Official Covid-19 Discussion Thread

[Fairview4Life]

It is absolutely not clear Sweden has reached any herd immunity threshold. Most estimates say around 70% would be sufficient. The Swedes just came out and celebrated...25%. In Stockholm. And somehow expected that to reach herd immunity levels within 2 weeks. That's with all the usual caveats of unreliable antibody tests, Stockholm just being a single city, 25% being a very long way away from 70%, and not actually showing anyone any of the underlying data. Oh, and no one really knowing if immunity is conferred and for how long. If it's only for like a month of an increased effect, then you'd need to hit those infected levels all within that time frame or there will be a rash of reinfections. And then if the Swedes somehow decide they have hit their herd immunity levels and people start to actually go out to restaurants and movies again...they are going to get ****.

[ItsDanger]

It is absolutely not clear Sweden has reached any herd immunity threshold. Most estimates say around 70% would be sufficient. The Swedes just came out and celebrated...25%. In Stockholm. And somehow expected that to reach herd immunity levels within 2 weeks. That's with all the usual caveats of unreliable antibody tests, Stockholm just being a single city, 25% being a very long way away from 70%, and not actually showing anyone any of the underlying data. Oh, and no one really knowing if immunity is conferred and for how long. If it's only for like a month of an increased effect, then you'd need to hit those infected levels all within that time frame or there will be a rash of reinfections. And then if the Swedes somehow decide they have hit their herd immunity levels and people start to actually go out to restaurants and movies again...they are going to get ****.

I've heard anywhere from 70%-90% to achieve herd immunity. Yet that is unnecessarily high due to this virus' lower infection rate. I reference the chart below, but it makes logical sense. Wiki currently lists SARS CoV 2 as R0:1.4-3.9 and HIT 29-74%. I've heard local estimates of the R0 being around 2.0 but we'll know more later. But I would classify targeted herd immunity as a range at this point in time.

[Vaclac]

It is absolutely not clear Sweden has reached any herd immunity threshold. Most estimates say around 70% would be sufficient. The Swedes just came out and celebrated...25%. In Stockholm. And somehow expected that to reach herd immunity levels within 2 weeks. That's with all the usual caveats of unreliable antibody tests, Stockholm just being a single city, 25% being a very long way away from 70%, and not actually showing anyone any of the underlying data. Oh, and no one really knowing if immunity is conferred and for how long. If it's only for like a month of an increased effect, then you'd need to hit those infected levels all within that time frame or there will be a rash of reinfections. And then if the Swedes somehow decide they have hit their herd immunity levels and people start to actually go out to restaurants and movies again...they are going to get ****.

I used to think a high percentage like that was needed, which made the Swedish results puzzling, but then I came across an article which helped me understand how to model the "herd immunity threshold" in a way that I don't think many articles discuss.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.27.20081893v1.full.pdf  

The "herd immunity threshold" at which cases would naturally peak even absent any particular intervention actually depends very significantly on how homogeneous a population is in terms of their level of social interaction.  To start with the simple case of a homogeneous population, if we assumed an R0 of 2.5, then 60% of the population would need to be immune before the peak would hit, which would cause the transmission rate to drop below 1 (because only 40% of people would remain susceptible, and 2.5*40% = 1).  Of course there would still be significant infection post-peak and the ultimate % of people infected before the virus ran its course would be higher than 60%.
But in fact people who interact more with others are both more likely to catch the virus and more likely to spread it when they do catch it.  This variability in how much different people actually spread the virus is apparent in the "superspreader" phenomenon and backed up by research showing that a small percentage of infected people are responsible for causing the vast majority of infection.  It turns out this heterogeneity matters immensely in terms of what the "herd immunity threshold" is and how many people we should expect to contract the virus if we were not to take extreme measures to prevent infection, dropping from a 60% to 70% range down to a 10% to 20% range in the article linked above, under certain assumptions as to degree of heterogeneity.  Cases in Stockholm appear to have peaked roughly around the time that 17% of people had antibodies.  Of course, new infections continue after this threshold is reached, but the ultimate % infected should be no more than twice this amount. Prior to reading this article and thinking about it, the fact that Stockholm's cases appeared to have already peaked despite only 17% of people having antibodies puzzled me, as I was thinking of the simple version of this model and thinking that a virus which initially spread very quickly would necessarily have a very high herd immunity threshold. But accounting for clearly observed heterogeneity actually produces a much lower threshold than the simple formula.

[Kevin Willis]

I'm keeping an eye on India for two things.

1) If hot weather is slowing down the virus like other coronas. Apparently not. Granted the fact some refuse to social distance and population density adds to it. In rural parts, where there is more of a natural social distance, the virus spread rate is very, very low. There is hope there.
2) The low mortality rate. Since they have limited testing kits, the best number to look at is the mortality rate which is very, very low. Much of it is citizens are not very overweight like in N. America. Also their diet is full of herbs and foods known to boost the immunity so that they can get it but not die from it. There's also the large amounts of sun giving a Vitamin D boost to the immune system.

They will have herd immunity without a lot of deaths which is probably the best any country can ask for outside of how Taiwan, Australia, S. Korea, etc have handled it.

[ItsDanger]

Ontario reported a 6 week low of 258 new cases today. Some positive news and hopefully trend continues. This virus is showing typical pattern for its type. Media will churn out negative statements regardless but be cautious in your interpretation.

Some Toronto cases weren't reported so it will likely jump tomorrow.

[Kevin Willis]

CESB is open tomorrow. Students go and get your money, it's going to be tough to find a job.

[omar36]

CESB is open tomorrow. Students go and get your money, it's going to be tough to find a job.

wanteed to apply but dont think i will, not sure how stringent they are with the whole looking for a job thing. gunna be honest, not really gunna apply for jobs cause will put my mom at risk. shes already had a health scare so no point of risking it for the next month or 2.

tho for students who do get it, wish they just gave em all the 2k

[Raps in 4]

**** the requirements on the CESB. You need to be earning under $1000 to qualify. That's way too strict.

Most people I know applied for the CERB despite not qualifying. Maybe I should too... I just don't want to deal with the headache of a potential audit later.

[Johnny Bball]

How did people get sucked into using Swedens term for their strategy “herd immunity“ instead of calling it what it really is. Mass spread of disease. Just do nothing, take very little action, and let everyone get sick and let people die.

But I guess it’s used in a different context here. I’m pretty sure right now not even the Swedes are happy with the Swedes.

[jaymeister15]

How did people get sucked into using Swedens term for their strategy “herd immunity“ instead of calling it what it really is. Mass spread of disease. Just do nothing, take very little action, and let everyone get sick and let people die.

But I guess it’s used in a different context here. I’m pretty sure right now not even the Swedes are happy with the Swedes.

They aren't "doing nothing". They have closed their borders for the most part, banned gatherings over 50 people, and have a lot of the same social distancing recommendations/guidelines in place----obvious difference being they allowed businesses and schools to stay open, subject to following the guidelines, and have allowed people to continue seeing friends and family while following the recommendations.

They do have a relatively high death per capita rate compared to a couple neighbours currently, but it's also lower than several European countries with strict lockdowns (UK, spain, italy). Their main issue is the same issue we are having here in Ontario, and many other countries, which is nursing homes. Only 171 of the people in Sweden that have passed away have been under 60 years old, 14 people under 40 (and almost all of them had other conditions). The majority of their deaths have been in nursing homes, with 1495 being between 80-90 and 901 over 90 years old.

I'm sure they would agree they've failed at keeping the elderly in LTC homes safe from the virus, just like we have here. But, in terms of their general population, the number of deaths has been minimal and right in line or below any country with strict guidelines you want to compare them to. Their hospitals and ICUs have stayed well below capacity (which was the original goal of our lockdown back when it started). The obvious benefit is they avoid all the collateral damage caused by mass unemployment, mental health issues caused by isolation from friends and family, health issues from delaying surgeries (certain heart and cancer related surgeries were postponed in Ontario under our guidelines), the massive hit to the general economy (last I saw their GDS had dropped a tenth as much as comparable countries in the EU). They also avoid the theoretical increase in cases expected when lockdowns are ended and should have a much weaker (if any) 2nd wave

[omar36]

**** the requirements on the CESB. You need to be earning under $1000 to qualify. That's way too strict.

Most people I know applied for the CERB despite not qualifying. Maybe I should too... I just don't want to deal with the headache of a potential audit later.

oh they will audit, i think the govt knows how many fradualent claims were made, thats why they are giving ppl the chance to pay it back now instead of when they forecefully take it back. Im not gunna risk it, im forunate enough to have enough money to get by for now.

[Kevin Willis]

Watched Aeon Flux since it was recommended to me. Hopefully things don't go that bad in terms of viruses.

[BBallInSight]

Read on Twitter

Earlier sciam article making the same point.

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/comparing-covid-19-deaths-to-flu-deaths-is-like-comparing-apples-to-oranges/

If every time someone died, we gave them a test for the flu, and if it showed positive we marked the death caused by the flu, we'd certainly have these sorts of numbers associated with the flu. There has been too little distinction between died of and died with. Also, even with 5x more deaths, I wouldn't say it's worth imploding society with lockdowns.

[BBallInSight]

I'm friendly with an an emergency room doctor in Toronto. He sees Covid patients regularly. He told me that this is all blown out of proportion. That it is basically a bad flu. If you're really sick already, it can be a problem - the same is true for the flu. He says that there are a lot of doctors that feel the same way. I'd rather believe professionals who see these patients all the time, rather than believe the fear-mongering media that's always going on about cases, which is not an indicator of much at all. Why did the media say hospitals were at the tipping point when they were always almost empty? The only way to know precisely how much danger the virus presents is to have done more testing - and here we are months in and yet still not nearly enough testing. Excuse after excuse as to why we can't do more.

[5thQuarter]

I'm friendly with an an emergency room doctor in Toronto. He sees Covid patients regularly. He told me that this is all blown out of proportion. That it is basically a bad flu. If you're really sick already, it can be a problem - the same is true for the flu. He says that there are a lot of doctors that feel the same way. I'd rather believe professionals who see these patients all the time, rather than believe the fear-mongering media that's always going on about cases, which is not an indicator of much at all. Why did the media say hospitals were at the tipping point when they were always almost empty? The only way to know precisely how much danger the virus presents is to have done more testing - and here we are months in and yet still not nearly enough testing. Excuse after excuse as to why we can't do more.

I work in ER in the GTA and I want to know where that paradise is located.

If that is what you truly believe, we could use your courage in the hospitals. Why not volunteer in one? Could greatly use your help especially with the amount of patients coming in from retirement homes.

We're rather short on PPE but it seems like you don't want it nor would use it.

[mtcan]

Read on Twitter

Earlier sciam article making the same point.

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/comparing-covid-19-deaths-to-flu-deaths-is-like-comparing-apples-to-oranges/

If every time someone died, we gave them a test for the flu, and if it showed positive we marked the death caused by the flu, we'd certainly have these sorts of numbers associated with the flu. There has been too little distinction between died of and died with. Also, even with 5x more deaths, I wouldn't say it's worth imploding society with lockdowns.

Here's the problem with your theory. People sick enough to die from the flu usually find their way to the hospital...and once there they are swabbed for a flu. Flu swabs return quickly so quantifying the numbers of flu deaths is happening. Those that aren't sick enough to be a death's door are usually at home and will pull through. Sooo...there goes your theory.

But think of ALL of the people in the community asymptomatic or symptomatic with covid and they were just never offered a test because the criteria was too stringent or there just weren't enough tests available. There could be thousands more that have or had covid and the case number is probably even higher.

[BBallInSight]

I'm friendly with an an emergency room doctor in Toronto. He sees Covid patients regularly. He told me that this is all blown out of proportion. That it is basically a bad flu. If you're really sick already, it can be a problem - the same is true for the flu. He says that there are a lot of doctors that feel the same way. I'd rather believe professionals who see these patients all the time, rather than believe the fear-mongering media that's always going on about cases, which is not an indicator of much at all. Why did the media say hospitals were at the tipping point when they were always almost empty? The only way to know precisely how much danger the virus presents is to have done more testing - and here we are months in and yet still not nearly enough testing. Excuse after excuse as to why we can't do more.

I work in ER in the GTA and I want to know where that paradise is located.

If that is what you truly believe, we could use your courage in the hospitals. Why not volunteer in one? Could greatly use your help especially with the amount of patients coming in from retirement homes.

We're rather short on PPE but it seems like you don't want it nor would use it.

You don't sound like much of a doctor. Do you gloss over the statements of your patients like you did mine? Where did I say it was a paradise? I recounted the testimony of a doctor, who said the "disease" presents like the flu. Why don't you speak to the facts? What is happening to your patients? Were the hospitals overflowing or they were not?

[Kevin Willis]

I'm friendly with an an emergency room doctor in Toronto. He sees Covid patients regularly. He told me that this is all blown out of proportion. That it is basically a bad flu. If you're really sick already, it can be a problem - the same is true for the flu. He says that there are a lot of doctors that feel the same way. I'd rather believe professionals who see these patients all the time, rather than believe the fear-mongering media that's always going on about cases, which is not an indicator of much at all. Why did the media say hospitals were at the tipping point when they were always almost empty? The only way to know precisely how much danger the virus presents is to have done more testing - and here we are months in and yet still not nearly enough testing. Excuse after excuse as to why we can't do more.

I work in ER in the GTA and I want to know where that paradise is located.

If that is what you truly believe, we could use your courage in the hospitals. Why not volunteer in one? Could greatly use your help especially with the amount of patients coming in from retirement homes.

We're rather short on PPE but it seems like you don't want it nor would use it.

Yep, I call bs on what he said as well. IF that was truly the case there wouldn't be doctors committing suicide over this. Or the videos of doctors in Italy talking about dead bodies everywhere. I don't have you guys connection, only an aunt who is a retired nurse and all she said was 'it's bad.' However the world needs all kinds of people, I personally don't want to get it with some of those symptoms - I would much rather get the flu but if some feel it's mild they can go do as you suggested and volunteer on the front line.

[jaymeister15]

Here's the problem with your theory. People sick enough to die from the flu usually find their way to the hospital...and once there they are swabbed for a flu. Flu swabs return quickly so quantifying the numbers of flu deaths is happening. Those that aren't sick enough to be a death's door are usually at home and will pull through. Sooo...there goes your theory.

But think of ALL of the people in the community asymptomatic or symptomatic with covid and they were just never offered a test because the criteria was too stringent or there just weren't enough tests available. There could be thousands more that have or had covid and the case number is probably even higher.

Not sure how your post addresses his. If a 95 year old with a weak heart gets the flu and then passes away a week later from a heart attack, do we say he died from the flu? No. But, if the same person tests positive with COVID, has no COVID symptoms, and passes away from a heart attack, that death is being counted in the COVID numbers.

How about an 85 year old stage 4 cancer patient? If someone in that situation dies while having the common cold, that death isn’t considered caused by the cold, it’s rightly considered caused by cancer. If that cancer patient gets COVID instead of the cold, why is it being counted as a COVID death?

Colorado changed the way they are counting COVID deaths from “died with COVID” to “died due to COVID” and the number of deaths dropped by almost 30%. Would it be that drastic everywhere? No idea, but given the average age of people currently considered COVID deaths is well into the 80s, and so many have other serious conditions, it seems a safe bet the numbers would be pretty similar in most places.

https://www.coloradoan.com/story/news/2020/05/16/colorado-changes-how-coronavirus-deaths-state-counted/5198485002/

For comparison sake, Canada (and every other country I’ve found the info on) follows the “died with COVID” reporting guidelines instead of only counting deaths that were actually caused by COVID

[BBallInSight]

Read on Twitter

Earlier sciam article making the same point.

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/comparing-covid-19-deaths-to-flu-deaths-is-like-comparing-apples-to-oranges/

If every time someone died, we gave them a test for the flu, and if it showed positive we marked the death caused by the flu, we'd certainly have these sorts of numbers associated with the flu. There has been too little distinction between died of and died with. Also, even with 5x more deaths, I wouldn't say it's worth imploding society with lockdowns.

Here's the problem with your theory. People sick enough to die from the flu usually find their way to the hospital...and once there they are swabbed for a flu. Flu swabs return quickly so quantifying the numbers of flu deaths is happening. Those that aren't sick enough to be a death's door are usually at home and will pull through. Sooo...there goes your theory.

But think of ALL of the people in the community asymptomatic or symptomatic with covid and they were just never offered a test because the criteria was too stringent or there just weren't enough tests available. There could be thousands more that have or had covid and the case number is probably even higher.

My point is that if many people test positive that are not very sick, then it shows the virus is not as worrisome. So more cases means less serious in that case, not more. To simply report cases is misleading.

As to my first point, at least one US state dropped their deaths due to covid by something like %25 percent today, because they said the deaths were incorrectly attributed to Covid. https://www.foxnews.com/us/colorado-lowers-coronavirus-death-count.amp.