them dying in roves of a pandemic, then you consider them expendable. Which is again, not EXACTLY as bad as actively trying to kill them, but not a LOT better.

Tyr comes across as the left wing equivalent of a right-wing conspiracy nut when he's talking about political actors he doesn't like.

The tone and content of some of your posts have been grating me particularly badly over the last few weeks as they've started to sound like someone going down the same rabbit hole. I can see Sheilbh has had to post again to point out that Sweden (and Britain beforehand) were following scientific advice of how to deal with the Coronavirus outbreak - and, at least in Britain's case, have published the papers to show that. It's not some sinister right wing conspiracy to reduce social care costs.

Yet at least once a week he's having to say it again in response to posts like yours.

I've been holding back on posting the item I posted or a similar line for the last 2 or 3 weeks; today I finally lost patience and politeness and just posted it and "damn the torpedoes".