4 ms·

I think herd immunity is an interesting point. Sweden is not there yet but its effective R value has already dropped below 1 a while back and it will continue t

I think herd immunity is an interesting point. Sweden is not there yet but its effective R value has already dropped below 1 a while back and it will continue to drop as the susceptible population continues to shrink. Then there’s approaches like shielding that are interesting that are being discussed a lot. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0895-3 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0895-3 There’s something to note about this virus infection fatality rate: we don’t seem to have an agreed upon value for it and there is quite a window. It may depend on locale, population health, age, etc. But the 1% for the diamond princess is quite high and I think that number was cited for caution.

rihegher 6y ago
The diamond princess fatality rate has been revised and is now around 1.5%
nodamage 6y ago
> But the 1% for the diamond princess is quite high and I think that number was cited for caution. Why? The Diamond Princess has had 14 fatalities out of 712 cases which implies a fatality rate of 2%, with 8 unresolved cases still in the hospital that could push it even higher.
- enitihas 6y ago
  The diamond princess was a very high age group though, very far away from the general population average age.
  - iso947 6y ago
    Not the staff, which are usually about half the people on a cruise liner.
    - enitihas 6y ago
      Fair enough. But is there data available separately for staff and passengers?
- goalieca 6y ago
  I came across this the other day on reddit. It is another cfr study with much lower rates. https://reddit.com/r/COVID19/comments/g6nmtf/_/foatvgv/?context=1 https://reddit.com/r/COVID19/comments/g6nmtf/_/foatvgv/?cont... There’s other highly tested populations with lower CFRs and then there’s IFR estimates based on serology and indirect estimates on CFR that slew much lower than 1%
  - ignoramous 6y ago
    A ~1% of world's population, the entirety of which is naive [0], is still a huge toll. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccine-naive https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccine-naive
  - nodamage 6y ago
    > I came across this the other day on reddit. It is another cfr study with much lower rates. https://reddit.com/r/COVID19/comments/g6nmtf/_/foatvgv/?cont.. https://reddit.com/r/COVID19/comments/g6nmtf/_/foatvgv/?cont.... I would be careful about generalizing results from that particular study as 99.5% of the workers sampled were under the age of 70. If your sampled population does not include the most vulnerable age groups then of course your fatality rate will be lower than normal. > There’s other highly tested populations with lower CFRs and then there’s IFR estimates based on serology and indirect estimates on CFR that slew much lower than 1% I'm curious what you mean by "much lower"? Some of the antibody studies published recently have found prevalence rates that were not much higher than the false positive rates for the test, making confidence in their results somewhat dubious. In studies where the prevalence has been higher (e.g. NYC, Geneva), the IFR is trending towards 0.5-1%. This meta-analysis was published yesterday which suggests an IFR of 0.75% (CI: 0.49-1.01%): https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.03.20089854v1 https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.03.20089854v...
- raverbashing 6y ago
  An even better number of IFR (or CFR?) is 0.5% from Iceland
elric 6y ago
What makes you think immunity is the reason for Sweden's R-value decline? From what I can tell, Swedes are applying social distancing, just without strongarming from the government. That seems like a much more likely cause for the decline than immunity. Or do you hou have any statistics about Swedish immunity?
- DyslexicAtheist 6y ago
  Sweden has also very low population density. And then there is the question of why countries like Japan are such an outlier. I think we're forgetting that models can't be replicated across countries due to possible differences in individual strains.
everly 6y ago
Sweden also has significantly higher death rates than any other Scandinavian country so I'm not sure why its Covid response keeps being trotted out as a herd immunity success story.
- orblivion 6y ago
  What are the death rates? Is this based on confirmed cases or extrapolations from randomly testing the population? If you're talking about raw numbers of dead, _of course_ they have more dead, they're explicitly running this movie on fast forward. The question is number of dead in the long run.
  - everly 6y ago
    https://www.wsj.com/articles/sweden-has-avoided-a-coronavirus-lockdown-its-economy-is-hurting-anyway-11588870062 https://www.wsj.com/articles/sweden-has-avoided-a-coronaviru... 301 dead per million in Sweden vs. 86 in Denmark, 46 in Finland, and 40 in Norway. Based on Johns Hopkins study of confirmed cases.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - orblivion 6y ago
      Your figures are deaths per capita, irrespective of confirmed cases. Not sure why you mention Johns Hopkins and confirmed cases here. Do you mean confirmed _dead_ cases? So, of course Sweden's numbers are highest. Their gambit (as I understood it) was that if they infect people faster, they'll get immune faster. If they infect people faster, it obviously also means that people will die faster. It doesn't mean more will have died; Norway could just be killing people more slowly. We won't know who got it right until this is over. (This is what I meant earlier by "raw numbers", but it's now a bad choice of words given that your figures are per capita)
  - dragonwriter 6y ago
    > What are the death rates? Is this based on confirmed cases or extrapolations from randomly testing the population? Case fatality rate is defined as deaths per confirmed diagnosis. Estimates based on population testing would be of the infection fatality rate, which is a different measure. Assuming similar profile of cases diagnosed, a higher CFR could be a key indicator of greater health system strain. > The question is number of dead in the long run. Everyone is dead on the long run, when and how are the only things that vary and, generally speaking, sooner is less desirable.

rihegher 6y ago

The diamond princess fatality rate has been revised and is now around 1.5%

nodamage 6y ago

> But the 1% for the diamond princess is quite high and I think that number was cited for caution. Why? The Diamond Princess has had 14 fatalities out of 712 cases which implies a fatality rate of 2%, with 8 unresolved cases still in the hospital that could push it even higher.

enitihas 6y ago
The diamond princess was a very high age group though, very far away from the general population average age.
- iso947 6y ago
  Not the staff, which are usually about half the people on a cruise liner.
  - enitihas 6y ago
    Fair enough. But is there data available separately for staff and passengers?
goalieca 6y ago
I came across this the other day on reddit. It is another cfr study with much lower rates. https://reddit.com/r/COVID19/comments/g6nmtf/_/foatvgv/?context=1 https://reddit.com/r/COVID19/comments/g6nmtf/_/foatvgv/?cont... There’s other highly tested populations with lower CFRs and then there’s IFR estimates based on serology and indirect estimates on CFR that slew much lower than 1%
- ignoramous 6y ago
  A ~1% of world's population, the entirety of which is naive [0], is still a huge toll. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccine-naive https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccine-naive
- nodamage 6y ago
  > I came across this the other day on reddit. It is another cfr study with much lower rates. https://reddit.com/r/COVID19/comments/g6nmtf/_/foatvgv/?cont.. https://reddit.com/r/COVID19/comments/g6nmtf/_/foatvgv/?cont.... I would be careful about generalizing results from that particular study as 99.5% of the workers sampled were under the age of 70. If your sampled population does not include the most vulnerable age groups then of course your fatality rate will be lower than normal. > There’s other highly tested populations with lower CFRs and then there’s IFR estimates based on serology and indirect estimates on CFR that slew much lower than 1% I'm curious what you mean by "much lower"? Some of the antibody studies published recently have found prevalence rates that were not much higher than the false positive rates for the test, making confidence in their results somewhat dubious. In studies where the prevalence has been higher (e.g. NYC, Geneva), the IFR is trending towards 0.5-1%. This meta-analysis was published yesterday which suggests an IFR of 0.75% (CI: 0.49-1.01%): https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.03.20089854v1 https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.03.20089854v...
raverbashing 6y ago
An even better number of IFR (or CFR?) is 0.5% from Iceland

elric 6y ago

What makes you think immunity is the reason for Sweden's R-value decline? From what I can tell, Swedes are applying social distancing, just without strongarming from the government. That seems like a much more likely cause for the decline than immunity. Or do you hou have any statistics about Swedish immunity?

DyslexicAtheist 6y ago
Sweden has also very low population density. And then there is the question of why countries like Japan are such an outlier. I think we're forgetting that models can't be replicated across countries due to possible differences in individual strains.

everly 6y ago

Sweden also has significantly higher death rates than any other Scandinavian country so I'm not sure why its Covid response keeps being trotted out as a herd immunity success story.

orblivion 6y ago
What are the death rates? Is this based on confirmed cases or extrapolations from randomly testing the population? If you're talking about raw numbers of dead, _of course_ they have more dead, they're explicitly running this movie on fast forward. The question is number of dead in the long run.
- everly 6y ago
  https://www.wsj.com/articles/sweden-has-avoided-a-coronavirus-lockdown-its-economy-is-hurting-anyway-11588870062 https://www.wsj.com/articles/sweden-has-avoided-a-coronaviru... 301 dead per million in Sweden vs. 86 in Denmark, 46 in Finland, and 40 in Norway. Based on Johns Hopkins study of confirmed cases.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - orblivion 6y ago
    Your figures are deaths per capita, irrespective of confirmed cases. Not sure why you mention Johns Hopkins and confirmed cases here. Do you mean confirmed _dead_ cases? So, of course Sweden's numbers are highest. Their gambit (as I understood it) was that if they infect people faster, they'll get immune faster. If they infect people faster, it obviously also means that people will die faster. It doesn't mean more will have died; Norway could just be killing people more slowly. We won't know who got it right until this is over. (This is what I meant earlier by "raw numbers", but it's now a bad choice of words given that your figures are per capita)
- dragonwriter 6y ago
  > What are the death rates? Is this based on confirmed cases or extrapolations from randomly testing the population? Case fatality rate is defined as deaths per confirmed diagnosis. Estimates based on population testing would be of the infection fatality rate, which is a different measure. Assuming similar profile of cases diagnosed, a higher CFR could be a key indicator of greater health system strain. > The question is number of dead in the long run. Everyone is dead on the long run, when and how are the only things that vary and, generally speaking, sooner is less desirable.