Northern Europe during Pandemic -- Summers 2020 & 2021 & onwards

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by barnakiel

. . . All the locking down was not done to save your health. It was done to minimize broad and deep impact on the hospital systems in each country. If the hospital systems collapse, the politicians are out of their jobs. They do all they can to avoid such a situation.

I agree.


However, there is a more sinister side of the political. Politicians do it not just to protect health care systems, but to appear to be taking bold action, and God forbid they take action which is less bold than the country next door. And without any regard to whether the action is actually beneficial. And without any plan for how to get out of it. This is truly frightening.

Originally Posted by barnakiel

. . . Post-factum, we can say, maybe in a year: "Swedes were right". But this kind of post factum knowledge is worth nothing. And what is good for a wee nation of Swedes, already isolated before any isolation policies, will likely be of little use for the city of Tokyo.

Different situations, different populations, different strokes.

I agree completely.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Jonte

It looks about same in Sweden. There open but you should keep distance in public places. Maybe there will be some sailing for you after all. Just wait for the Finnish border to open.

I'm counting on it. I need for the Danish border to be open so that my Danish friends can sail with me and can get home when they need to. Apparently this will happen a week from today, on 10 May.


By the middle of this month it looks like Denmark and Finland will have exactly the same policies as Sweden, which means we can sail and live more or less normally.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by tp12

An R value of 1.4 indicates that the rate of infections is 1 to the power of 1.4. Meaning that each person infected is infecting 1.4 people. This is exponential growth with the exponent being 1.4

This means the virus is still not contained and is something to be concerned about. Certainly not indicating that any measures taken are working.

Of course the virus is not "contained". It will never be "contained" -- we're in a pandemic. In some exceptionally isolated places, on islands, it might be possible to eradicate it, probably at enormous cost, but in most of the world, everyone, or more or less everyone, will get this disease sooner or later.

[tp12]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Sweden getting "smashed"? What are you smoking? Half of ICU beds are empty in Sweden. Hospitalizations are decreasing. Deaths are flat. Cumulative deaths are at about 1.5x compared to a bad flu year. "Smashed"?

In Finland they are alarmed that there are so few deaths -- it means that the end of the epidemic is far away. There is a growing opinion among the health authorities of the Nordic countries that Sweden has done the best job in the Nordics of getting the policy right, and evidence of that is that both Denmark and Finland are now moving towards the Swedish model. In fact a friend of mine from the Danish Ministry of Health was on board my boat today and expressed that opinion.

Everyone will get it, and about the same number of people will die everywhere. It's just a question of how fast it goes.

You don't want it to go so fast that health care systems are overwhelmed. That is the expressly stated goal of social distancing measures. Going much slower than what the health care system can handle will not save lives; it will merely prolong the agony. And the economic destruction.

By that measure Sweden may be going too slowly, not too fast. For all the carnage in Italy, the Italians may end up having the best outcome of all -- having largely gotten it over with.

This is simply a triumph of spin over substance. I gave a range of metrics and you've, conveniently, ignored all of them and then applied a lot of libertarian views.

[Paul L]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

There are only two purposes of lockdowns -- eradicating the disease, as is the tactic in New Zealand, or flattening the curve so that the pandemic does not progress so far as to overwhelm health care systems.


Very few countries consider eradication to be possible, so almost all countries accept that more or less everyone will be infected within the next few months, certainly long before a vaccine is perfected and distributed.


So although Denmark has a death rate 1/3 of Sweden's, the Danes do not claim that fewer people will die in Denmark -- just that they will die over a longer period of time.


Sweden's policy has clearly succeeded SO FAR. The death rate is high only if you cherry pick the comparisons; in general it's about average for Northern and Western Europe and is far lower than locked down tight UK (264 vs 414) or locked down tight France (264 vs 379), not to mention Spain, Italy, etc. In fact the Swedish death rate is about the same as Ireland's, a country which has been praised for handling the crisis well. And Sweden's death rate may be overstated by as much as 2x compared to other European countries as Sweden counts deaths outside of hospitals and deaths were COVID-19 is only suspected.


The key fact is that the health care system is very far from being overwhelmed -- about half of ICU beds are empty in Sweden and the case rate is flat or falling. That's the whole measure of whether the policy works or not, if you are not going for eradication, and not on European country is doing that.



We still don't know what this all looks like in the long term, because this is a very complicated phenomenon and it is still early days. Many European countries are now trying to figure out how to get out of lockdown without an explosion of cases. In Poland the lifting keeps getting delayed; yet nothing there has been accomplished since the epidemic barely got started and will just rock and roll when the draconian lockdown is lifted. And the country can't afford any more lockdown -- it shot it's wad already. This does not look like good policy. Sweden, on the other hand, can maintain its current measures basically forever -- and sustainability of the measures was forefront in the thinking of the health ministry from the beginning. This is looking more and more like a smart move, compared to locking down willy nilly without figuring out what the end game is, as seems to have happened in Poland. Poland will have no choice but to open up, and with the economy already in a shambles, will have no further resources available to control the spread, whereas Sweden can tighten or loosen as they like.


When you think about whether a country's policies were successful or not, measure them against their stated purpose. If it's flattening the curve, rather than eradication, then over-fulfilling the goal by slowing down the spread too much may be counter-productive -- may make the pandemic last for months or years rather than getting it over with, and without saving any lives over the long term.

Your declaration of the only purposes of a lockdown is just setting the goal posts where you want them. The goals are not simple, they are far more nuanced and complex. All approaches, including the Swedish approach wants to avoid overwhelming the health care system. The range of restrictions put on in each country varies. Sweden is doing a light weight version of what other countries are doing. The chief epidemiologists (Anders ?) says they are following a scientific approach. Then goes on to explain that they aren't issuing a government lockdown because tbe laws of Sweden do not allow it. But they did issue a social distancing suggestion that the government supporting populace are following( pretty easy to get people to follow on when there is a very strong social security net in place) . Not that different an approach from other places - light weight version. Look at the reduced traffic, work at home rates, etc.
They issued suggestive rules for restaurants to implement social distancing. Then say that the health dept will inspect a few and shut them down if they don't follow them as an example for others.
One big difference is keeping the elementry and middle schools open.

You stated above that Sweden was clearly past its peak infections. I posted the daily new cases graph. It does not show a clear peak being past. Stick to the facts. Swedens death rate is high, according to neighboring stats, the chief epidemiologists and the PM.

Your argument that getting people sick now is better than dragging this on and having them get sick latter is just wrong. The treatment for cv19 is far better today than it was 3 months ago. In 3 more months it will be even better and in 6 months still better. This means people who get sick will be both less likely to die and will recover with less long term side effects.

The other argument you hear hyping the Swedish approach is that the other approaches are destroying the economy. Unemployment in Sweden has climbed a lot and projected to to hit 9 to 10%. The GDP projection by the central bank is -7 to -10%, more than the 2008 financial hit.

There are a lot of people cheerleading Sweden with crazy arguments. I read a discussion this morning about how to cross the Indian Ocean. The plan was to head to Tanzania, one of the few places that have partially open borders and no lockdown. When the disease risk was brought up, it was pointed out that all was rosy in Sweden not lockdowns.

[tp12]

Originally Posted by Paul L

You stated above that Sweden was clearly past its peak infections. I posted the daily new cases graph. It does not show a clear peak being past. Stick to the facts. Swedens death rate is high, according to neighboring stats, the chief epidemiologists and the PM.

Exactly. I've attached snips of the graphs of infections and deaths in Sweden. There's no peak or start of a downward trend to be seen.



They're currently at 265 deaths/million population. Tenth on the global leader board. Compared to Nordics the next closest is Denmark at 23 on the leader board with 84 deaths/million population. They are getting very bad results when compared to any Nordic country.

[Jonte]

https://www.svt.se/datajournalistik/...coronaviruset/

I hope this link works. I don't now how to read it but if the experts say we going in the right direction I believe it. That doesn't mean we're clear in any way. At least for the moment it's not going up.

A little twist is people looking more to sailing activities now.

[tp12]

Originally Posted by Jonte

https://www.svt.se/datajournalistik/...coronaviruset/

I hope this link works. I don't now how to read it but if the experts say we going in the right direction I believe it. That doesn't mean we're clear in any way. At least for the moment it's not going up.

A little twist is people looking more to sailing activities now.

Thanks for that. There's an english version as well - https://www.svt.se/datajournalistik/...e-coronavirus/


This data shows the Swedish death rate slowing but not yet bucking the trend. Hopefully it will continue to slow.


Here's their graph of Sweden V Nordics; please excuse my terrible hand writing

[Jonte]

Originally Posted by tp12

Thanks for that. There's an english version as well - https://www.svt.se/datajournalistik/...e-coronavirus/


This data shows the Swedish death rate slowing but not yet bucking the trend. Hopefully it will continue to slow.


Here's their graph of Sweden V Nordics; please excuse my terrible hand writing [emoji3]

There is a difference between the Nordic neighbors for the moment and for there sake I hope it's stay that way. Only time will tell.

The handwriting is perfect [emoji106]

[Viking Sailor]

You folks really oughta read about Polio. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polio


Lets hope the CV19 doesn't cause post infection problems like Polio does. It would be horrific if CV19 caused our children to suffer like the children that got polio had to suffered. Years after having a Polio infection the children could experience physical and mental disabilities. We already know the CV19 can damage the mind and body of adults. Do we want to risk that CV19 will have delayed long term effects on children as well?


Keep the children safe, minimize the spread of the virus, and ask whomever you pray to for a vaccine ASAP!

[tomfl]

Originally Posted by Jonte

There is a difference between the Nordic neighbors for the moment and for there sake I hope it's stay that way. Only time will tell.

The handwriting is perfect [emoji106]

I am not convinced Sweden should be compared to Nordic countries. It has a bigger population and is more like what I will call Northern Europe in terms of development and big cities. Sweden does quite well in deaths per million when compared to the UK, Italy, Spain, and the rest of Northern Europe.

All that being said I am also not convinced there is any really good approach to deal with COVID-19. There don't seem to be any reliable tests for it; way too many false positives and false negatives. There is no real specific way to treat it or prevent it and I don't see a lot of hope that either will be available before the flu season restarts in the fall.

The real question is how damaging the shutdown will be. Already billions have been lost in the world economy, millions are out of work, thousands (maybe millions) of small businesses have closed, governments are spending way more money they don't have than usual. Hospitals are closing because their revenue stream for normal care has been almost completely stopped and there is a real cost in human lives for folks who can't get their normally scheduled care. There is some truth to the position that 'the cure may be worse than the disease'. On the other hand letting the pandemic go on willy nilly with no government action does not seem like the right approach either.

I am reminded of the old country saying 'when a cow gets caught in a hail storm all they can do is stand there and take it'.

[letsgetsailing3]

Originally Posted by tp12

This is simply a triumph of spin over substance. I gave a range of metrics and you've, conveniently, ignored all of them and then applied a lot of libertarian views.

This simply isn’t true. Dockhead has provided a fairly clear explanation of his perspective.

You can disagree, but you can neither prove him right nor wrong, as all the numbers aren’t in yet.

What he has correctly pointed out is that lowering the curve postpones infections, but doesn’t stop them and the stated purpose was to lower the curve, not to eliminate it. All measures taken have come at an economic cost, and nobody has beaten this thing yet.

Unfortunately, we can’t all just stay home for two years. There are essential services, and folks just aren’t patient enough to make that sacrifice when we’re looking at a disease that doesn’t require strong medical intervention for 85% of us.

Sweden went with a voluntary approach that wouldn’t have worked everywhere. The relative effectiveness won’t be known for some time, but it does seem that as their herd immunity rises, their infection rate is diminishing, and their approach was less costly economically.

[Jonte]

Originally Posted by tomfl

I am not convinced Sweden should be compared to Nordic countries. It has a bigger population and is more like what I will call Northern Europe in terms of development and big cities. Sweden does quite well in deaths per million when compared to the UK, Italy, Spain, and the rest of Northern Europe.

All that being said I am also not convinced there is any really good approach to deal with COVID-19. There don't seem to be any reliable tests for it; way too many false positives and false negatives. There is no real specific way to treat it or prevent it and I don't see a lot of hope that either will be available before the flu season restarts in the fall.

The real question is how damaging the shutdown will be. Already billions have been lost in the world economy, millions are out of work, thousands (maybe millions) of small businesses have closed, governments are spending way more money they don't have than usual. Hospitals are closing because their revenue stream for normal care has been almost completely stopped and there is a real cost in human lives for folks who can't get their normally scheduled care. There is some truth to the position that 'the cure may be worse than the disease'. On the other hand letting the pandemic go on willy nilly with no government action does not seem like the right approach either.

I am reminded of the old country saying 'when a cow gets caught in a hail storm all they can do is stand there and take it'.

Yes I no. I'm only referring to the diagram that was shown.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by tp12

This is simply a triumph of spin over substance. I gave a range of metrics and you've, conveniently, ignored all of them and then applied a lot of libertarian views.

You gave one metric -- comparison of death rates SO FAR with neighboring countries, ignoring Europe as a whole -- which is completely meaningless. That is not "substance."


As I said -- the success of any policy has to be measured against it's goals. It is ignorant to take death rates SO FAR as the measure success or failure when the stated goal of the policy is not to reduce deaths, but stretch the deaths out over time. During this stage of the pandemic, the goal is to preserve the functioning of health care systems. Sweden is succeeding SO FAR. Basic reproductive rate is supposed to be 0.85 -- very sustainable even with upticks. My friend from Danish ministry of health tells me this morning that it's 0.9 in Denmark.



Countries that slow down the progress of the pandemic too much just kick the can down the road -- so you spend 10% of GDP to delay the progress of the pandemic by 2 months. Now what? We're still at least 18 months from a vaccine. And you're still in a pandemic with the inevitable full development of infections ahead of you. That is not a policy success. That's what we see in Poland for example. The sustainability of measures taken is crucially important.

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by letsgetsailing3

T... it does seem that as their herd immunity rises, their infection rate is diminishing, and their approach was less costly economically.

The rate of case growth seems to be slowing, but what evidence, have you, concerning their growth (or the existence) of herd immunity?