Coronavirus Deaths per Capita

Ola

Registered User
Apr 10, 2004
34,597
11,595
Sweden

I am here! Give it to me! ;)

Seriously though, I still have to add that nothing even remotely could have strengthen the arguments I made about a month ago than the recent developments.

Check NYC:
87AC7E04-340B-4046-A0B5-39547435A280.png


Reopened. Mass protests. Not.Even.A.Flinch.In.The.Curve,

What we are seing now is places that shut down too early and never had any cases get them for the first time. It further just proves how unintelligent the country wide lockdown in the US was. When some places really should lockdown, they can’t afford it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dala

Sojourn

Registered User
Nov 1, 2006
50,523
9,377
What happened to second corona wave in the US? New record number of deaths per day? Lockdown lifted. People not social distancing.

View attachment 352614

6-7 weeks since George Floyd died.

This is one of those instances were you have one group saying one thing and then they are proven right 100% of the time, and the other group is saying something else and they are proven wrong 100% of the time — but it still makes no difference lol.

Here is the argument you made a month ago.

Yeah, that turned out wonderfully for you. You probably didn't think you were the one who was being proven wrong 100% of the time.

You keep selectively trying to use only the data that proves your point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: I am toxic

izlez

We need more toe-drags/60
Feb 28, 2012
4,576
3,463
I am here! Give it to me! ;)

Seriously though, I still have to add that nothing even remotely could have strengthen the arguments I made about a month ago than the recent developments.

Check NYC:
View attachment 359758

Reopened. Mass protests. Not.Even.A.Flinch.In.The.Curve,

What we are seing now is places that shut down too early and never had any cases get them for the first time. It further just proves how unintelligent the country wide lockdown in the US was. When some places really should lockdown, they can’t afford it.
A month ago, you looked at the USA's ~500 deaths per day and predicted a continued downward trend.

Since then, that would have resulted in ~14,000 deaths, depending how steeply we assumed the trend would continue down.
Instead we got ~33,000 deaths.

21,000 human beings died, in part, to spreading ridiculous misinformation that this isn't a big deal, that more cases doesn't mean more deaths, that this is disappearing, etc.


Then we've got states including Ohio, Louisiana, Virginia, Indiana, Washington, Georgia that show just because you hit a peak and had a downward trend does not mean you are passed this. You had a downward trend because you were diligent in doing the right thing.

And no, this does not mean I am advocating for a country-wide lock-down. We did that at the beginning to gain some initial time and knowledge (and my god, we were never actually locked down). Since then, we have learned things about face-masks, crowds, indoor vs outdoor, treatments, etc. We don't need to lock down, we just need to do a few basic things and continue to treat this seriously, and not look at tens of thousands of cases per day and act like we are magically fine.
 

Ola

Registered User
Apr 10, 2004
34,597
11,595
Sweden
A month ago, you looked at the USA's ~500 deaths per day and predicted a continued downward trend.

Since then, that would have resulted in ~14,000 deaths, depending how steeply we assumed the trend would continue down.
Instead we got ~33,000 deaths.

21,000 human beings died, in part, to spreading ridiculous misinformation that this isn't a big deal, that more cases doesn't mean more deaths, that this is disappearing, etc.


Then we've got states including Ohio, Louisiana, Virginia, Indiana, Washington, Georgia that show just because you hit a peak and had a downward trend does not mean you are passed this. You had a downward trend because you were diligent in doing the right thing.

And no, this does not mean I am advocating for a country-wide lock-down. We did that at the beginning to gain some initial time and knowledge (and my god, we were never actually locked down). Since then, we have learned things about face-masks, crowds, indoor vs outdoor, treatments, etc. We don't need to lock down, we just need to do a few basic things and continue to treat this seriously, and not look at tens of thousands of cases per day and act like we are magically fine.

Yeah, and you don’t think those places having been locked down for as long as they could afford when it wasn’t even necessary was a bit of a bigger problem?

Look at Sweden, cases isn’t surging, they have almost disappeared. Did Sweden open up too early? They never shut down! Look at NYC. Not even a flinch.
 

Sojourn

Registered User
Nov 1, 2006
50,523
9,377
Ola, you need to stop cherry picking only the data that suits your argument. You blatantly ignored the case numbers that were skyrocketing a month ago to focus on the mortality numbers, which were lagging behind. You pointed to them and said "Hey look, things are great!" but as soon as the curve turned up, you were mysteriously absent. Everyone else was predicting the curve would turn, as a result of the case numbers, and surprise surprise, that's exactly what happened.

Now you're using New York as evidence that things are still great, while ignoring that 1,000 people have been dying every day in the country, and the numbers have been awful at other locations. New York is doing great, but they are not the only example out there, are they? New York has been doing well because they have been doing well. Other locations had big increases in cases because they were failing to follow guidelines properly. There is a straight line between those results.

Edit: Pretty sure he has me on ignore, but oh well.
 
Last edited:

izlez

We need more toe-drags/60
Feb 28, 2012
4,576
3,463
Yeah, and you don’t think those places having been locked down for as long as they could afford when it wasn’t even necessary was a bit of a bigger problem?

Look at Sweden, cases isn’t surging, they have almost disappeared. Did Sweden open up too early? They never shut down! Look at NYC. Not even a flinch.
"Not necessary"

Very easy to say there was no problem when you're preventative measures are effective. Louisiana didn't shut things down soon enough and had mardi gras. They got hit hard. They closed down. They reopened and are being hit hard again.

Frankly, I have no idea how we are still having the "Sweden" conversation in the U.S. We loosened restrictions. We are consequently being butt****ed by the virus to the point of more daily cases and daily deaths than ~175 other countries have total to date.


This article gives a pretty quick/good visual representation on how things are going since states reopened.
See How All 50 States Are Reopening (and Closing Again)
The majority of states have seen a rise in cases. New York is an outlier, with a couple similar examples. If we want to let it just "burn through a population" in an area, we have a couple hundred thousand more deaths to go. Or we can just use the mitigation measures we have learned.
 

TaLoN

Red 5 standing by
Sponsor
May 30, 2010
50,736
24,446
Farmington, MN
Ola, you need to stop cherry picking only the data that suits your argument. You blatantly ignored the case numbers that were skyrocketing a month ago to focus on the mortality numbers, which were lagging behind. You pointed to them and said "Hey look, things are great!" but as soon as the curve turned up, you were mysteriously absent. Everyone else was predicting the curve would turn, as a result of the case numbers, and surprise surprise, that's exactly what happened.

Now you're using New York as evidence that things are still great, while ignoring that 1,000 people have been dying every day in the country, and the numbers have been awful at other locations. New York is doing great, but they are not the only example out there, are they? New York has been doing well because they have been doing well. Other locations had big increases in cases because they were failing to follow guidelines properly. There is a straight line between those results.

Edit: Pretty sure he has me on ignore, but oh well.
Cherry picking data to fit agendas happens too often around here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sojourn

Sojourn

Registered User
Nov 1, 2006
50,523
9,377
Cherry picking data to fit agendas happens too often around here.

Advanced stats, much?

But yeah. It’s still stupid. A point doesn’t suddenly become valid if you ignore all other data that disputes you. If you need to cherry pick the data to try to make your argument seem more legitimate, it’s a pretty good sign your argument isn’t legitimate. It’s very anti-scientific method.
 

TaLoN

Red 5 standing by
Sponsor
May 30, 2010
50,736
24,446
Farmington, MN
Advanced stats, much?

But yeah. It’s still stupid. A point doesn’t suddenly become valid if you ignore all other data that disputes you. If you need to cherry pick the data to try to make your argument seem more legitimate, it’s a pretty good sign your argument isn’t legitimate. It’s very anti-scientific method.
Hockey stats and their usage is why it was so predictable that virus stats would be utilized the same way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sojourn

Snauen

Registered User
Dec 27, 2017
1,349
526
Every country is making corrections like this, the reason a negative shows up is because they had no new deaths to report. Do you think the death numbers that are released are always people who died the day before? That's not how it works, sometimes they can be from the day before, sometimes they are a death from weeks ago that was added, and sometimes deaths are taken away.
Yep thats what I said. / Regards
 

Dubi Doo

Registered User
Aug 27, 2008
19,221
12,696
I am here! Give it to me! ;)

Seriously though, I still have to add that nothing even remotely could have strengthen the arguments I made about a month ago than the recent developments.

Check NYC:
View attachment 359758

Reopened. Mass protests. Not.Even.A.Flinch.In.The.Curve,

What we are seing now is places that shut down too early and never had any cases get them for the first time. It further just proves how unintelligent the country wide lockdown in the US was. When some places really should lockdown, they can’t afford it.
This isn't clear cut herd immunity. Could there be? Sure, but I believe speaking in absolutes is a bit...foolish?

NYC doesn't have indoor dining. They have gyms closed. From what I've read- many people wear masks. Now, I do believe that herd immunity may also be playing a factor in keeping their numbers so low, but that doesn't mean the other factors are not playing a major role, too. The question is- How big of a role each of these are playing?

Here in my county (Upstate NY)- our antibody tests are only hitting at a 3.9% positive rate, which started back in June. We've been hoovering around 1% positive infected rate (7-day average) for over a month now. You may be quick to claim "herd immunity" because it fits the narrative, but the truth is- we're very diligent with wearing masks out in public and we have strong regulations put in place that are followed due to harsh penalties if broken. I truly believe we are where we are today due to this. Herd immunity is likely having little effect on the spread in my area, atm.

It's going to be a while before we can say whether it's herd immunity, behavioral changes, or regulations put in place that are slowing the spread in certain areas. No where in the world, not even Sweden, is going back to a pre-pandemic lifestyle (outside of NZ, maybe)

Sweden has limited capacity at bars and restaurants, mass gatherings are not allowed (sporting events, concerts, etc...), they did distant learning for schools back in April and are going with a hybrid learning style in the autumn, they encourage people to work from home if they can, etc...So I think you can see why it's incredibly difficult to judge exactly where herd immunity begins to play a major role.

Finally, claiming the US locking down was unintelligent is the epitome of hindsight is 20/20. People seem to forget that the mortality rate in Lombardy was over 5% back in March. Obviously it was less than that, but we had no idea how much less it was. We had insufficient testing and knowledge of the virus. All we knew, was that Italy, a country with a topnotch healthcare system, was just rattled by this virus. We were fighting this war blind, so our only realistic option was to lock down until we gained control of the virus.
 
Last edited:

Ola

Registered User
Apr 10, 2004
34,597
11,595
Sweden
This isn't clear cut herd immunity. Could there be? Sure, but I believe speaking in absolutes is a bit...foolish?

NYC doesn't have indoor dining. They have gyms closed. From what I've read- many people wear masks. Now, I do believe that herd immunity may also be playing a factor in keeping their numbers so low, but that doesn't mean the other factors are not playing a major role, too. The question is- How big of a role each of these are playing?

Here in my county (Upstate NY)- our antibody tests are only hitting at a 3.9% positive rate, which started back in June. We've been hoovering around 1% positive infected rate (7-day average) for over a month now. You may be quick to claim "herd immunity" because it fits the narrative, but the truth is- we're very diligent with wearing masks out in public and we have strong regulations put in place that are followed due to harsh penalties if broken. I truly believe we are where we are today due to this. Herd immunity is likely having little effect on the spread in my area, atm.

It's going to be a while before we can say whether it's herd immunity, behavioral changes, or regulations put in place that are slowing the spread in certain areas. No where in the world, not even Sweden, is going back to a pre-pandemic lifestyle (outside of NZ, maybe)

Sweden has limited capacity at bars and restaurants, mass gatherings are not allowed (sporting events, concerts, etc...), they did distant learning for schools back in April and are going with a hybrid learning style in the autumn, they encourage people to work from home if they can, etc...So I think you can see why it's incredibly difficult to judge exactly where herd immunity begins to play a major role.

Finally, claiming the US locking down was unintelligent is the epitome of hindsight is 20/20. People seem to forget that the mortality rate in Lombardy was over 5% back in March. Obviously it was less than that, but we had no idea how much less it was. We had insufficient testing and knowledge of the virus. All we knew, was that Italy, a country with a topnotch healthcare system, was just rattled by this virus. We were fighting this war blind, so our only realistic option was to lock down until we gained control of the virus.

Nope, there is a dramatically different development in NYC, Stockholm, London, Northern Italy and sites like this compared to other places that hasn't been hit hard early that see their curves go through the roof right now.

In other words, we have a group of places with de facto little or no immunity with curves pointing up towards the sky and we have a group of places with a lot of immunity with curves pointing straight down.

Can this theoretically be explained by something else than immunity playing a major factor? Of course, if the -- behavior pattern -- of people in NYC, Stockholm, London and the likes was as dramatically different than elsewhere. We do not have direct information on that. But there is no sign of anything being different whatsoever in the data that we do have. I mean, if you can't see that now, I don't know what to say to be honest. Its the argument re Xs curve going down rapidly and Ys curve being stagnant resulting in the question "are X really doing such a better job at social distancing than Y" times 1,000 compared to a few months ago, and that was a point it was legit to ask that question at to start with.

Believe it or not, the world expands outside the border of the US and NY state and this is very obvious no matter where you look.

I definitely agree with a lot of the points you make, and of course, the globe today looks different re how we acted before the pandemic. No doubt. And that of course has a big impact. But antibody tests are showing very low results everywhere, but you still have a very large definit impact in the places that has been hit the hardest. That cannot be up for debate anymore.
 
Last edited:

Dubi Doo

Registered User
Aug 27, 2008
19,221
12,696
Nope, there is a dramatically different development in NYC, Stockholm, London, Northern Italy and sites like this compared to other places that hasn't been hit hard early that see their curves go through the roof right now.

In other words, we have a group of places with de facto little or no immunity with curves pointing up towards the sky and we have a group of places with a lot of immunity with curves pointing straight down.

Can this theoretically be explained by something else than immunity playing a major factor? Of course, if the -- behavior pattern -- of people in NYC, Stockholm, London and the likes was as dramatically different than elsewhere. We do not have direct information on that. But there is no sign of anything being different whatsoever in the data that we do have. I mean, if you can't see that now, I don't know what to say to be honest. Its the argument re Xs curve going down rapidly and Ys curve being stagnant resulting in the question "are X really doing such a better job at social distancing than Y" times 1,000 compared to a few months ago, and that was a point it was legit to ask that question at to start with.

Believe it or not, the world expands outside the border of the US and NY state and this is very obvious no matter where you look.

I definitely agree with a lot of the points you make, and of course, the globe today looks different re how we acted before the pandemic. No doubt. And that of course has a big impact. But antibody tests are showing very low results everywhere, but you still have a very large definit impact in the places that has been hit the hardest. That cannot be up for debate anymore.
You cannot compare pre-pandemic NYC/Italy to post-pandemic NYC/Italy. It's completely different. The initial outbreak and surge was before any lock down took place. NY then locked down, curb stomped the spread, reopened slowly with strong regulations, testing, contact tracing and mask usage, and is now a completely different environment than it was before the outbreak began. Italy has reacted similarly. I haven't followed London enough, but I'm assuming they've followed a similar trend.

Sweden seems to have hit their threshold, but again- they're not back to normal, so claiming herd immunity has been reached is a bit disingenuous since there are so many other factors at play that are also slowing the spread.

What I'm saying is- there's no way to know exactly where herd immunity would have a significant impact if we stopped testing, contact tracing, had zero mask usage, and no regulations because there's no area in the world that is doing that. So while herd immunity is likely having an effect on those hard hit areas- what's to say we wouldn't see another surge if we reopened and went back to normal?

Eventually, a country/state will take that chance, and we'll have a better idea. As of today, we can assume that herd immunity will begin to play a factor in hard hit areas, but to what extent is still unclear. This doesn't even take into account that every area will have a different R0 value depending on density, culture, wealth distribution, etc...which impacts herd immunity.
 
Last edited:

Devilsfan992

Registered User
Apr 14, 2012
8,623
3,538
These South American + Latin American countries are going through hell right now. Mexico, Colombia, Argentina, Peru and Brazil. It doesn't seem to be slowing down at all either.
 

Snauen

Registered User
Dec 27, 2017
1,349
526
Nope, there is a dramatically different development in NYC, Stockholm, London, Northern Italy and sites like this compared to other places that hasn't been hit hard early that see their curves go through the roof right now.

In other words, we have a group of places with de facto little or no immunity with curves pointing up towards the sky and we have a group of places with a lot of immunity with curves pointing straight down.

Can this theoretically be explained by something else than immunity playing a major factor? Of course, if the -- behavior pattern -- of people in NYC, Stockholm, London and the likes was as dramatically different than elsewhere. We do not have direct information on that. But there is no sign of anything being different whatsoever in the data that we do have. I mean, if you can't see that now, I don't know what to say to be honest. Its the argument re Xs curve going down rapidly and Ys curve being stagnant resulting in the question "are X really doing such a better job at social distancing than Y" times 1,000 compared to a few months ago, and that was a point it was legit to ask that question at to start with.

Believe it or not, the world expands outside the border of the US and NY state and this is very obvious no matter where you look.

I definitely agree with a lot of the points you make, and of course, the globe today looks different re how we acted before the pandemic. No doubt. And that of course has a big impact. But antibody tests are showing very low results everywhere, but you still have a very large definit impact in the places that has been hit the hardest. That cannot be up for debate anymore.
A must read for the Swedish "Corona-community" here.
Mejlen som avslöjar Gieseckes inflytande över coronaplanen

I've said it before here. This explains alot of the "Swedish strategy" and the failiure of it all. The corruption behind. Giesecke is the main problem. Tegnell and others are merely marionettes. Giesecke should be prosecuted for multiple things.
 
  • Like
Reactions: I am toxic

Ola

Registered User
Apr 10, 2004
34,597
11,595
Sweden
You cannot compare pre-pandemic NYC/Italy to post-pandemic NYC/Italy. It's completely different. The initial outbreak and surge was before any lock down took place. NY then locked down, curb stomped the spread, reopened slowly with strong regulations, testing, contact tracing and mask usage, and is now a completely different environment than it was before the outbreak began. Italy has reacted similarly. I haven't followed London enough, but I'm assuming they've followed a similar trend.

Sweden seems to have hit their threshold, but again- they're not back to normal, so claiming herd immunity has been reached is a bit disingenuous since there are so many other factors at play that are also slowing the spread.

What I'm saying is- there's no way to know exactly where herd immunity would have a significant impact if we stopped testing, contact tracing, had zero mask usage, and no regulations because there's no area in the world that is doing that. So while herd immunity is likely having an effect on those hard hit areas- what's to say we wouldn't see another surge if we reopened and went back to normal?

Eventually, a country/state will take that chance, and we'll have a better idea. As of today, we can assume that herd immunity will begin to play a factor in hard hit areas, but to what extent is still unclear. This doesn't even take into account that every area will have a different R0 value depending on density, culture, wealth distribution, etc...which impacts herd immunity.

Of course, but policy decisions going forward should of course be based on reality going forward, and not how things were but won't be again. Right?

Its the same in NYC, I assume. From my POV, I think its safe to assume that multiple factors plays a part in the development. People could be slightly more careful in NYC than in states where infections are peaking right now. Compared to the spring, climate are surely less favorable then compared to now for the virus. Its vacation time, less people at work. Etc etc etc.

But its also a fact that in the calculations and policy decisions, immunity was assumed to have a very marginal effect if any at all.
 

Gm0ney

Unicorns salient
Oct 12, 2011
14,428
12,680
Winnipeg
This is an interesting Twitter thread about the current "2nd wave" and the combination of some herd immunity and continuing social distancing measures in keeping it down:

 

Montag DP

Sabres fan in...
Apr 4, 2007
11,854
4,069
...Maryland
These South American + Latin American countries are going through hell right now. Mexico, Colombia, Argentina, Peru and Brazil. It doesn't seem to be slowing down at all either.
I just took a look at Brazil's numbers. Their daily deaths have been at a plateau of right around 1,000 for over 2 months now. That is weird. I feel like they must be missing a lot of deaths in the official count for that to happen.
 

TheMoreYouKnow

Registered User
May 3, 2007
16,385
3,413
38° N 77° W
A must read for the Swedish "Corona-community" here.
Mejlen som avslöjar Gieseckes inflytande över coronaplanen

I've said it before here. This explains alot of the "Swedish strategy" and the failiure of it all. The corruption behind. Giesecke is the main problem. Tegnell and others are merely marionettes. Giesecke should be prosecuted for multiple things.

I don't think it really explains much of it at all. I looked through the stuff in there, and all it tells me is that Giesecke is sort of the 'godfather' of Swedish epidemiology, and a lot of senior staffers in the public health sector admire him.

It's not illegal for them to get advice from someone they consider a highly competent expert. In fact, I suspect if his advice had been the other direction you would have welcomed it. It's also not obvious at all from all the stuff written that any of it - from his consulting contract with some financial institution to his wife's dealings - played any role in what his advice was. It's shoddy public administrative practice but hardly the root cause of the Swedish strategy.

The root cause of the Swedish strategy is that the leaders who made these decisions had these opinions, and we can say that those opinions are false, that they're due to the arrogance of a few leading men etc. etc. but that just means it's a false strategy as per your or my opinion. Now I would probably say that about a good few other government strategies and that's what elections are for - punish the government for pursuing the wrong strategy. No-one's going to be prosecuted for this, you can just vote them out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JBeast

Devilsfan992

Registered User
Apr 14, 2012
8,623
3,538
I just took a look at Brazil's numbers. Their daily deaths have been at a plateau of right around 1,000 for over 2 months now. That is weird. I feel like they must be missing a lot of deaths in the official count for that to happen.

Wouldn't be surprised. I don't know about Brazil, but I read Mexico is being severely under-counted as many deaths occur at home without being tested.
 

izlez

We need more toe-drags/60
Feb 28, 2012
4,576
3,463
This is an interesting Twitter thread about the current "2nd wave" and the combination of some herd immunity and continuing social distancing measures in keeping it down:


The idea that Louisiana is the only state going through a "second wave" is so cute.

It's like all these other states had a "first wave" and were trending downward and felt like they were passed the first wave. Now they are getting hit hard, causing the scale of graphs to change, and all of a sudden we're acting like it just didn't happen
 

Snauen

Registered User
Dec 27, 2017
1,349
526
I don't think it really explains much of it at all. I looked through the stuff in there, and all it tells me is that Giesecke is sort of the 'godfather' of Swedish epidemiology, and a lot of senior staffers in the public health sector admire him.

It's not illegal for them to get advice from someone they consider a highly competent expert. In fact, I suspect if his advice had been the other direction you would have welcomed it. It's also not obvious at all from all the stuff written that any of it - from his consulting contract with some financial institution to his wife's dealings - played any role in what his advice was. It's shoddy public administrative practice but hardly the root cause of the Swedish strategy.

The root cause of the Swedish strategy is that the leaders who made these decisions had these opinions, and we can say that those opinions are false, that they're due to the arrogance of a few leading men etc. etc. but that just means it's a false strategy as per your or my opinion. Now I would probably say that about a good few other government strategies and that's what elections are for - punish the government for pursuing the wrong strategy. No-one's going to be prosecuted for this, you can just vote them out.
I'll just say this; The mere fact, no matter if he is the most honourable person (I can asure you he is not) in the universe, that him and his wife are involved and heads of theese med-companies and lung-hospitals make him disqualified. End of discussion. He shouldnt have been listened too. Its just wrong all along.
 
Last edited:

romelson

Registered User
Dec 19, 2007
1,551
330
Ornskoldsvik
I'll just say this; The mere fact,no matter if he is the most honorable person (I can asure you he is not) in the universe, that him and his wife are involved and heads of theese med-companies and lung-hospitals make him disqualified. End of discussion. He shouldnt have been listened too. Its just wrong all along.

This is just plain and utter BS.
In a time of crisis, people should have been fired if we did NOT bring in our most senior experts in epidemiology.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dala and JBeast

Snauen

Registered User
Dec 27, 2017
1,349
526
This is just plain and utter BS.
In a time of crisis, people should have been fired if we did NOT bring in our most senior experts in epidemiology.
"We" did not "bring in" anyone. This is the person in charge (in reality) from the begining. Who do you refer to when you say"we" by the way, a politician?
 

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->