Sweden is counting way more deaths with covid as deaths from covid.goodAg80 said:
Hmm. Well I got that one wrong. I guess we are healthier.
Mike Shaw - Class of '03
Did Sweden end up taking the best approach?
304,872 Views |
1675 Replies |
Last: 1 yr ago by Enzomatic
Is your graph Sweden or US? Do you have comparable graphs?Keegan99 said:
Yet Sweden all-cause mortality is in line with previous years.
The US? Not so much.
I am not saying the Sweden way wasn't the right way, my point was that Sweden's death rate due to Covid seems to be on par with the US. Do you not agree? They definitely hit their curve quicker and got through it faster, but it appears that their death rate was on par with US.
That chart is for Sweden.
And the rates on paper look the same, I agree. But that's subject to counting methods.
US all-cause mortality is running about 10% above normal. So we're experiencing more excess death.
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/index.htm
And the rates on paper look the same, I agree. But that's subject to counting methods.
US all-cause mortality is running about 10% above normal. So we're experiencing more excess death.
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/index.htm
That was intentional -- I used 2020 population as the basis for adjusting all of the other years to be apples-to-apples on populatoin. So there would be no adjustment for 2020.webgem08 said:
Very interesting data. Can you revise your Sweden table though? Raw deaths and 2020 equivalent deaths show the same numbers.
HotardAg07 said:That was intentional -- I used 2020 population as the basis for adjusting all of the other years to be apples-to-apples on populatoin. So there would be no adjustment for 2020.webgem08 said:
Very interesting data. Can you revise your Sweden table though? Raw deaths and 2020 equivalent deaths show the same numbers.
There's no difference in any of the numbers across both columns though, not just for the Year 2020 row.
You are very right, thank you for pointing that out. I was not pulling the right data for the actual deaths. Fixed:webgem08 said:HotardAg07 said:That was intentional -- I used 2020 population as the basis for adjusting all of the other years to be apples-to-apples on populatoin. So there would be no adjustment for 2020.webgem08 said:
Very interesting data. Can you revise your Sweden table though? Raw deaths and 2020 equivalent deaths show the same numbers.
There's no difference in any of the numbers across both columns though, not just for the Year 2020 row.
Of course, Sweden is also currently running a "death deficit" for the past seven weeks.
If this keeps up there won't be much, if any, excess mortality for 2020.
Population adjusted, all-cause deaths in Sweden are already below what they were in 2015 to this point in the calendar year.
The excess mortality in the Spring seems to be mostly "pull forward" by a few months.
If this keeps up there won't be much, if any, excess mortality for 2020.
Population adjusted, all-cause deaths in Sweden are already below what they were in 2015 to this point in the calendar year.
The excess mortality in the Spring seems to be mostly "pull forward" by a few months.
Keegan,
I've tried to get high quality data directly from the source, dissect the data myself, and then split the data several different ways to try to tease out different ways of looking at the data which may have different narratives. I have done it the same exact approach for the US, Texas and Sweden and updated myself over time. I even uploaded my first spreadsheet I did and posted it google drive so anybody could download it and check my math and I had no disagreements.
These people you're quoting are reporting the deaths data in a biased way and it's a little insulting to all the work I've done that you continue to use them to disagree with the numbers I've posted.
If you look at population adjusted all cause deaths data for the active-coronavirus period of March to July, where the data is complete, there is ~10% excess death in Sweden as I have shown. I think that time frame and population adjustment is very reasonable. They do seem to have lowered down to normal deaths levels again and 10% is not apocalyptic by any means. It's possible that this excess mortality period will be followed by a below average mortality period that will average out to no excess mortality over a longer time scale, but for right now we can't state that as a fact or anything supported by data. Somewhere around the first to second week of August the data falls off a cliff to 0 due to incomplete reporting.
I've tried to get high quality data directly from the source, dissect the data myself, and then split the data several different ways to try to tease out different ways of looking at the data which may have different narratives. I have done it the same exact approach for the US, Texas and Sweden and updated myself over time. I even uploaded my first spreadsheet I did and posted it google drive so anybody could download it and check my math and I had no disagreements.
These people you're quoting are reporting the deaths data in a biased way and it's a little insulting to all the work I've done that you continue to use them to disagree with the numbers I've posted.
If you look at population adjusted all cause deaths data for the active-coronavirus period of March to July, where the data is complete, there is ~10% excess death in Sweden as I have shown. I think that time frame and population adjustment is very reasonable. They do seem to have lowered down to normal deaths levels again and 10% is not apocalyptic by any means. It's possible that this excess mortality period will be followed by a below average mortality period that will average out to no excess mortality over a longer time scale, but for right now we can't state that as a fact or anything supported by data. Somewhere around the first to second week of August the data falls off a cliff to 0 due to incomplete reporting.
No problem. So not a huge change (1%) when adjusting for population...still a double-digit increase.HotardAg07 said:You are very right, thank you for pointing that out. I was not pulling the right data for the actual deaths. Fixed:webgem08 said:HotardAg07 said:That was intentional -- I used 2020 population as the basis for adjusting all of the other years to be apples-to-apples on populatoin. So there would be no adjustment for 2020.webgem08 said:
Very interesting data. Can you revise your Sweden table though? Raw deaths and 2020 equivalent deaths show the same numbers.
There's no difference in any of the numbers across both columns though, not just for the Year 2020 row.
You have to be myopic when you are pushing facts to fit a predefined conclusion.
Would take Swedens route any and every day.
You are cherrypicking the worst of the pandemic and not at all accounting for the less than expected death in 2019, early 2020, and now currently in 2020.
Looking only at the narrow width of time where there were almost guaranteed to be excess deaths, you're unsurprisingly finding excess deaths. Is that supposed to be revelatory?
What the 2020 all-cause numbers show is that, when widening the window a few months before and after the worst, there is no notable excess death. That is the true story that puts the scale of the impact in proper context.
Looking only at the narrow width of time where there were almost guaranteed to be excess deaths, you're unsurprisingly finding excess deaths. Is that supposed to be revelatory?
What the 2020 all-cause numbers show is that, when widening the window a few months before and after the worst, there is no notable excess death. That is the true story that puts the scale of the impact in proper context.
How am I cherry picking the data by not including data that is:
1. Before the first death due to coronavirus, i.e. a period of time where coronavirus's impact on deaths is completely irrelevant
2. After the deaths data is actually complete.
Based on the data I downloaded, I cut off my analysis at week 30 because I was highly confident that that data was complete. Below, you can see why. In early August, the data decays to zero. The 31st week could very well be complete, it's hard to tell.
In the US data, the last two completed weeks are shown as <100% complete and you have to go 3 weeks back to get the last week that is 100%. I assumed the same would go for the Sweden data.
So again, why am I wrong for cutting off my data at the end of July? How am I missing several weeks of death when at most I'm missing one week of available data? I just can't believe the mental gymnastics people will go through to promote a certain narrative. Is it so hard to just call balls and strikes on this virus instead of basically trying to push a consistent narrative constantly?
1. Before the first death due to coronavirus, i.e. a period of time where coronavirus's impact on deaths is completely irrelevant
2. After the deaths data is actually complete.
Based on the data I downloaded, I cut off my analysis at week 30 because I was highly confident that that data was complete. Below, you can see why. In early August, the data decays to zero. The 31st week could very well be complete, it's hard to tell.
In the US data, the last two completed weeks are shown as <100% complete and you have to go 3 weeks back to get the last week that is 100%. I assumed the same would go for the Sweden data.
So again, why am I wrong for cutting off my data at the end of July? How am I missing several weeks of death when at most I'm missing one week of available data? I just can't believe the mental gymnastics people will go through to promote a certain narrative. Is it so hard to just call balls and strikes on this virus instead of basically trying to push a consistent narrative constantly?
Here's the table for Calendar weeks 1 through 30.
Still found excess death.
Still found excess death.
Here's the table from the beginning of the flu season in the beginning of October:
Still have excess death!
Still have excess death!
So I say once again -- if someone is telling you there is no excess death in Sweden, they're spinning the data in an irresponsible way to lie to you. They're simply trying to push a narrative and they'r twisting the statistics to help make that claim, nothing else. There's no truth-seeking or honest analysis going on.
We can have the conversation about Sweden without lying about the death toll. Sweden may have taken a very good approach while acknowledging excess death.
This stuff isn't that hard. You can download the publicly available data, put it into excel, makes some graphs and formulas and see for yourself. I tried really hard to do this with an open mind and put out all the different ways the stats can be analyzed, so I could see for myself without narrative brokers about what's going on.
We can have the conversation about Sweden without lying about the death toll. Sweden may have taken a very good approach while acknowledging excess death.
This stuff isn't that hard. You can download the publicly available data, put it into excel, makes some graphs and formulas and see for yourself. I tried really hard to do this with an open mind and put out all the different ways the stats can be analyzed, so I could see for myself without narrative brokers about what's going on.
There was excess death for a period of three months.
Any reasonable longer term view and that excess disappears.
Any reasonable longer term view and that excess disappears.
Hotard. You are trying to hard to spin it.
They did see higher death rates for a time period from covid. They are also now seeing a lower death rate for a time period.
In 12 months it is probably going to even out.
What is your point? Is it to only focus only on a 1-3 month period?
They did see higher death rates for a time period from covid. They are also now seeing a lower death rate for a time period.
In 12 months it is probably going to even out.
What is your point? Is it to only focus only on a 1-3 month period?
All I did was set out to answer the question -- did coronavirus cause excess death in Sweden? My point is that the data conclusively says, yes, the coronavirus caused excess death. And yes, the deaths have now returned to normal historical levels.DadHammer said:
Hotard. You are trying to hard to spin it.
They did see higher death rates for a time period from covid. They are also now seeing a lower death rate for a time period.
In 12 months it is probably going to even out.
What is your point? Is it to only focus only on a 1-3 month period?
You or I don't know what is going to happen in 12 months.
I agree it did cause excess death. That is true.
I don't think anyone is saying it did not. What we are saying is excess death has gone slightly negative and close to normal already. It's awful to say but the reality is most of the deaths were from people who were going to die in the next 12 months. If you look at the numbers of people being hospitalized and dying now from covid it has dropped to the point it isn't even much of a concern in Sweden anymore, they have basically reached herd immunity.
I agree with you on the surge in deaths for three months. Thanks for your input.
I don't think anyone is saying it did not. What we are saying is excess death has gone slightly negative and close to normal already. It's awful to say but the reality is most of the deaths were from people who were going to die in the next 12 months. If you look at the numbers of people being hospitalized and dying now from covid it has dropped to the point it isn't even much of a concern in Sweden anymore, they have basically reached herd immunity.
I agree with you on the surge in deaths for three months. Thanks for your input.
Sweden's approach. All day every day.
Quote:
Swedes are losing trust in authorities' handling of the coronavirus, as the man behind the country's light-touch approach called lockdowns a form of madness and political parties demanded the Swedish strategy be reviewed before the next election in 2022.
An Ipsos survey this week for the Dagens Nyheter newspaper showed confidence in the country's management of Covid-19 had fallen 11 points to 45% since April, with backing for the national public health agency down 12 points.
The proportion of respondents satisfied with the centre-left government's actions in the pandemic also fell to 38% in June from 50% the previous month, while the personal approval rating of the prime minister, Stefan Lfven, also slid 10 points.
"The differences are big enough that we can say with certainty that there has been a real change," an Ipsos analyst, Nicklas Kllebring, told the paper. "The view of authorities' capabilities has taken a clear negative turn."
That article was from June
I'm pretty sure that Eric Feigl-Ding guy has been wrong about everything ehe tweets since the outbreak started. IIRC, cone used to post his tweets all the time on the original F16 thread until even cone got fed up with the negativity and malformed information.
I believe in Sweden's approach but also realize its too early for the final story to be written. Will need to at least get to the end of the year IMO. . . .
Yes, by the end of the year we should know. But looking at their charts they look really good right now and people are moving on and their economy didn't take near the hit of other countries.
Just about every country that did the lockdown tight method is seeing out breaks when they open back up. It follows logic as the virus is here to stay. Ruining your economy and killing jobs is and was a terrible idea. It has to run its course. The initial slowdown was fine because we didn't know the virus was targeting mostly the old and sick. Once that was determined the old and sick should have been isolated an the rest back to life as fast as possible to get to herd immunity and move on with life. the 15-24 old age group has a 99.99947% recovery rate. We are dragging things out for no reason. People died from all types of sickness and accidents before covid was invented by the Chinese.
Just about every country that did the lockdown tight method is seeing out breaks when they open back up. It follows logic as the virus is here to stay. Ruining your economy and killing jobs is and was a terrible idea. It has to run its course. The initial slowdown was fine because we didn't know the virus was targeting mostly the old and sick. Once that was determined the old and sick should have been isolated an the rest back to life as fast as possible to get to herd immunity and move on with life. the 15-24 old age group has a 99.99947% recovery rate. We are dragging things out for no reason. People died from all types of sickness and accidents before covid was invented by the Chinese.
Ding is resorting to digging up stuff from months ago to try to keep the panic going.
Good grief.
So has ding admitted how awfully wrong he was? He should.
Really appreciate the deeper analysis.HotardAg07 said:
ReaSo I say once again -- if someone is telling you there is no excess death in Sweden, they're spinning the data in an irresponsible way to lie to you. They're simply trying to push a narrative and they'r twisting the statistics to help make that claim, nothing else. There's no truth-seeking or honest analysis going on.
We can have the conversation about Sweden without lying about the death toll. Sweden may have taken a very good approach while acknowledging excess death.
This stuff isn't that hard. You can download the publicly available data, put it into excel, makes some graphs and formulas and see for yourself. I tried really hard to do this with an open mind and put out all the different ways the stats can be analyzed, so I could see for myself without narrative brokers about what's going on.
There's nothing "deep" about looking for excess deaths in a place where you're all-but-guaranteed to find excess deaths. It's like looking in your laundry hamper and finding dirty clothes.
What would be insightful is putting it into a longer term context. Based on the 20 months prior to COVID, Sweden was actuarially assured of experiencing a period of excess death. It was a matter of when, not if. Had it not been COVID, it would have been a brutal flu season.
What would be insightful is putting it into a longer term context. Based on the 20 months prior to COVID, Sweden was actuarially assured of experiencing a period of excess death. It was a matter of when, not if. Had it not been COVID, it would have been a brutal flu season.
Hey, look. About 50/50. Maybe along political lines in an election year? Meaningless poll.
With 95% of the press running constantly negative campaign against the President.
The absolute shameful handling of covid by liberal states and mayors and your surprised?
Really?
The absolute shameful handling of covid by liberal states and mayors and your surprised?
Really?
Featured Stories
See All
2026 Lakewood (CA) tight end Caleb Tafua commits to Texas A&M
by Jason Howell
Presenting Texas Aggies United's 'Battle At Reed' Sweepstakes!
by Texas Aggies United
22:08
1d ago
5.0k
Hefner scores 19 as No. 12 A&M overpowers HCU in Friday matinee
by Olin Buchanan
Ar'maj Reed-Adams announces his return to Texas A&M for 2025
by Richard Zane