plain_o_llama said:
A reminder for those not following this closely.... (not Squadron7)
The IFR is based on the number of actual infections across the whole population and is exceedingly
difficult to determine. It is not the same as the CFR which is based on the cases of infection that have been identified. More confusing, differences between countries and states in testing procedures and availability skew the CFR in ways that are difficult to reconcile for comparison purposes.
Conflating these two ideas is rather unhelpful for developing policy.
Did Sweden end up taking the best approach?
260,843 Views |
1675 Replies |
Last: 6 mo ago by Enzomatic
plain_o_llama said:
A reminder for those not following this closely.... (not Squadron7)
The IFR is based on the number of actual infections across the whole population and is exceedingly
difficult to determine. It is not the same as the CFR which is based on the cases of infection that have been identified. More confusing, differences between countries and states in testing procedures and availability skew the CFR in ways that are difficult to reconcile for comparison purposes.
Conflating these two ideas is rather unhelpful for developing policy.
Good point. Those are materially different metrics.
This is how I have been thinking about it
CFR = Pr (Death | Diagnosed)
IFR = Pr (Death | Infected)
Diagnosed is a subset of infected.
Is that fair to say diagnosed == identified?
Both are highly dependent upon testing, whether it's measuring for positive active cases or past infections via antibodies. As we know, those numbers are subjective.PerpetualLurker said:plain_o_llama said:
A reminder for those not following this closely.... (not Squadron7)
The IFR is based on the number of actual infections across the whole population and is exceedingly
difficult to determine. It is not the same as the CFR which is based on the cases of infection that have been identified. More confusing, differences between countries and states in testing procedures and availability skew the CFR in ways that are difficult to reconcile for comparison purposes.
Conflating these two ideas is rather unhelpful for developing policy.
Good point. Those are materially different metrics.
This is how I have been thinking about it
CFR = Pr (Death | Diagnosed)
IFR = Pr (Death | Infected)
Diagnosed is a subset of infected.
Is that fair to say diagnosed == identified?
Same with measuring death counts, and what you include as a SARS-Cov-2 death. That might be off by a factor of 2 depending on how conservative you are.
The numbers are good for indication, but seem to result in more questions than answers when comparing. about
Mike Shaw - Class of '03
Don't forget Sweden is assigning more deaths to covid than the others. Especially more elderly.
Counts aren't the same methods so messes up numbers when countries don't use the same metrics.
Counts aren't the same methods so messes up numbers when countries don't use the same metrics.
Sweden death from Covid 19 projections up from 10,500 to 15,625. At one time it was down as low as 5,600.
https://covid19.healthdata.org/sweden
https://covid19.healthdata.org/sweden
It is better to light a flamethrower than to curse the darkness- Sir Terence Pratchett
“ III stooges si viveret et nos omnes ad quos etiam probabile est mittent custard pies”
“ III stooges si viveret et nos omnes ad quos etiam probabile est mittent custard pies”
Reminds me of the narrative that we have more cases than the rest of the world combined. Sure thing. Maybe we have just tested more?DadHammer said:
Don't forget Sweden is assigning more deaths to covid than the others. Especially more elderly.
Counts aren't the same methods so messes up numbers when countries don't use the same metrics.
Probably
Kind of like Ecuador having 260 official deaths but funeral homes and graveyards overrun while their official deaths from all causes was over 10k more than expected that month.
We don't have more cases than the rest of the world combined. We have 1MM cases, the world has 3MM including us.beerad12man said:Reminds me of the narrative that we have more cases than the rest of the world combined. Sure thing. Maybe we have just tested more?DadHammer said:
Don't forget Sweden is assigning more deaths to covid than the others. Especially more elderly.
Counts aren't the same methods so messes up numbers when countries don't use the same metrics.
The reason we have so many cases is that we have the third highest population in the world. On a per capita basis we are not as bad as Italy, Spain, Belgium for cases and certainly not for deaths.
We are leading the world in # of tests, but not tests per capita by a long stretch.
The best way to look at testing IMO is tests per positive infection.HotardAg07 said:We don't have more cases than the rest of the world combined. We have 1MM cases, the world has 3MM including us.beerad12man said:Reminds me of the narrative that we have more cases than the rest of the world combined. Sure thing. Maybe we have just tested more?DadHammer said:
Don't forget Sweden is assigning more deaths to covid than the others. Especially more elderly.
Counts aren't the same methods so messes up numbers when countries don't use the same metrics.
The reason we have so many cases is that we have the third highest population in the world. On a per capita basis we are not as bad as Italy, Spain, Belgium for cases and certainly not for deaths.
We are leading the world in # of tests, but not tests per capita by a long stretch.
South Korea shines when looking at it that way and I think it provides the truest picture of how a country is doing with this.
What if they only test the really sick they know are more likely to be infected?
DadHammer said:
What if they only test the really sick they know are more likely to be infected?
South Korea? What???
"The best way to look at testing IMO is tests per positive infection.
South Korea shines when looking at it that way and I think it provides the truest picture of how a country is doing with this."
Wouldn't you get a high test per positive infection if you only test the very sick?
I'm am not sure I understood your answer I guess.
South Korea shines when looking at it that way and I think it provides the truest picture of how a country is doing with this."
Wouldn't you get a high test per positive infection if you only test the very sick?
I'm am not sure I understood your answer I guess.
South korea tests suspected cases AND the people they have had direct contact with.
So they are able to identify and isolate, not only the new symptomatic cases, but the asymptomatic cases quickly before they spread the infection.
As a result they have the closest thing to a fully functional economy. Having businesses open is only half of the equation, an economy also needs consumers that feel comfortable conducting business. And despite the bug chasers on the news, most Americans dont feel fully confident in fully participating in the economy.
So they are able to identify and isolate, not only the new symptomatic cases, but the asymptomatic cases quickly before they spread the infection.
As a result they have the closest thing to a fully functional economy. Having businesses open is only half of the equation, an economy also needs consumers that feel comfortable conducting business. And despite the bug chasers on the news, most Americans dont feel fully confident in fully participating in the economy.
You've got it backwards. If you do 100 tests for every positive infection, that means you have the bandwidth to test 99 people who don't have it. As Duncan said well, what we need is enough testing capacity to test all symptomatic people AND their contacts.DadHammer said:
"The best way to look at testing IMO is tests per positive infection.
South Korea shines when looking at it that way and I think it provides the truest picture of how a country is doing with this."
Wouldn't you get a high test per positive infection if you only test the very sick?
I'm am not sure I understood your answer I guess.
DadHammer said:
"The best way to look at testing IMO is tests per positive infection.
South Korea shines when looking at it that way and I think it provides the truest picture of how a country is doing with this."
Wouldn't you get a high test per positive infection if you only test the very sick?
I'm am not sure I understood your answer I guess.
Yeah I'm sorry I was vague. South Korea is testing EVERYbody that was ever around a contact of a contact of a sick person. They are doing the opposite of what you suggested.
Sometimes I forget people dont understand that. Sorry.
According to who?DadHammer said:
Don't forget Sweden is assigning more deaths to covid than the others. Especially more elderly.
Counts aren't the same methods so messes up numbers when countries don't use the same metrics.
There were several articles that said Sweden counts elderly home deaths and their neighbors were not. Seemed weird way to count to me. Improves your numbers to justify lock downs.
Go back in the thread a few pegs and read some of the articles posted. It was in a few of them.
I am about done with this whole thing. The virus is here, hiding at home will not help in the long run. Might as well not kill your economy also. As long as hospitals and portable hospitals don't max capacity there really is no reason to stay at home. Not checking this page much anymore after today.
Go back in the thread a few pegs and read some of the articles posted. It was in a few of them.
I am about done with this whole thing. The virus is here, hiding at home will not help in the long run. Might as well not kill your economy also. As long as hospitals and portable hospitals don't max capacity there really is no reason to stay at home. Not checking this page much anymore after today.
There was one article that made a vague reference to "some countries" that were not counting elderly home deaths. Without specificity, it is meaningless.DadHammer said:
There were several articles that said Sweden counts elderly home deaths and their neighbors were not. Seemed weird way to count to me. Improves your numbers to justify lock downs.
Go back in the thread a few pegs and read some of the articles posted. It was in a few of them.
I am about done with this whole thing. The virus is here, hiding at home will not help in the long run. Might as well not kill your economy also. As long as hospitals and portable hospitals don't max capacity there really is no reason to stay at home. Not checking this page much anymore after today.
Yet there are tons of articles criticizing Sweden's approach by comparing their COVID deaths with neighboring countries without comparing how each country counts the deaths. Equally pointless.
Sweden now looking at over 17,000 projected deaths. Way up.
https://covid19.healthdata.org/sweden
https://covid19.healthdata.org/sweden
It is better to light a flamethrower than to curse the darkness- Sir Terence Pratchett
“ III stooges si viveret et nos omnes ad quos etiam probabile est mittent custard pies”
“ III stooges si viveret et nos omnes ad quos etiam probabile est mittent custard pies”
I think this website in general has the best projections, since they're one of the few that accounts for future loosening of social distancing and also uncertainty.
https://covid19-projections.com/sweden
https://covid19-projections.com/sweden
I will be sure not to cite them as support for an argument I am making.GAC06 said:
Yet there are tons of articles criticizing Sweden's approach by comparing their COVID deaths with neighboring countries without comparing how each country counts the deaths. Equally pointless.
Yeah it's ****ing driving me crazy when people point to the univ of Washington one and say "see it will be gone by June"
That's not how that chart works!
That's not how that chart works!
[img]http://www.unicron.us/tf1985/cartoon/dinobots2.jpg[/img]
That's only 0.17% of their population.
HotardAg07 said:
I think this website in general has the best projections, since they're one of the few that accounts for future loosening of social distancing and also uncertainty.
https://covid19-projections.com/sweden
Cool site, thx
GAC06 said:
Yet there are tons of articles criticizing Sweden's approach by comparing their COVID deaths with neighboring countries without comparing how each country counts the deaths. Equally pointless.
DadHammer said:
That's only 0.17% of their population.
Which would be 620,000 people here....just saying. And keep in mind that while they didnt do a government mandated lock down, they did encourage people to stay home and limit travels, so it was more of a soft lock down. They weren't having infection parties at the capital like we did here.
Infection parties? Is that something worse than sitting at a cafe?
Well, based on the photos, many (all?) of the protests in the States would violate the social distancing rules that have gotten some Swedish bars and restaurants shut down by the Swedish government.GAC06 said:
Infection parties? Is that something worse than sitting at a cafe?
HotardAg07 said:
I think this website in general has the best projections, since they're one of the few that accounts for future loosening of social distancing and also uncertainty.
https://covid19-projections.com/sweden
****...this confirms my doomsday predictions.
If the spread between ICU beds needed and available increases further as they project, they are going to be in a world of hurt by mid May. Already they are above the available beds, if the numbers are reliable according to that chart.UTExan said:
Sweden now looking at over 17,000 projected deaths. Way up.
https://covid19.healthdata.org/sweden
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
I don't know how it will turn out but I am rooting for them. That is how I would have ruled if I was the dictator, formerly governor, of one of our states.
I think we should understand that this will kill several hundred thousand people whether we lockdown or not and it's really just the time it takes that we can modify. I know there is the whole hospital capacity threshold that we don't want to exceed but we should try and utilize most of that total capacity to get through this as fast as possible.
I think we should understand that this will kill several hundred thousand people whether we lockdown or not and it's really just the time it takes that we can modify. I know there is the whole hospital capacity threshold that we don't want to exceed but we should try and utilize most of that total capacity to get through this as fast as possible.
That's what I was looking at initially. The deficit in ICU beds + deaths are the figures that stand out to me.doctorAg13 said:If the spread between ICU beds needed and available increases further as they project, they are going to be in a world of hurt by mid May. Already they are above the available beds, if the numbers are reliable according to that chart.UTExan said:
Sweden now looking at over 17,000 projected deaths. Way up.
https://covid19.healthdata.org/sweden
It is better to light a flamethrower than to curse the darkness- Sir Terence Pratchett
“ III stooges si viveret et nos omnes ad quos etiam probabile est mittent custard pies”
“ III stooges si viveret et nos omnes ad quos etiam probabile est mittent custard pies”
Duncan Idaho said:DadHammer said:
That's only 0.17% of their population.
Which would be 620,000 people here....just saying. And keep in mind that while they didnt do a government mandated lock down, they did encourage people to stay home and limit travels, so it was more of a soft lock down. They weren't having infection parties at the capital like we did here.
You can stay at home the rest of us are moving on. The virus is here to stay and you can't hide from it.