Sweden Dealing with Covid the Right Way

[island911]

Exactly.

How is the HUGE drop explained? You know, if they are doing it all wrong.

Shouldn't it be EXPONENTIAL from their failure to contain?

[Cajundaddy]

This thing is still super-fluid and drawing conclusions or calling the final score in the 1st quarter is pretty useless. Sweden is running a grand experiment and we will know the results next year, not next week or even next month.

[McLovin]

I agree, but these articles are so weird.

Here’s the headline:



Then buried at the very end:

[island911]

Originally Posted by Cajundaddy

This thing is still super-fluid and drawing conclusions or calling the final score in the 1st quarter is pretty useless. Sweden is running a grand experiment and we will know the results next year, not next week or even next month.

Agree.

And yet people quickly conclude that Sweden is doing it wrong... not enough social distancing is the problem.

A lot of countries have been locked down and still have much higher deaths per population than does Sweden. Spain, Italy, France, Belgium ... all have more than double the percentage of deaths from CV.

There are clearly so many factors here beyond only Social distancing..

[livi]

Somewhat simplified way of looking at it would be that no matter what strategy, its just a matter of time until every part of the world will have basically the same death toll per capitae. If we can´t erradicate this virus like smallpox and naturaly immunity/vaccine only have a limited time effect, sooner or later everybody succeptible will run into it.

This is of course not taken into account the deaths that partly will be caused by a overwhelmed healthcare, not enough ventilators etc. Other factors as well will also have an impact on some countries, geographic areas. Age distribution, smoking, general health etc.

But basically, without a long natural immunity or effective vaccin, the virus will sooner or later have flooded every corner of the world no matter degree of lockdown.

[jyl]

Originally Posted by McLovin

I agree, but these articles are so weird.



Then buried at the very end:

Significant “weekend effect” in Sweden data (and many other countries’ data too).

https://91-divoc.com/pages/covid-visualization/

[Sooner or later]

Originally Posted by island911

Exactly.

How is the HUGE drop explained? You know, if they are doing it all wrong.

Shouldn't it be EXPONENTIAL from their failure to contain?

If you look at past data that don't report many on weekends. I have been waiting to see today's number.

12 (Yesterday, Sunday)
17 (Saturday)
77
106
96
114
76
23 (Sunday)
15 (Saturday)
50
59

[jyl]

Originally Posted by livi

Somewhat simplified way of looking at it would be that no matter what strategy, its just a matter of time until every part of the world will have basically the same death toll per capitae. If we can´t erradicate this virus like smallpox and naturaly immunity/vaccine only have a limited time effect, sooner or later everybody succeptible will run into it.

This is of course not taken into account the deaths that partly will be caused by a overwhelmed healthcare, not enough ventilators etc. Other factors as well will also have an impact on some countries, geographic areas. Age distribution, smoking, general health etc.

But basically, without a long natural immunity or effective vaccin, the virus will sooner or later have flooded every corner of the world no matter degree of lockdown.

But that ignores two factors that can’t be ignored:

1. Overwhelmed healthcare. Death rate has been much higher where healthcare overwhelmed (Italy, Wuhan, NYC) than where it hasn’t been.

2. Vaccine development. Current efforts seem likely to produce a tested, approved vaccine in mass quantities by early/mid 2021. Not necessarily enough quantity for everyone on earth, but maybe enough for older, vulnerable, health care workers, and VIPs in rich countries.

So if you’re in a county that has a substantial healthcare system and can afford to procure the vaccine in mass quantity - i.e. any developed country - then a strategy that stretches out the deaths by “flattening the curve” will result in fewer total deaths, first by lower death rate and then by cutting off the pandemic with widespread vaccination.

If you’re in, say, Bangladesh or sub-Saharan Africa, or other poor country, then it probably doesn’t matter what strategy is used. Your healthcare will be overwhelmed regardless, and you can’t afford mass vaccination. There, your thesis may be correct.

Or maybe still not. In the 1918 Spanish flu pandemic, healthcare was ineffectual (no drugs or ventilators) and there was never a vaccine option (technology didn’t exist). I’ve seen charts showing that US cities that took aggressive measures had lower death rates than cities that did not - but I don’t know if that was just for one of the three waves of that pandemic, or for the whole thing.

[Sooner or later]

Also, Sweden has put in limitations. They started off limiting gatherings to less than 500 and then dropped it to 50. They have asked those in risk to self isolate. Many folks have decided to work from home.

Business is still off significantly and currently they are projecting a 6% contraction of GDP this quarter and about 3% for the year. SAS (airline) has cut 90% of it's workforce. Some of the laid off SAS staff is being trained to help in the healthcare system.

They may end up better than everyone else. Still too early to tell.

[jyl]

Of course, the economic effects of a strategy that flattens the curve via aggressive shutdown has huge economic impact.

Only the richest countries can cushion that impact. The USA can, because the US operates on US Dollars and the global dependence on USD means we can “print” a huge amount of USD for at least a limited time. Other countries that operate on their own local currency have some ability to print more EUR, CAD, CNY etc, though their need for USD is something of a constraint. Countries that operate on an external currency - not many, but for example Saudi Arabia, which effectively operates on USD given that all their income is in USD - are in a tougher spot.

So, the USA can have both a death-minimizing strategy and a minimized economic impact, if we can actually come up with the political and bureaucratic ability to execute the necessary steps.

[Sooner or later]

We need to start focusing on specific areas and look at modifying the amount of lockdown in areas that are stabilizing. And what we are locking down.

We damn sure know that a closed space with a high occupancy rate in contact for a length of time is a path to destruction. Nursing homes (high at risk pop account for over 15% of total US deaths, 3621), 240 cases at an Iowa pork processor, cruise ships, aircraft carriers, and churches,

[wayner]

One of the significant things about Sweden compared to many other countries, is the degree to which people have consideration for other people.

As a culture, in a negotiation for example, I want you to be ok with your end of the deal and you want me to be ok with my end of the deal.

This spills over into many other social interactions.
Being considerate in COVID days means, wearing a mask and gloves, keeping you distance, not leaving your infection all over the landscape.

They are not the most huggy or kissy like the Italians.

Meanwhile in another country, the Danes are one of the most non touchy feely people I have ever met.

So, consider a variety of factors beyond the obvious of testing, complete lockdown etc.
There may be alternate actions that can be taken, but if people can't be considerate of each other, then you've got to keep them apart.

[McLovin]

Originally Posted by jyl

the US operates on US Dollars and the global dependence on USD means we can “print” a huge amount of USD for at least a limited time.

So, the USA can have both a death-minimizing strategy and a minimized economic impact, .

This is the part I need explained.

Our federal yearly budget (total spending) is roughly $4.2 trillion.

Our total revenue on that spending is roughly $3.8 trillion.

I can see where we have an unexpected emergency and spend/“print” a few hundred billion. And calling that a minimized economic impact on our economy.

But 2.2 trillion? Or more likely $4 or $6 trillion?

We can “print”/spend as much as our yearly budget and that can be accurately described as having a “minimized” economic impact on us.

Please explain. I’d be happy to understand, because maybe I’m worrying about nothing. It seems to violate the “there’s no free lunch” principle, or math as I understand it, but I hope I’m wrong and there’s something going on that I’m missing.

[island911]

Money is but a marker of value. Inflation is typically taxing on everyone. Sitting on hands is typically taxing on everyone.

Pushing more currency on to a smaller working class will likely drive wage inflation unless all of those "non-essential businesses" really don't matter. Restaurants and entertainment ..., maybe we can just put those "non-essential" people on welfare and rely on the efficiencies of the essential workers.

This whole thing really is a huge macro-economic experiment.

[berettafan]

how do you find commonality in these numbers from various countries or even states when some live in cities on top of each other and others are in more rural and suburban areas?

[island911]

It is clear that it is important for many to have Sweden fail miserably, as it will reinforce their mental model of govt directed wide lock-down. --Swedes are of course aware of the problem and taking action to protect the most vulnerable. It's not as if they are doing nothing.

[legion]

Because my state includes the cluster**** that is Chicago, my governor has decreed that only "necessary" medical procedures can be done. That basically means only emergency medicine, which accounts for something like 1% of medicine practiced. We have something like 40 known COVID-19 cases in the county. So our local hospitals are laying pretty much everyone off and forcing pay cuts on the rest. My kid's annual checkups have been rescheduled three times. Far from "overwhelmed", my local medical community is sitting idle and people aren't getting paid. Pretty much anything that can wait is waiting, even if it causes further harm and complications to people later on.

[berettafan]

A Dr friend of mine has been home more than he's been at work over the past two weeks.

[McLovin]

Same here. My friend is a nurse and she has been furloughed and is sitting at home.
She signed up for and will be collecting unemployment soon.

[Sooner or later]

We have several Oklahoma nurses that volunteered and were accepted to work a time period in New York. One being a long time friend of my little sister.