Jump to content

The Swedish Experiment


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Wess said:

.......Same virus, same strain, and it ain’t going nowhere. Never has and never will until there is broad community immunity and or a highly effective long lasting vaccine that is broadly distributed and the vast majority of the world’s population dosed. .......

You want a strategy. Get healthy. Lose fat. Don’t need pharmaceuticals (because you are healthy). Failing that prepare to isolate for a long long time. ..

^^^^^^^^^ A non pharma community virus response 'dead zone'.

2 out of the three suspects with Kate's likey of that post...have now put Captain Tegnell on IGNORE after he deserted their propoganda infested ship.

On 10/30/2020 at 11:59 AM, Frakka said:

Sweden hits highest daily COVID-19 spread as chief epidemiologist says herd immunity not ethically justifiable'

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-10-30/sweden-hits-highest-daily-coronavirus-case-number/12829990

13 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

La poursuite de l’immunité collective est à la fois futile et immorale

Where are WeaselWordsWes, BlatentlyBullshitting and CuntShortforBob??

They are normally not short of words??

 

 

9 hours ago, Wess said:

So strange how nobody has posted daily deaths in Sweden - still flat near zero BTW

9 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

So strange how you don't quote or refer to Tegnell's comments on new deaths, hospitalisations and cases or additional suppresion/shut down measures just introduced.

You must know more than him now, yet you say nothing.

9 hours ago, Wess said:

Enjoy your lockdown LOL. 

 

WeaselWordsWes you ALWAYS keep calling up Swedens current mortality rate, but ALWAYS misquoting it, ALWAYS ignoring mortality rate that preceded the current, ALWAYS ignoring the Nordic 5 by comparison and ALWAYS ignoring where Sweden sits on the world stage.

The shrine you worship at is toxic.

IMG_20201031_102022.jpg

IMG_20201031_102325.jpg

 

IMG_20201031_120546.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

First of all:  how is your trip to Spain going? Now. Any single person who doesn’t die from this is excellent news. And anyone who doesn’t contract the virus is also good news. For starters

Everyone in this thread is probably in a nursing home. They sound like Joe Biden trying to form a cognitive sentence.    "Uh, but, cases only, g.g.g.g.go down with lock-down." 'If you don't w

Im hazarding a guess that you have never had to walk into the waiting room and tell a husband, son daughter father that their wife mother daughter has passed. Because today in the USA 512 doctors or n

Posted Images

....and WeaselWordsWes you ALWAYS come up with the 'diversion'.

Usually best to ignore but I will oblige.

9 hours ago, Wess said:

Enjoy your lockdown LOL

8 hours ago, Wess said:

Only 5900.  Chumps. Cuomo reportedly killed many more in NY.  There is a dude that should be facing prison time

 

Its ALWAYS the 'disingenuous' diversion.

- Comparative Mortality Rate NYS and Stockholm Region per capita very SIMILIAR.

- Comparative National Virus Entry. NYS the major US virus entry point from Europe with people movements commensurate with a country of 330 million and nationals returning. Sweden only 10 million pop comparatively, a northern Europe dead end and other than air/sea, largely only ONE ENTRY (bridge with Denmark) that was CLOSED.

US/NYC versus Sweden/Stockholm virus entry hardly comparing apples with apples.

- US Democratic Leadership. In the US Mayor of NYS, Cuomo Govenor NY State, then the President under a federal democratic system i.e. President controls international border and didn't fully close or screen. The States largely administer health care with CONSTRAINTS on cooperation with other states and federally, despite a national response issue.

US states are constrained, HOWEVER it's the state and Cuomo ALONE that should face prison time. 

- Sweden's Autocratic Leadership. The Swedish Constitution PROHIBITS ministerial rule or politicians overruling the advice from its agencies and MANDATES that agency. In this crisis case the NATIONAL (not provincial) Public Health Agency for health care and rendering state epidemiologist Dr Anders Tegnell the LEADER above that of the Prime Minister for a epidemic response.

Sweden autocratic leadership and a fraction of NYSs constraints, yet NO call for Tegnell to face prison time.

- Comparative Virus Response. NYS/NYC could have locked sooner but didn't. BUT lockdowns are bad, so get healthy, protect vunerable (all based on hindsight) and 'LET IT RIP' is BETTER either unprepared or prepared, just LIKE Sweden. 

NONSENSE. Sweden promoted as having no lockdowns yet it has by law imposed some at the advise of Tegnell to circumvent the Constitution regarding the free movement of people. The balance of 'suppression' responses largely similiar to other countries, BUT not mandated. Currently TWO Swedish provinces are essentially LOCKED DOWN. 

ALWAYS the 'disingenuous' and bullshit laden diversion from WeaselWordsWes.

The next one shortly to appear.

IMG_20201031_122151.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Wess said:

In my opinion you have never spoken honestly about a vaccine and seem more interested in reopening your practice or keeping it open. Not a word about the advisory committee or materials. Not a word about the endpoints or lack of challenge testing. Not a word about AE and which ones and systems limitations. Not a word about GMPs and the challenges of so much so fast so... much profit.... get it out the door. Not a word even about AF’s comments on what the first vaccines are likely to do and not do.

I think the best you are going to see early on from vaccines is disease severity mitigation. For years. Your dream of a vaccine that wipes this out and going back to normal life is years and years and away in my opinion. So you better come up with a long term sustainable strategy for the interim. Which is going to be a very very long interim. I about laughed my ass off when you said two weeks to flatten the curve. Second wave... what a joke. Same virus, same strain, and it ain’t going nowhere. Never has and never will until there is broad community immunity and or a highly effective long lasting vaccine that is broadly distributed and the vast majority of the world’s population dosed. Good luck with that any time soon. You ain’t getting out of endless lockdowns and often pointless masks for YEARS. You want a strategy. Get healthy. Lose fat. Don’t need pharmaceuticals (because you are healthy). Failing that prepare to isolate for a long long time. Believe what you want but I ain’t buying what you are selling.

Is there a jackass vaccine? I’m thinking this could be more and more important down the stretch 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/24/2020 at 12:56 AM, Matagi said:

....The same can be applied to the UK or the Netherlands. So, it’s not a lockdown that has a massive impact. This is in my view only an emergency mechanism: If you don’t trigger it at a certain point, your pandemic will run down the hill and you can’t stop it. A lockdown is therefore more a safeguard for your health system, not a 'steering mechanism'. Therefore, it is not a determining factor and thus cannot be used a an exhibit for either strategy. So can we please put this idea of a completely free Sweden to rest, please?

My hypothesis is: factors that determine the speed at which you approach the point where things go exponential are way more important. Things like testing, ICU capacity (and usage!), mask mandates, the ability to track and trace. You can't just pinpoint at one factor and say: that's the one.

But if you'd compare the approaches of, say, Germany and Sweden in some of these aspects, which are really not that much a threat to your personal freedom, you would see massive differences.  

^^^^^ On the money. 

You can also overlay 'GOVERNANCE' in comparing Sweden and say Germany. 

The Swedish Constitution PROHIBITING ministerial rule or politicians overruling  the advice from its NATIONAL (not provincial) Public Health Agency renders it a mandate and state epidemiologist  Dr Anders Tegnell the LEADER above that of the Prime Minister for an epidemic response.

Sweden currently has two provinces effectively locked down in response to Tegnell's advice and taken from their recently upscaled Contact/Trace/Test regieme.

Compare that to Germany consisting of SIXTEEN partly sovereign federated states where power and administration is devolved. PM Merkel (ex scientist) has only just secured the states unanimous agreement to a nationwide 'virus reproduction short circuit' or short term increase in restrictions EXACTLY as you outline.

This is because even their excellent Contact/Trace/Test regieme has reached a point where they are not satisfied with a benchmark THEY set of 75% of cases not being able to track those to the transmission SOURCE. Sweden are less transparent and don't reveal what underpins their decision making. 

So on governance alone and with ONLY one-tenth the population, but one-tenth greater landmass so more decentralised population (hence provincial restrictions), Sweden has an enormous ADVANTAGE over Germany in fine tuning response timing and the 'stringency' of any restrictions selected. 

Yet TODAY on nearly every metric, Sweden and Germany are nearly EXACTLY the SAME. Yet look at the UK, potentially a repeat of the 1st wave outcome via a shambolic response and ignoring the science. 

The nonsense of a completely free Sweden and reasons behind Sweden's response UTurn are hopefully glaringly obvious to most people.

images - 2020-10-31T132849.734.jpeg

IMG_20201031_141611.jpg

IMG_20201031_141655.jpg

IMG_20201031_141738.jpg

IMG_20201031_141835.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, fufkin said:

Is there a jackass vaccine? I’m thinking this could be more and more important down the stretch 

If so ...then if these vaccination records are any guide, it's going to be years even decades of enduring 'jackass' outbreaks before the WJO (World Jackass Organisation) deem 'jackass' eradicated.

Screen-Shot-2019-05-30-at-11_38.20-AM.png.5b3b65ef938ffe1d68ac73946a73da51.png

Screen-Shot-2019-05-30-at-11_38.00-AM.png.122456bf4fe5db5307b64cad355aa461.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/30/2020 at 4:36 PM, Wess said:

So strange how nobody has posted daily deaths in Sweden - still flat near zero BTW - while UK, France, Spain and even darling Germany and others all see skyrocketing death rates. It ain’t gonna go away people. You can’t elect - or send away - a politician and make a virus go away. It’s going to be with you for... not 2 weeks to flatten a curve, or 2 months or 2 quarters.... it will still be here 2 years later and I bet much longer. Better find a sustainable strategy. 

It hasn't changed much.  Sweden actually removed 8 or 9 deaths from their count last week.

As noted above, it looks like they are not releasing data every day, so, you have to wait for new data twice a week.
 

Maybe this chart will change this winter, but, compared to every other country in Europe right now, this is looking pretty good.

 

Screen Shot 2020-11-01 at 5.20.36 AM.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

Spot any patterns ..any myths busted????  

And NO, the air is not special in the Asia-Pacific.

"Only authoritarian states can stop it" 
"Only islands can stop it"
"Only rich countries can stop it"
"Anglo-Saxon countries are too free"

Deaths/million
USA            694

Europe       350

UK              696
Sweden     593
Denmark   124  
Germany   125
Italy            638

Asia & Oceania

China              3
S Korea          9
Japan           14
Taiwan            0.3
Vietnam          0.4
Cambodia       0
Laos                0
Thailand         1
Myanmar      21
Malaysia         8
Singapore       5
Indonesia     50

Australia          33
New Zealand  5.1

Note: Sweden and Germany matching prevalence

EluPW1vVkAIaa9R.jpeg

IMG_20201031_120546.thumb.jpg.189331a38a786d3f97c176c6c83cc6b2.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, BlatantEcho said:

Maybe this chart will change this winter, but, compared to every other country in Europe right now, this is looking pretty good.

 

Screen Shot 2020-11-01 at 5.20.36 AM.png

"..compared to every other country in Europe right now.."

Still blatant bullshitting.

IMG_20201031_102325.thumb.jpg.ed5b14a0ba2ee838037a20c61c1f896f.jpgIMG_20201031_122151.jpg.0c3b84a50681f9a31eeb12f2598c06a1.jpgIMG_20201031_141738.jpg.0eba0b954773afc71e08e77cdd8a6fa0.jpgIMG_20201031_141835.jpg.d6b43a0477d824154ade10a3d537f734.jpg

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/31/2020 at 2:59 PM, jack_sparrow said:

Its ALWAYS the 'disingenuous' diversion.

- Comparative Mortality Rate NYS and Stockholm Region per capita very SIMILIAR.

Wess there is no point in debating with Jacko.  Jacko seems to have immunity that allows him to post largely misinformation - the rest of us when we post evidence based research that contradicts HIS world view are banned.  The above quote is a classic example.

Stockholm Region versus NYS.

Assumptions of what Jacko means:

Stockholm Region = Stockholm County
NYS = New York State

Comparative Mortality Rate = number of deaths per total population.

Stockholm County has a population of 2.385 million as of 2020.  The recorded Covid-19 deaths in this county as of 29 October is 2429.  On a deaths per population basis that is 0.1%.

Compare with NYS - deaths 33,687 population 19.453 million.  Death rate 0.17%.

Now Jacko says that 0.1% is similar to 0.17%.  I disagree.  NYS had 70% more deaths per head of population than Stockholm County.  Don't get me wrong neither result is "good" but to say they are SIMILAR (was Jacko's spelling of the word a freudian slip?) is rubbish.

So Wess don't bother stressing about Jacko's response(s) they are an artform in misinformation.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/31/2020 at 11:59 AM, jack_sparrow said:

....and WeaselWordsWes you ALWAYS come up with the 'diversion'.

Usually best to ignore but I will oblige.

On 10/31/2020 at 2:53 AM, Wess said:

Enjoy your lockdown LOL

On 10/31/2020 at 3:40 AM, Wess said:

Only 5900.  Chumps. Cuomo reportedly killed many more in NY.  There is a dude that should be facing prison time

 

Its ALWAYS the 'disingenuous' diversion.

- Comparative Mortality Rate NYS and Stockholm Region per capita very SIMILIAR.

- Comparative National Virus Entry. NYS the major US virus entry point from Europe with people movements commensurate with a country of 330 million and nationals returning. Sweden only 10 million pop comparatively, a northern Europe dead end and other than air/sea, largely only ONE ENTRY (bridge with Denmark) that was CLOSED.

US/NYC versus Sweden/Stockholm virus entry hardly comparing apples with apples.

- US Democratic Leadership. In the US Mayor of NYS, Cuomo Govenor NY State, then the President under a federal democratic system i.e. President controls international border and didn't fully close or screen. The States largely administer health care with CONSTRAINTS on cooperation with other states and federally, despite a national response issue.

US states are constrained, HOWEVER it's the state and Cuomo ALONE that should face prison time. 

- Sweden's Autocratic Leadership. The Swedish Constitution PROHIBITS ministerial rule or politicians overruling the advice from its agencies and MANDATES that agency. In this crisis case the NATIONAL (not provincial) Public Health Agency for health care and rendering state epidemiologist Dr Anders Tegnell the LEADER above that of the Prime Minister for a epidemic response.

Sweden autocratic leadership and a fraction of NYSs constraints, yet NO call for Tegnell to face prison time.

- Comparative Virus Response. NYS/NYC could have locked sooner but didn't. BUT lockdowns are bad, so get healthy, protect vunerable (all based on hindsight) and 'LET IT RIP' is BETTER either unprepared or prepared, just LIKE Sweden. 

NONSENSE. Sweden promoted as having no lockdowns yet it has by law imposed some at the advise of Tegnell to circumvent the Constitution regarding the free movement of people. The balance of 'suppression' responses largely similiar to other countries, BUT not mandated. Currently TWO Swedish provinces are essentially LOCKED DOWN. 

ALWAYS the 'disingenuous' and bullshit laden diversion from WeaselWordsWes.

The next one shortly to appear.

2 hours ago, Kate short for Bob said:

Wess there is no point in debating with Jacko.  Jacko seems to have immunity that allows him to post largely misinformation.......

......Stockholm Region versus NYS...

...Now Jacko says that 0.1% is similar to 0.17%.  I disagree. .....

So Wess don't bother stressing about Jacko's response(s) they are an artform in misinformation.

 

"......Stockholm Region versus NYS......Now Jacko says that 0.1% is similar to 0.17 %.  I disagree. ....Jacko's response(s) they are an artform in misinformation."

- CuntForBob you disagree 0.1% and 0.17% are not similiar...alert the fucking media.

- So that's one point. Why did you NOT disagree and label the other four points misinformation? Comparative National Virus Entry, US Democratic Leadership, Sweden's Autocratic Leadership and Comparative Virus Response. Surely it was not for want of trying.

- You DIDN'T you address WeaselWordsWes post, the target of my reply that; "Cuomo...should be facing prison time" but he let Tegnell off the hook. Seems you must agree.

- All Fucking hilarious coming from you who was banned on SA for peddling untruths.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Kate short for Bob said:

Can you enlighten me what that "untruth" was?  

Don't know what that 'untruth' you were banned for was BUT I do know you just posted this fucking monstrous 'untruth'.

"Compare with NYS - deaths 33,687 population 19.453  million.  Death rate 0.17%."

YET 25,824 Covid deaths in NYS as REPORTED by NYSNOT your 33,687.  So ACTUAL death rate is  0.13% NOT your 0.17% and compared to Stockholm's 0.1%

The NYS and Stockholm mortality rate comparison is 'similiar' as I posted, yet you claim is "misinformation" and "rubbish".

Nice 'forgery' there cunt by taking the 'probable' COVID-19 deaths from NYC and ADDING them to the state's count. Sweden ALSO DON'T count 'probables' 

So CuntForBob you really are fucking something. Seems being banned for peddling dangerous 'untruths' didn't teach you fucking anything. 

7 hours ago, Kate short for Bob said:

Compare with NYS - deaths 33,687 population 19.453 million.  Death rate 0.17%.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

^^^^^^^^^

"New York" WHAT??? in 'Worldmeters' and you IGNORING Sweden count methodology of deaths ONLY with test, NOT probables (NYC probables incl in your NYS 33,687) is your "evidence based research."

:lol::lol::lol::lol:

11 hours ago, Kate short for Bob said:

...Jacko seems to have immunity that allows him to post largely misinformation - the rest of us when we post evidence based research..

3 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

Nice 'forgery' there cunt by taking the 'probable' COVID-19 deaths from NYC and ADDING them to the state's count. Sweden ALSO DON'T count 'probables' 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

See Wess it's pointless Jacko just spent hours trying to refute data that a few days ago he was happy to quote.  

Not only does he manipulate timelines on graphs to accentuate magnitude but will selectively narrow or enlarge a dataset to agree with his world view e.g. enlarges the Stockholm and NYS datasets so that he can argue there is little difference.

That isn't evidence based research nor the scientific method.

It is misinformation.

Needless to say his new estimate still shows NYS being 30% greater.  In my opinion that doesn't constitute "SIMILAR".

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Kate short for Bob said:

See Wess it's pointless Jacko just spent hours trying to refute data that a few days ago he was happy to quote.

Lie. I have never ever quoted or cited Worldmeter data.

2 hours ago, Kate short for Bob said:

Not only does he manipulate timelines on graphs to accentuate magnitude but will selectively narrow or enlarge a dataset to agree with his world view e.g. enlarges the Stockholm and NYS datasets so that he can argue there is little difference.

Lie. Data doesn't change. Shortening timeline is to make recent data readable and or relevant to the time in question.

Lie. The data set for deaths in Stockholm was yours not mine and was based upon deaths with tests. The data set for deaths in NYS (and published by NYS and used day to day by NYS) is also based upon deaths with tests. Other platforms use this NYS data, but not Worldmeters.

The data set for deaths in NYS posted by you did not come from NYS and it was not based upon deaths with tests. It included deaths in NYC with no tests

You used it for no other reason but to deliberately inflate NYS deaths in comparison by a factor of >2:1

2 hours ago, Kate short for Bob said:

That isn't evidence based research nor the scientific method.

It is misinformation.

Lie. See above 

Also in view of the above their isn't a ounce of accuracy for comparative purposes attached to what you have posted. You lied deliberately.

2 hours ago, Kate short for Bob said:

Needless to say his new estimate still shows NYS being 30% greater.  In my opinion that doesn't constitute "SIMILAR"

Lie. I have posted evidence that you posted information that for comparative purposes was false by a magnitude of >2:1. Whether the truthful varience of 30% not the false 70% constitutes 'similiar' or not in your mind, I don't care in light of your lying.

More Lies  You have not addressed one post after you were challenged but elected to post more lies. 

Keep lying and as I have skin on the game, I will have no hesitation putting the Covid misinformation police on your arse. I suspect a second offence is a permanent, not a temporary ban.

So fuck off with your lies you lying cunt.

Link to post
Share on other sites

None of what i posted is a lie.  You are angry because I pointed out that one of your statements was an inaccurate misrepresentation of the facts.  I didn't call YOU  a LIAR.

Jacko you are wacko.  Quite frankly I can't be bothered with the nonsense you post.  It seems to attract all the pessimists to congregate here and find whatever they can to preach doom and gloom.

The fact is you cherry pick your data and it's presentation purely to discredit Sweden’s pandemic strategy.  Nothing more.  For what reason I cannot fathom.

I'm heading back to America's Cup anarchy and will leave you to your misery.  Using your logic being 30% faster on the water will mean a similar performance.

My bet is that this time next year even you may look back at what you have posted as being off beam.

See ya around - keep washing your hands and stay 2m away from everyone.  Take care. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Kate short for Bob said:

Wess there is ...

6 hours ago, Kate short for Bob said:

See Wess it's..

4 hours ago, Kate short for Bob said:

Jacko you are wacko.

 

"you are wacko"

OK "See Wes". :lol:

 

4 hours ago, Kate short for Bob said:

  I didn't call YOU  a LIAR.

18 hours ago, Kate short for Bob said:

Jacko..post largely misinformation. 

18 hours ago, Kate short for Bob said:

Jacko's response(s) they are an artform in misinformation.

18 hours ago, Kate short for Bob said:

..the misinformation

6 hours ago, Kate short for Bob said:

Jacko just spent hours trying to refute data that a few days ago he was happy to quote

6 hours ago, Kate short for Bob said:

It is misinformation.

 

" I didn't call YOU a  LIAR"

Really cunt.

 

4 hours ago, Kate short for Bob said:

I'm heading back to America's Cup..

4 hours ago, Kate short for Bob said:

I'See ya around..

18 hours ago, Kate short for Bob said:

Anyway back to America's Cup Anarchy....

As you keep saying CuntShortForBob.

You will be back like a dog and it's vomit as you always do.

That's what lying cunts do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you’re trying to glean something from Sweden and super impose it on, say your home country, comparing a non lockdown Sweden to a pseudo lockdown US is beyond absurd. On the one hand you have a society that has no problem deciphering between logical safety measures and infringements on civil liberties, and on the other you have a country that locked down in certain states yet allowed a 400,000 person biker rally in another state, all with basically no travel restrictions between states. 

As for this disease only selecting (to paraphrase your words), ‘fat people and old people’, apparently that’s not really the case either.

https://apple.news/AbMtJofifQL2088AKjiYPeQ

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Wess said:

And Sweden was smart and locked down early.

Funny how you missed that.

On 10/31/2020 at 11:59 AM, jack_sparrow said:

NONSENSE. Sweden promoted as having no lockdowns yet it has by law imposed some at the advise of Tegnell to circumvent the Constitution regarding the free movement of people. The balance of 'suppression' responses largely similiar to other countries, BUT not mandated. Currently TWO Swedish provinces are essentially LOCKED DOWN

ALWAYS the 'disingenuous' and bullshit laden diversion from WeaselWordsWes.

IMG_20201031_141738.jpg.0eba0b954773afc71e08e77cdd8a6fa0.jpg

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, fufkin said:

If you’re trying to glean something from Sweden and super impose it on, say your home country, comparing a non lockdown Sweden to a pseudo lockdown US is beyond absurd. ..

"Superimpose" Sweden is even 'beyond' the thing that is 'beyond absurd'. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The Great Barrington Declaration crowd have just released  Frequently Asked Questions  last week which is odd considering the time elapsed since it's release. 

The reason is pretty funny after so much professional critisism generated.

Firstly the original risks of lockdown and protecting the vunerable stand and are not controversial, BUT stuff like these two examples and links in particular, they should be run out of town.

How Dangerous is the SARS-CoV-2 virus and the COVID-19 disease? 

It is important to distinguish between the risk of infection and the risk of death. Anyone can get infected, but there is more than a thousand-fold difference in the risk of death between the oldest and youngest. For old people, COVID-19 is more dangerous than the annual influenza. For children, the COVID-19 mortality risk is less than for the annual influenza

Have contact tracing, testing and isolation been successful against infectious diseases? 

Yes. Contact tracing is of critical importance for many infectious diseases. They do not work for widely spread diseases such as annual influenza, pre-vaccine measles, COVID-19, or, by definition, against any pandemic.  

_________________

HOWEVER. NOW THE BIG U-TURN

Is the Great Barrington Declaration advocating a herd immunity strategy? 

NO. Those making such claims in the media have either (i) not read the document, (ii) do not understand the basic principles of infectious disease epidemiology, or (iii) are willfully distorting the public health message for political purposes......

Does the Great Barrington Declaration advocate for “Letting the virus run free”? 

NO, that is a false characterization, as it advocates the opposite.......

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fish on the line. Dope on a rope. Same thing round here.

Oh and Italy locking down too. Kinda comical if it wasn’t so sad.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, TheDragon said:

It's neck and neck as the US and Sweden race towards natural herd immunity, vaccines be damned.

Given the US has had just over 10 million cases, which is about 3% of its population, and the lowest estimate I've seen for possible "herd immunity" is 50%, it has a very long way to go. Even at the current breakneck speed of 100,000 new cases per day, it will take over 8 years to reach 50%.

I guess Sweden is on a similar path?

Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, RobG said:

Given the US has had just over 10 million cases, which is about 3% of its population, and the lowest estimate I've seen for possible "herd immunity" is 50%, it has a very long way to go

That's only confirmed cases.  If a large % are asymptomatic or mild then the total is much higher.  Not everyone who has had it has been tested  WHO has stated it believes total number is 10x greater.

There has been research published that shows in some areas of NYC the level of actual cases is very high.  This may explain why the current infection rates in NYC are not as high as earlier in the year.

Antibody research published in April indicated that possibly 20% of the NYC population had been infected.  14% State wide. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Kate short for Bob said:

That's only confirmed cases.  If a large % are asymptomatic or mild then the total is much higher.  Not everyone who has had it has been tested  WHO has stated it believes total number is 10x greater.

There has been research published that shows in some areas of NYC the level of actual cases is very high.  This may explain why the current infection rates in NYC are not as high as earlier in the year.

Antibody research published in April indicated that possibly 20% of the NYC population had been infected.  14% State wide. 

Sorry folks, only one and half laps to go on our beautiful euthansia coaster.

But don't worry, cause: if herd immunity doesn't kick in: FREE BONUS RIDES FOR EVERYONE, WHOOOOOOOOOOOOHHHOOOOOO!

04hFIb2TaKEU4DE5cmN_0nkzg18X0-HGIjrX2xJQON1ERzIELnYKtIrWLjXRsY8sChieQAf7F7f78Eag8KYoZROpRByGpvkGglWOMBBOc0Df6rbRXi4u5j5vodJEoLTv9Atr3JobWlz0_UMa3vA

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Kate short for Bob said:

That's only confirmed cases.  If a large % are asymptomatic or mild then the total is much higher.  Not everyone who has had it has been tested  WHO has stated it believes total number is 10x greater.

There has been research published that shows in some areas of NYC the level of actual cases is very high.  This may explain why the current infection rates in NYC are not as high as earlier in the year.

Antibody research published in April indicated that possibly 20% of the NYC population had been infected.  14% State wide. 

If 20% (4 million) New Yorkers had had it in April, barely 2 months after the first reported case in the US, why wasn't herd immunity reached months ago? Even if the actual cases are 10 times reported, New York is still only at 25%.

Claims of much higher incidence seem to have petered out around June. There is this from July, but using April data. Got anything recent?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RobG said:

If 20% (4 million) New Yorkers had had it in April, barely 2 months after the first reported case in the US, why wasn't herd immunity reached months ago? Even if the actual cases are 10 times reported, New York is still only at 25%.

Claims of much higher incidence seem to have petered out around June. There is this from July, but using April data. Got anything recent?

Because -thank God- measures were put in place to prevent what would have been a viral meltdown.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, RobG said:

If 20% (4 million) New Yorkers had had it in April, barely 2 months after the first reported case in the US, why wasn't herd immunity reached months ago? Even if the actual cases are 10 times reported, New York is still only at 25%.

Claims of much higher incidence seem to have petered out around June. There is this from July, but using April data. Got anything recent?

You may be making the same error that a lot people make and that is thinking that herd immunity = zero cases.  It doesn't.  There will still be cases but compared to the first outbreak the rate of spread will lower and slower.  What herd immunity does is lower the R0 rate i.e. the rate of infection of a virus WITHOUT intervention.  Initially this was estimated to be 3 but now the actual rate of infection seems to be below 1.5 (a recent anti-body study suggests 1.16 however in my opinion that study is seriously flawed).  Of course it is difficult to ascertain what proportion of that reduction is caused by herd immunity and/or non-pharmaceutical intervention (NPI's).  Some will say it is all due to the NPI's however there is research to show that it is probably a factor of both.

Even then herd immunity is reached there is still the possibility that there will be outbreaks however the magnitude of those outbreaks and their longevity will substantially reduced.  How much and how quickly will be determined by the vulnerability of the sub-set within the population.  

The next thing to consider is what is the herd immunity threshold.  The more infectious the virus the higher the threshold.  Although we may perceive Covid-19 to be extremely infectious when compared to other viruses in circulation it isn't.  Estimates vary but currently research seems to be settling on a figure of 60%.  However many factors are involved and some studies suggest it might be as low as 40% but population dependent.  It would be fair to say though that there is a consensus that Covid-19 is less infectious than some influenza strains, more infectious than other influenza strains but not as infectious as measles or polio.

image.png.12894a0dcec2da3400b984294ccd69eb.png

Getting back to your question about NYC.  What we are seeing globally in this current surge in infection is that it is occurring at far greater rates in some areas that didn't have significant infections earlier in the year.  BUT case numbers are misleading primarily because the amount of testing has increased substantially since April.  The next two graphs show why this is misleading.

In April 10,000 people at the peak were tested in one day.  The % positive was 70%.  So 7,000 cases in one day.  In November 40,000 tested with a % positive of 2% so 800 cases in a day.  So the case peak in April is way understated and Fatality Rates are overstated.   In my opinion the reduction in cases cannot be solely due to NPI's.  YES they have helped immensely and occurred too late to suppress the pandemic in NYC.  But is there some form of herd immunity occurring?  I would say yes there is.  The last graphs shows anti-body testing and the percent of positives is about 21%.  Anti-body tests only give an indication of the level of immunity in a population.  They have a very low false positive rate i.e. if a positive result is obtained it is highly unlikely to be inaccurate.  However they underestimate the number of positives (false negatives) because they cannot detect very low levels of anti-bodies.  Also in terms of immunity, anti-bodies are only one measure.  T-cells are another however they are more expensive and difficult to test for.

8 hours ago, RobG said:

Even if the actual cases are 10 times reported, New York is still only at 25%.

Regular anti-body testing in NYS is showing a positivity of 22%.  Even assuming that that positivity is underestimated it would tend to suggest that the herd immunity threshold is lower than 60% and that the actual R0 is now a lot lot closer to 1 than 3.  If they weren't then you would be seeing a far greater rise in case numbers than currently being seen.  Or a higher percentage of the population has already been infected.  I would say that more people have been infected than 22% and the threshold is less than 60%.  The only other explanation is that NPI's are doing it all.  I believe it is most likely both.  

The good news is if the Herd Immunity threshold is much lower than initial estimates then a vaccine won't need to be as nearly as effective (40-50%) to knock this virus out of the ball park.

NOTE:  this post is only opinion.  It is not intended to promote anything.

image.png.5ba1aa6606e52d9808f952a6ad77d355.png

image.png.3dbd65b6f9ad06ebd62d07d9b8996f47.png

image.png.2870a6f71d8d8fb23a06f927bc6ef77d.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting.

How would you explain the massive drop in positive antibody test (last pic)?

To me one explanation would be an actual decline in antibodies, co-inciding with the massive drop in cases over the summer. 

That this rate flattens out in the summer and stays at ca. 25% would not add up with a positive rate of ca. 2% though. That would only be possible if the number of undetetected cases is and stays at ca. 12x the tests' positive rates. Hardly to believe with a massively increasing number of tests. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Kate short for Bob said:

What herd immunity does is lower the R0 rate i.e. the rate of infection of a virus WITHOUT intervention.  Initially this was estimated to be 3 but now the actual rate of infection seems to be below 1.5 (a recent anti-body study suggests 1.16 however in my opinion that study is seriously flawed).  Of course it is difficult to ascertain what proportion of that reduction is caused by herd immunity and/or non-pharmaceutical intervention (NPI's).  Some will say it is all due to the NPI's however there is research to show that it is probably a factor of both.

Kate an interesting read for once and graphs, thanks.

I don't understand your RO comments at all having regard for the following. 

RO is not static, RO less than R1 cases reducing, more than R1 increasing, R1.3 say one person infects less than 20 people, R3 one person infects tens of thousands.

Non pharma mitigation and suppression is essential where IFR is high. If natural immunity was being pursued (it has never been done before) it would be to balance encouraging the number of people getting infected (no different than encouraging vaccine take up) to NOT RISE above the capacity to treat and care for Covid and normal patients. Hence the need for a vaccine is essential.

All talk of natural immunity happening, that immunity lasting for a reasonable time and being effective BUT all WITHOUT the existence of a vaccine doesn't seem to add up. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Matagi said:

How would you explain the massive drop in positive antibody test (last pic)?

It hasn't dropped massively.  The graph records the % of those tested that have antibodies.  The following graph shows that the number of anti-body tests are a lot less.   I suspect the graph is skewed because the initial testing was done in areas of high infection.

image.png.07f45b627c939d449e1c810cea500926.png

The % of positive antibody tests has remained at a steady state of 22% since end of June.  BUT that 22% will understate the true level of antibodies for the reasons I posted above.

1 hour ago, Matagi said:

 To me one explanation would be an actual decline in antibodies, co-inciding with the massive drop in cases over the summer. 

There would be a decline in measurable antibodies but that doesn't mean that those previously infected are not immune.  Contrary to some of the alarmist headlines there have been very few re-infections.  Even those are debated as being true reinfections.  

1 hour ago, Matagi said:

 That this rate flattens out in the summer and stays at ca. 25% would not add up with a positive rate of ca. 2% though. That would only be possible if the number of undetetected cases is and stays at ca. 12x the tests' positive rates. Hardly to believe with a massively increasing number of tests. 

I don't understand your point.  The level of antibodies has stayed the same even though the % of positive tests has declined to 2%.  So proportionally less cases are being added to the pool of antibody positives but that % seems stable. 

Interesting numbers all the same.   

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

RO is not static, RO less than R1 cases reducing, more than R1 increasing, R1.3 say one person infects less than 20 people, R3 one person infects tens of thousands.

Ris the base reproduction rate of a virus.  It doesn't change.  It is only estimated and refers to the rate of infection if there is no vaccination, no previous infections and if there was no way to control the spread.  So initially it was estimated that the R0 for Covid-19 s 3.0.  Some studies are now suggesting it is actually lower.  Hence lower estimates for immunity thresholds.  At 3.0 they were talking over 80% now it seems to be 60%.

So infections and NPI's will reduce the measured actual rate of infection.  My apologies I wasn't trying to mislead but in my opinion those that are saying the base reproduction rate is less than 3 are closer to the mark.  Also the ACTUAL reproduction rate at the moment in some populations is around 1.2 due to NPI's and developing population immunity.  Which of those two factors have contributed most to the drop is where there is considerable debate.  In my opinion the drop cannot be explained solely by NPI's in for example NYS.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kate short for Bob said:

Ris the base reproduction rate of a virus.  It doesn't change. It is only estimated and refers to the rate of infection if there is no vaccination, no previous infections and if there was no way to control the spread.  So initially it was estimated that the R0 for Covid-19 s 3.0. 

You are off confusing again.

R0, pronounced “R naught,” is a mathematical term that indicates how contagious an infectious disease is. It's also referred to as the actual reproduction occuring.

You have now corrected when this is pointed out.

1 hour ago, jack_sparrow said:

RO is not static, RO less than R1 cases reducing, more than R1 increasing, R1.3 say one person infects less than 20 people, R3 one person infects tens of thousands.

1 hour ago, Kate short for Bob said:

So infections and NPI's will reduce the measured actual rate of infection.  My apologies I wasn't trying to mislead...

 

You still haven't addressed IFR and health care capacity which can't be divorced from the subject of natural immunisation and controlling rate of infection or R0 without vaccination.

The inference is you DON'T want to go there.

1 hour ago, jack_sparrow said:

Non pharma mitigation and suppression is essential where IFR is high. If natural immunity was being pursued (it has never been done before) it would be to balance encouraging the number of people getting infected (no different than encouraging vaccine take up) to NOT RISE above the capacity to treat and care for Covid and normal patients. Hence the need for a vaccine is essential.

All talk of natural immunity happening, that immunity lasting for a reasonable time and being effective BUT all WITHOUT the existence of a vaccine doesn't seem to add up. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

You are off confusing again.

R0, pronounced “R naught,” is a mathematical term that indicates how contagious an infectious disease is. It's also referred to as the actual reproduction occuring.

No R0 is the "base reproduction rate" for a new virus.  It is an estimate and is difficult to quantify.  The initial R0 was estimated to be 3.0 or higher for Covid-19.  Some research suggests it may have been lower.

The current ACTUAL Reproduction Rate's per region per population are NOT R0.

Now the base R0 is important because it gives you an approximation of the herd immunity threshold.  The higher the infectiousness the higher the threshold.  If the R0 is lower than the first estimate then vaccine effectiveness doesn't need to be as high.

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

You still haven't addressed IFR and health care capacity which can't be divorced from the subject of natural immunisation and controlling rate of infection or R0 without vaccination.

I didn't address those things because I was only responding to the questions asked by RobG and Matagi.

Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

You still haven't addressed IFR and health care capacity which can't be divorced from the subject of natural immunisation and controlling rate of infection or R0 without vaccination.

The inference is you DON'T want to go there.

10 minutes ago, Kate short for Bob said:

I didn't address those things because I was only responding to the questions asked by RobG and Matagi.

 

"I didn't address those things because I was only  responding to the questions asked by RobG and Matagi."

You are pushing for Convid having a lower than forecast R0 using a "natural immunity" argument, so now is you chance to address "IFR and health care capacity......and controlling rate of infection or R0 without vaccination."

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jack_sparrow said:

You are off confusing again.

R0, pronounced “R naught,” is a mathematical term that indicates how contagious an infectious disease is. It's also referred to as the actual reproduction occuring.

You have now corrected when this is pointed out.

1 hour ago, Kate short for Bob said:

No R0 is the "base reproduction rate" for a new virus.  It is an estimate and is difficult to quantify. 

 

"No R0 is the "base reproduction rate" for a  new virus."

Now you are back in full mislead mode when challenged, bizzarely even after I gave you a undeserved free pass.

"You have now corrected when this is pointed out."

TO MAKE IT CRYSTAL CLEAR FOR YOU

R is ALSO used to describe the 'current' or 'effective' reproduction number or the number of people in a population who can be infected by an individual at any specific time. It changes as the population is exposed to non pharma interventions, become increasingly immunised, either by individual natural immunity following infection, or by vaccination, and also as people die.

You have already been told that but disagree.

It is THIS context, NONE OTHER that I simply asked you a Question about 'natural immunity', NOT your assertions about Convid's base reproduction rate.

"I don't understand your RO comments at all having regard for the following."

2 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

Kate an interesting read for once and graphs, thanks.

I don't understand your RO comments at all having regard for the following. 

I ALSO haven't made ANY comment about about your assertions on Convid's base reproduction rate. 

And so not to confuse any further I will call it by its proper R descriptor called Re, sometimes also called Rt. Unfortunately, the symbol R0 is nearly always used in all publications when Re or Rt is meant.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Kate short for Bob said:

Here we go again.  A perfectly civil and interesting discussion will degenerate now that Jacko is involved.  I see that even pisses Astro off.

 "A perfectly civil and interesting discussion will degenerate now that Jacko is involved.

Really.....and Randumb your partner. :lol:

"Kate an interesting read for once and graphs ,  thanks. I don't understand your RO comments at all having regard for the following."

2 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

Kate an interesting read for once and graphs, thanks.

I don't understand your RO comments at all having regard for the following. 

So a harmless question sends you off into fully blown defence mode. 

You do this all by your own hand.

You are your own problem, don't blame me.

What are you hiding from, surely it can't be the truth?

1152490919_giphy(26).gif.00fe01e74b1caca6860b664116fc093b.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Kate short for Bob said:

You may be making the same error that a lot people make and that is thinking that herd immunity = zero cases.

Or not. If the disease isn't eradicated, then cases must continue to preserve herd immunity (in the absence of a vaccine). Unless it eradicates itself, which doesn't seem to have happened.

4 hours ago, Kate short for Bob said:

Getting back to your question about NYC. What we are seeing globally in this current surge in infection is that it is occurring at far greater rates in some areas that didn't have significant infections earlier in the year.  BUT case numbers are misleading primarily because the amount of testing has increased substantially since April.  The next two graphs show why this is misleading.

Regular anti-body testing in NYS is showing a positivity of 22%.  Even assuming that that positivity is underestimated it would tend to suggest that the herd immunity threshold is lower than 60% and that the actual R0 is now a lot lot closer to 1 than 3.  If they weren't then you would be seeing a far greater rise in case numbers than currently being seen.  Or a higher percentage of the population has already been infected.  I would say that more people have been infected than 22% and the threshold is less than 60%.  The only other explanation is that NPI's are doing it all.  I believe it is most likely both.  

You seem to be claiming NY has reached herd immunity at about 25%, which gives an R0 of 1.3 or about the same as seasonal flu.

Extending your logic to the entire US, then 9 million reported cases becomes 90 million actual cases, which is more than the 25% required to achieve the above estimated herd immunity. But current rates of infection seem to indicate quite a different story.

You didn't answer my other question: where are the current studies saying infections are 10 times reported cases?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kate short for Bob said:

I didn't address those things because I was only responding to the questions asked by RobG and Matagi.

37 minutes ago, RobG said:

You didn't answer my other question: where are the current studies saying infections are 10 times reported cases?

 

He has been known to forget questions even when acknowledging the questions. :lol:

PS. That was a CDC estimate of up to 20X but US wide, not NYC.

Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, RobG said:

You seem to be claiming NY has reached herd immunity at about 25%, which gives an R0 of 1.3 or about the same as seasonal flu.

I'm not claiming that because I dont know.  But I am suggesting that the current level of infection in NYS can't be entirely explained by NPI's.

55 minutes ago, RobG said:

Extending your logic to the entire US, then 9 million reported cases becomes 90 million actual cases, which is more than the 25% required to achieve the above estimated herd immunity. But current rates of infection seem to indicate quite a different story.

But that is where extrapolating out to the whole population doesn't work.  The increase in infections seen at a country level is being driven by the spread in sub-populations that previously hadn't had it or to a level that NYS had.  The same can be seen in the UK, Italy and Sweden.

NYS is not driving the current USA surge other states are.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RobG said:

You didn't answer my other question: where are the current studies saying infections are 10 times reported cases?

WHO have stated that they believe 20 x more have been infected than the current confirmed.

https://www.dw.com/en/coronavirus-who-estimates-10-of-global-population-infected-with-covid-19/a-55162783

If you accept that 22% of the NYS state has antibodies then extrapolating that out you get at least 8x the confirmed cases.  22% of 19 million is 4.1 million.  The official figure is 560,000.  

We also know that antibody tests understate the true level.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kate short for Bob said:

I'm not claiming that because I dont know.  But I am suggesting that the current level of infection in NYS can't be entirely explained by NPI's.

So you say you don't know if NY has reached 'herd immunity' but you are NOT taking 'herd immunity' off the table. 

You also don't have an explanation why the current low Ri in NYS is what it is, other than you suggest it is more than just NPI's.

So by simple deduction you are suggesting of NYS;

- Herd Immunity may exist.

- Something else may exist but you can't say what.

So you say a lot, YET when challenged end up saying absolutely fucking nothing, BUT leave the strong impression you are convinced NYS has reached 'herd immunity.'  

Is there a name for your disease?

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Matagi said:

I think having convictions without knowing exactly is not uncommon. ...

..Cut him some slack ;) 

Tried that...doesn't work.

His 'anti lockdown/contact/trace' doesn't work 'conviction' is real and 'natural immunity' is then an essential companion. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

His 'anti lockdown/contact/trace' doesn't work 'conviction' is real 

Bullshit.  YOU are telling lies now.  So go ahead Jacko start posting your cut and paste edited quotes personal abuse and adding bookmarks and pleas to moderators to ban anyone who dare offers a well balanced opinion.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Provide us with your erudite analysis showing us that lockdowns and contact tracing in NYS are the sole reasons for the current Covid-19 state.

My opinion is that it cannot be entirely the result of those interventions.  It could be herd immunity in some sub-populations as some research suggests and/or it could be an environmental factor.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Kate short for Bob said:

Provide us with your erudite analysis showing us that lockdowns and contact tracing in NYS are the sole reasons for the current Covid-19 state.

"Provide us with your erudite analysis showing us that lockdowns and contact tracing in NYS are the sole  reasons for the current Covid-19 state."

Why? I have made no comment upon the effectiveness or otherwise of NYS NPI's.

That's your job is it not? You are the one suggesting current low Ri in NYS is more than just NPI's and you the one leaving 'natural immunity' on the table.

Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

His 'anti lockdown/contact/trace' doesn't work 'conviction' is real ...

35 minutes ago, Kate short for Bob said:

Bullshit.  YOU are telling lies now...

 

"Bullshit.  YOU are telling lies now.."

You are on the record for supporting the Barrington Declaration position on those two NPI's, which as of last week the BD promoters have stated they now no longer support 'herd immunity.'

35 minutes ago, Kate short for Bob said:

..pleas to moderators to ban anyone who dare offers a well balanced opinion.

Lie. I have neither posted nor sent a PM containing any such ban plea to a moderator for anyone, in fact I have posted as having no objection to you articulating your narrative. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kate short for Bob said:

...a well balanced opinion.

1 hour ago, Kate short for Bob said:

My opinion..

An 'opinion' can be regarded as "well balanced" AFTER it is subject to scrutiny and discourse. 

An 'opinion' ISN'T "well balanced" simply by the authors 'own' claim and certainly NOT when that author refuses to answer certain questions about their 'opinion'.

Maybe put your efforts into answering questions instead of posting 'diversions'.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/8/2020 at 12:55 PM, Kate short for Bob said:

But that is where extrapolating out to the whole population doesn't work.  The increase in infections seen at a country level is being driven by the spread in sub-populations that previously hadn't had it or to a level that NYS had.  The same can be seen in the UK, Italy and Sweden.

Yes, but it cuts both ways. Let's say 25% is enough to have stopped outbreaks in NY. If you break up the US wide 25% into clumps of 50% and 0%, you have a lot of questions about how those communities go to 50% if 25% is enough to stop large outbreaks.

Now that is just plain logic. If you're going to start making claims about herd immunity (and you're being very cagy about that), then best you find a reputable epidemiological study with actual data and modelling, preferably peer reviewed, that shows herd immunity for Covid–19 occurs at 25%. Without that, you are just guessing without even logic on your side.

I expect there is plenty of data out there now to do such a study, and a number of groups are already doing it, particularly when first round of vaccines are aiming for 50% so they will be desperately trying to find out if that is enough.

There are also probably a number of studies running right now looking at the Trump rallies and current hot spots to see if there's a correlation, and determine whether the level of Covid-19 immunity1 has an effect on subsequent transmission and outbreaks. Trump may have done a great service to humanity by running a giant science experiment, but not on purpose.

1.  Where "level of covid-19 immunity" is just number of people who've recovered in a community

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/5/2020 at 3:13 PM, jack_sparrow said:

In 24 hours Sweden went from sitting with Germany to turning on the after burners. That or there is a Swedish data release anomaly such as their intermittent reporting 

It wasn't an anomaly.

Swedens lockdowns appear to have finally broken the new cases rise. 

• 9 Nov 4700 cases.
• 6 Nov 7,200 cases

The granular growth/shrinkage map is showing more darker green over 3 days and you can still see the reduction in the lockdown areas north, south and around Stockholm. 

The Nordic 4 (except Sweden) and Germany all appear to be in step. 

Netherlands the big cases improver but at a cost.

US deaths just keep rolling along close to the 1,000 /day for months now.

UK and Netherlands tied together on steep mortality rate climb however the UK may going to keep going as cases plateau not dropping and questions exist over their testing cases data 

EmYyq5wW4AIYi2V.jpeg

EmJPnp-XYAAQLL_.jpeg

IMG_20201110_022955.jpg

IMG_20201110_023021.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, TheDragon said:

And Sweden takes the lead! Perhaps the Financial Times will fix the Y axis soon.

No the US in front, Sweden has turned the corner since late last week, see above 

The Times don't appear to be smoothing out Swedens twice weekly reporting that a rolling 7 day alone doesn't do. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think early November is just too early to call a corner turned in the Northern Hemisphere.

Also: Looking at ICU capacities (rather FTE than beds) across Europe, the damage may well be done.

I am absolutely shocked how France is a complete runaway train... Discussions on 'triaging' becoming more frequent, in Germany as well.

And: why are the numbers in Belgium going down while the color code keeps showing a positivity rate around 20%? Because they have stopped testing people without symptoms. yeah, you heard right... so the Belgium curve is absolutely toast. 

cov0911.jpg.368a0a7fe72e52a2dcc4ea440e032410.jpg

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, RobG said:

Yes, but it cuts both ways. Let's say 25% is enough to have stopped outbreaks in NY. If you break up the US wide 25% into clumps of 50% and 0%, you have a lot of questions about how those communities go to 50% if 25% is enough to stop large outbreaks.

Where do you get the 25% from?  Are you referring to antibody levels or the number of people who have been infected?  In NYC the number of actual cases is considerably higher than 25% - with an antibody level state wide of 22% it is probably over 40%.  Also you need to take into consideration the heterogeneity of each population.  For example factors such as population density, housing density, the inter-population mobility and so on. Compare it to the Spaniards who had 

There are still relatively naive population's (i.e. haven't been introduced to Covid-19) within States hence the overall surge and new outbreaks.  NYS still has people who haven't had Covid-19 but are at less of a risk at getting it because of the high level of pre-infection hence the unlikely event of an "outbreak" occurring. 

16 hours ago, RobG said:

 Now that is just plain logic. If you're going to start making claims about herd immunity (and you're being very cagy about that), then best you find a reputable epidemiological study with actual data and modelling, preferably peer reviewed, that shows herd immunity for Covid–19 occurs at 25%. Without that, you are just guessing without even logic on your side.

I didn't say that "herd immunity occurs at 25%".  A measurable level of 22% of antibodies in a population e.g. NYS may indicate that the herd immunity threshold has been reached.  However that doesn't mean that 22% of the population have been infected.  It is probably higher than that and likely to be 40% but less than 60%.  HENCE the lower increase in cases in NYS.

That's good news not bad news.  It ISN'T an argument for a "let it rip" strategy.

It's good news because it indicates that a vaccine that is 50% effective or less will work to nail this virus.  It will make achieving herd immunity easier with less casualties.

NOTE:  The perceived magnitude of the current spike in cases is distorted by the increased level of testing compared to the earlier stages of the pandemic.  In my opinion the % of positive tests should be also compared to get a more realistic view of the current pandemic stage.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Although it is fair to say that lockdown's generally don't work or are implemented too late. They don't work because it is impossible to lock down a large population.  People still need to go out and gather food and seek medical aid and those people that provide those services still need to go to work.

A country wide lockdown is easy to implement if you are a low population density country that has no borders AND you have never had a high level of infection.

It is interesting how many different definitions of a "lockdown" there is.  For example if you read mainstream media you would be forgiven for believing that Sweden has "implemented draconian lockdown rules to stem the surge of cases."

Here are Sweden's current rules:

  1. Non-essential travel from outside the EU to Sweden is banned until 22 December.  The entry ban does not apply to citizens of EU/EEA countries, the United Kingdom, Norway, Iceland, Liechtenstein and Switzerland, or their families, or for travels to Sweden from the EU/EEA area. Furthermore, the ban does not apply if you or a close relative already live here as a permanent resident or hold a residence permit in Sweden or another EU country, or if you have a national visa to Sweden.  https://www.krisinformation.se/en/hazards-and-risks/disasters-and-incidents/2020/official-information-on-the-new-coronavirus/visiting-sweden-during-the-covid-19-pandemic
  2. Entry requirements:  There is no quarantine requirement for travellers to Sweden. Swedavia Airports recommends that you use face masks at their airports. Airline operators may require passengers to show a health statement but this is no general requirement for entering Sweden.

  3. Face masks:  There is no general requirement to wear a face mask in normal social situations, in public places, in public transport etc.

  4. Public gatherings:  The prohibition of public gatherings of more than 50 people applies to public events that are covered by the Public Order Act. However, there are several exceptions to this rule. The limit is 300 participants for events where the members of the audience are seated and have at least one meter distance to other persons. Two people from the same group may be seated closer together.

  5. Restaurants and Bars:  As from 3 November 2020 the amendment of the Public Health Agency’s regulation on temporary communicable disease control measures at venues serving food and drink applies.

    Venues serving food and drink have to take precautionary measures to avoid crowding. This means, for example, limiting the number of visitors in the establishment so that dining parties can keep a distance of at least one meter from each other, and that the size of one dining party is limited to eight people. Serving venues also have to offer hand washing facilities or hand sanitiser, and to inform the visitors about how to reduce the risk of spreading the infection.

  6. Schools and Pre-schools:  The Public Health Agency does not currently consider it necessary to close all schools in Sweden. There are no scientific evidence indicating that such an intervention would have any significant impact on the pandemic, nor has any major transmission of COVID-19 in schools been reported.

Hardly a "lockdown" compared to some countries.

The latest stringency index:

image.png.bfccc33082af8094dbaa37985311b5d0.png

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/8/2020 at 1:06 PM, Kate short for Bob said:

WHO have stated that they believe 20 x more have been infected than the current confirmed.

https://www.dw.com/en/coronavirus-who-estimates-10-of-global-population-infected-with-covid-19/a-55162783

If you accept that 22% of the NYS state has antibodies then extrapolating that out you get at least 8x the confirmed cases.  22% of 19 million is 4.1 million.  The official figure is 560,000.  

We also know that antibody tests understate the true level.

Then:

27 minutes ago, Kate short for Bob said:

Where do you get the 25% from?  Are you referring to antibody levels or the number of people who have been infected?  In NYC the number of actual cases is considerably higher than 25% - with an antibody level state wide of 22% it is probably over 40%.  Also you need to take into consideration the heterogeneity of each population.  For example factors such as population density, housing density, the inter-population mobility and so on. Compare it to the Spaniards who had 

You're taking WHO's global figure of 10 times, which includes many places with minimal testing, and applying it to the US, which you say has far higher testing so is likely to have a more accurate count. 

Presumably people have antibodies because they've been infected, and the 22% is based on a suitably designed test program so is a reasonably accurate estimate of actual NY cases (no references from you so I'm just making that assumption). You can't then extrapolate further and say 22% magically becomes 40% to 60% unless you can show a study that says that.

27 minutes ago, Kate short for Bob said:

I didn't say that "herd immunity occurs at 25%"

I didn't say you did. I just put two and two together and came up with a number as an example.

27 minutes ago, Kate short for Bob said:

.  A measurable level of 22% of antibodies in a population e.g. NYS may indicate that the herd immunity threshold has been reached.  However that doesn't mean that 22% of the population have been infected.  It is probably higher than that and likely to be 40% but less than 60%.  HENCE the lower increase in cases in NYS.

If 40% have had it (which is 16 times the reported cases in NY, so higher than the WHO's global 10 times), how come only half of them have antibodies? NY alone has  had nearly as many cases as the entire rest of the US reported cases?

27 minutes ago, Kate short for Bob said:

NOTE:  The perceived magnitude of the current spike in cases is distorted by the increased level of testing compared to the earlier stages of the pandemic.  In my opinion the % of positive tests should be also compared to get a more realistic view of the current pandemic stage.

So using the global 10 times estimate is not logical.

I don't have any massive insight into the disease or epidemiology, I'm just apply some logic to your claims that are cobbled together from disparate facts. You could prove your case if you can find a study showing the levels of infection you're claiming.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Kate short for Bob said:

[...] NYS may indicate that the herd immunity threshold has been reached.  However that doesn't mean that 22% of the population have been infected.  It is probably higher than that and likely to be 40% but less than 60%.  HENCE the lower increase in cases in NYS.

That's good news not bad news.  It ISN'T an argument for a "let it rip" strategy.

It's good news because it indicates that a vaccine that is 50% effective or less will work to nail this virus.  It will make achieving herd immunity easier with less casualties.

NOTE:  The perceived magnitude of the current spike in cases is distorted by the increased level of testing compared to the earlier stages of the pandemic.  In my opinion the % of positive tests should be also compared to get a more realistic view of the 

Could be, but it is an assumption that lacks data.

In contrast, when we look at figures from Lombary, we see:

_Highest prevalence in Europe early this year, numerous reports of findings well into the 20ies percentagewise.

_Bergamo up to 38.5 per cent prevalence back then.

_Now: 20 per cent positivity rate with testing capacity at record high. 

_and the hardest hit region is: Lombardy again. Not an untouched pocket in the south or somewhere else. The same region where that thing has gonw through already.

https://www.thelocal.it/20201015/charts-that-explain-the-covid-19-pandemic-in-italy

https://www.politico.eu/article/lombardy-coronavirus-italy-new-nightmare/

So what I infer is: too early to say that signs of herd immunity are visible. The data is probably often blurred with interventions and measures.

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, RobG said:

You're taking WHO's global figure of 10 times, which includes many places with minimal testing, and applying it to the US, which you say has far higher testing so is likely to have a more accurate count. 

 

WHO's figure was actually 20 times - 10% of the world's population.  The CDC have said with the USA it could be between 6 to 24 times higher.

27 minutes ago, RobG said:

 Presumably people have antibodies because they've been infected, and the 22% is based on a suitably designed test program so is a reasonably accurate estimate of actual NY cases (no references from you so I'm just making that assumption). You can't then extrapolate further and say 22% magically becomes 40% to 60% unless you can show a study that says that.

Quote

The data for the antibody testing is posted here https://www1.nyc.gov/site/doh/covid/covid-19-data-trends.page

27 minutes ago, RobG said:

If 40% have had it (which is 16 times the reported cases in NY, so higher than the WHO's global 10 times), how come only half of them have antibodies? NY alone has  had nearly as many cases as the entire rest of the US reported cases?

Quote

As I posted earlier serological studies of antibodies understate the positives.  This is due to the level at which these tests can detect antibodies and the test accuracy.  They are very accurate i.e. no false positives.  But not so accurate in finding positives i.e. you get many false negatives.

Also antibodies are not the only indication of prior infection.  T-cells can be present which give immunity and can be present in the absence of antibodies.  Antibodies decline in prevalence over time but that doesn't mean immunity does.  Covid-19 is acting no different to any other virus - in fact there are signs that it may act more like it's close cousin Cov-SARS-1 (Covid-19 is Cov-SARS-2).  Quote:

"...But a new study by University of Birmingham and Public Health England, shows memory T-cells were present in all 100 asymptomatic non-hospitalised patients they tested, meaning coronavirus patients have cellular immunity for at least six months after infection even when antibodies are undetectable.

It suggests that more people may have had Covid than previously thought but have lost their antibody response, meaning it would not show up in surveillance testing.

Previous studies have shown that Sars – a very similar virus to coronavirus – can induce a T-cell response that lasts 10 years, but it was unknown whether a cellular response also happened in Covid.

Dr Shamez Ladhani, consultant epidemiologist at PHE and the study’s author, said: “Cellular immunity is a complex but potentially very significant piece of the Covid-19 puzzle.

“Early results show that T-cell responses may outlast the initial antibody response, which could have a significant impact on Covid vaccine development and immunity research.”

Professor Paul Moss, the UK Coronavirus Immunology Consortium lead, of the University of Birmingham, said it was the first study in the world “to show robust cellular immunity remains at six months after infection in individuals who experienced either mild/moderate or asymptomatic Covid-19. Six months is an early time point, and cells can live for a very long time.”

https://www.uk-cic.org/news/cellular-immunity-sars-cov-2-found-six-months-non-hospitalised-individuals

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, RobG said:

You could prove your case if you can find a study showing the levels of infection you're claiming.

The 22% antibody level is actual data from NY Health testing.  WHO, CDC and the majority of scientists all say that the true level of infection will be higher than the detectable antibody levels.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Matagi said:

And: why are the numbers in Belgium going down while the color code keeps showing a positivity rate around 20%? Because they have stopped testing people without symptoms. yeah, you heard right... so the Belgium curve is absolutely toast. 

Mat they have or had the highest testing rate? Could that not be explained that they are now focused on contact/trace/testing and so random testing has dropped?

The opposite to that is the UK where contact/trace is shit so lots of random testing. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Kate short for Bob said:

Although it is fair to say that lockdown's generally don't work or are implemented too late. They don't work because it is impossible to lock down a large population.  People still need to go out and gather food and seek medical aid and those people that provide those services still need to go to work.

"Although it is fair to say that lockdown's generally don't work or are implemented too late."

Yet you have said it was too late to lockdown in the UK in mid Sept when it had only 3,000 cases a day, a level only just above preceding weeks.

"But it WAS TOO LATE then (15 Sept). Cases were already  well over 3,000 a day."

You are insane.

But you don't stop.

"They don't work because it is impossible to lock down a large population. People still need to go out and gather food and gather food and seek medical aid and those people that provide those services still need to go to work."

Complete nonsense. Putting aside negative impacts of lock-downs, there is bucket loads of evidence that properly crafted lockdowns have REDUCED Ri from >1.5 to around 1 or even below.

In addition the stringency of lock-downs varies according to Ri. Yet you are suggesting there is only ONE form of lockdown, the most stringent with curfews and ring-fencing that precludes all but the most essential services. They are a RARITY in the world with places like Spain in 1st wave or Melbourne-Australia 2nd outbreak exceptions.

And more bullshit.

"Here are Sweden's current rules:....Hardly a "lockdown" compared to so me countries.."

Those are ONLY Sweden's national blanket guidelines and in some cases rules. 

This list EXCLUDES regional lockdown directives implemented first in the north weeks ago.

Then.

"The entry ban does not apply to citizens of EU/EEA...There is no quarantine requirement for travellers to Sweden."

That is typical of MOST EU countries and is NOT EXCLUSIVE to Sweden. They like Sweden have selected origin countries where Self Quarantine applies.

You just can't stop bullshitting.

4 hours ago, Kate short for Bob said:

It is interesting how many different definitions of a "lockdown" there is.  For example if you read mainstream media you would be forgiven for believing that Sweden has "implemented draconian lockdown rules to stem the surge of cases."

Here are Sweden's current rules:

  1. Non-essential travel from outside the EU to Sweden is banned until 22 December.  The entry ban does not apply to citizens of EU/EEA countries, the United Kingdom, Norway, Iceland, Liechtenstein and Switzerland, or their families, or for travels to Sweden from the EU/EEA area. Furthermore, the ban does not apply if you or a close relative already live here as a permanent resident or hold a residence permit in Sweden or another EU country, or if you have a national visa to Sweden.  https://www.krisinformation.se/en/hazards-and-risks/disasters-and-incidents/2020/official-information-on-the-new-coronavirus/visiting-sweden-during-the-covid-19-pandemic
  2. Entry requirements:  There is no quarantine requirement for travellers to Sweden. Swedavia Airports recommends that you use face masks at their airports. Airline operators may require passengers to show a health statement but this is no general requirement for entering Sweden.

  3. Face masks:  There is no general requirement to wear a face mask in normal social situations, in public places, in public transport etc.

  4. Public gatherings:  The prohibition of public gatherings of more than 50 people applies to public events that are covered by the Public Order Act. However, there are several exceptions to this rule. The limit is 300 participants for events where the members of the audience are seated and have at least one meter distance to other persons. Two people from the same group may be seated closer together.

  5. Restaurants and Bars:  As from 3 November 2020 the amendment of the Public Health Agency’s regulation on temporary communicable disease control measures at venues serving food and drink applies.

    Venues serving food and drink have to take precautionary measures to avoid crowding. This means, for example, limiting the number of visitors in the establishment so that dining parties can keep a distance of at least one meter from each other, and that the size of one dining party is limited to eight people. Serving venues also have to offer hand washing facilities or hand sanitiser, and to inform the visitors about how to reduce the risk of spreading the infection.

  6. Schools and Pre-schools:  The Public Health Agency does not currently consider it necessary to close all schools in Sweden. There are no scientific evidence indicating that such an intervention would have any significant impact on the pandemic, nor has any major transmission of COVID-19 in schools been reported.

Hardly a "lockdown" compared to some countries.

The latest stringency index:

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Matagi said:

I think early November is just too early to call a corner turned in the Northern Hemisphere.

Not Nth Hemisphere I just selected some countries have appeared to get on top of it.

Sweden appears to be one but like all countries when Ri rises many places data becomes unreliable, particularly Sweden with its bi weekly format. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Note: the General recommendations that I posted above had been updated in the past week to reflect the new directives.  

Swedens NEW "Stricter" recommendations (source https://www.krisinformation.se/en/news/2020/november/decision-on-stricter-general-recommendations-in-kronoberg-county-and-sodermanland-county ): 

As of 5 November, everyone in Kronoberg and Södermanland Counties is encouraged to:

  • If possible, physical contact with people other than those with whom you live should be avoided. This means, among other things, advice against arranging or taking part in parties or similar social gatherings.
  • You should also avoid certain types of activities if they are impossible to carry out with physically distancing yourself from other people, such as contact sports, healthcare or beauty treatments that are not for medical reasons.
  • Refrain from visits to indoor environmen