4 ms·

Sweeden is one example, the death toll is still manageable and the life is pretty much still normal. Not a country: florida, it is one of the state in the usa

by matz1 6y ago

Sweeden is one example, the death toll is still manageable and the life is pretty much still normal. Not a country: florida, it is one of the state in the usa that has the least covid related restriction. They are doing very well. Went there myself to visit recently. Its not hard to see why lockdown is not worth it. According to cdc, covid has very very low ifr : 0-19 years: 0.00003 20-49 years: 0.0002 50-69 years: 0.005 70+ years: 0.054

lostlogin 6y ago
It gets real dark real fast. The Post link suggests that their approach has worked, as long as you value a human life at no more than $1.1m. They are approaching 8k deaths and their approach is suggested to have added 5k to that. “ Assume that the differential Swedish approach dampens the GDP fall this year by 1 percentage point. This represents a gain of approximately $5.6 billion. Also suppose that the approach has caused 5,000 extra deaths — a reasonable guess from comparisons with other Nordic countries. How could one estimate that loss of life in economic terms? The value of a statistical life, used by the Swedish Transport Administration in its cost-benefit analyses of investment in traffic security, is approximately $4.6 million. Using this number, the economic cost of lost lives would be as high as $22.9 billion — clearly outweighing the benefits from the smaller GDP fall. One might argue that the value of lost lives should be set much lower, as the vast majority of deaths have been among elderly people, with fewer years left to enjoy life: 89 percent of the dead in Sweden have been above 70 years of age, and 67 percent above 80. One reaches the break-even point in my calculation if one lowers the value of an average life lost to $1.12 million. For the Swedish approach to be “profitable,” the average life lost must be valued lower than that.” https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/10/20/sweden-economy-pandemic-strategy https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/10/20/sweden-eco... https://covid19.who.int/region/euro/country/se https://covid19.who.int/region/euro/country/se
maxerickson 6y ago
How is 1 in 200 people between the ages of 50 and 70 "very very low"? In the US, it would be hundreds of thousands of deaths in just that age group. And 1 in 20 people over 70 obviously isn't low.
- matz1 6y ago
  Low or high can be very subjective, at least I consider it very very low. I wouldn't ask my parent/grand parent to isolate, if they don't want it. >And 1 in 20 people over 70 obviously isn't low People in over 70 has already high chance of death regardless of covid or not. So given that they are infected with covid, 1 in 20 chance is not high.
  - maxerickson 6y ago
    So given that they are infected with covid That this is not some uncontrollable inevitability is the whole point. Places that were proactive have less economic harm and far less death and illness. I suppose people aren't going to change, so the ship has sailed for much of the world, but it wasn't inevitable for vast numbers of people to get infected. As far as 1/200 being subjectively low, if something had a 1/200 chance in killing you, would you do it 5 times a day? We can answer probably not of course, because you probably wouldn't do it once a week (or you wouldn't be).
    - lostlogin 6y ago
      > As far as 1/200 being subjectively low, if something had a 1/200 chance in killing you, would you do it 5 times a day? It would probably be considerably more fun to self isolate while taking up drinking, smoking, motor biking without a helmet and a variety of other risky activities. At least those are interesting, and they are probably less risky.
    - matz1 6y ago
      The point is, even without any precaution, they might never be infected in the first place, so probably death from covid for this specific age group is : probability of getting infected * 1/200. So even less than 1/200. If I'm in this age group, obviously I would happily take this chance, if the alternative is lockdown/restriction.
ska 6y ago
> the death toll is still manageable and the life is pretty much still normal. It's probably worth noting that this statement is currently contentious both inside and outside Sweden.
andylynch 6y ago
I’m not sure about Sweden. This week their king was on TV saying ‘we have failed’. Nearly 8,000 dead. This is not normal.
- matz1 6y ago
  That is his opinion, which I disagree. I myself would not consider it 'failed'. Sweeden total death this year is not significantly different compared to previous year.
  - kiko_2 6y ago
    What are you taking about? Sweden reported that this November was the deadliest in the last 100 years since the Spanish flu in 1918. Compared to Norway, Sweden has 20x more deaths from covid (Sweden 8000 vs Norway 400 deaths) and Sweden has only 2x population (10M vs 5M). And Norway has a better GDP than Sweden despite stricter lockdown policies.
    - matz1 6y ago
      Number of death for 2020 are not significantly different than previous year: https://www.statista.com/statistics/525353/sweden-number-of-deaths/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/525353/sweden-number-of-... yes it said the dec 2020 data is only up to dec 11 but its unlikely that the number its going to be substantially increase with half month to go. another stats: death per million for 2020 is not much different compared to five year average: https://legionsletters.com/mortality#SWEDEN-MORTALITY https://legionsletters.com/mortality#SWEDEN-MORTALITY
      - lostlogin 6y ago
        Searching about I see data like yours and ones like those I include below, which show an excess. Why these differ, I don’t understand. In your link, if you assume the death rate for the remainder of the year will remain static and calculate the end of year total (it’s roughly adding 5%) you get a number that looks like it spikes, but not hugely. The below show a clear excess and a long tail after the spike in deaths. https://www.efta.int/Publications/news/COVID-19-Excess-Mortality-Selected-European-Countries-521261 https://www.efta.int/Publications/news/COVID-19-Excess-Morta... https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-1112-0 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-1112-0 https://academic.oup.com/eurpub/advance-article/doi/10.1093/eurpub/ckaa218/5968985 https://academic.oup.com/eurpub/advance-article/doi/10.1093/...

by matz1 6y ago

lostlogin 6y ago

It gets real dark real fast. The Post link suggests that their approach has worked, as long as you value a human life at no more than $1.1m. They are approaching 8k deaths and their approach is suggested to have added 5k to that. “ Assume that the differential Swedish approach dampens the GDP fall this year by 1 percentage point. This represents a gain of approximately $5.6 billion. Also suppose that the approach has caused 5,000 extra deaths — a reasonable guess from comparisons with other Nordic countries. How could one estimate that loss of life in economic terms? The value of a statistical life, used by the Swedish Transport Administration in its cost-benefit analyses of investment in traffic security, is approximately $4.6 million. Using this number, the economic cost of lost lives would be as high as $22.9 billion — clearly outweighing the benefits from the smaller GDP fall. One might argue that the value of lost lives should be set much lower, as the vast majority of deaths have been among elderly people, with fewer years left to enjoy life: 89 percent of the dead in Sweden have been above 70 years of age, and 67 percent above 80. One reaches the break-even point in my calculation if one lowers the value of an average life lost to $1.12 million. For the Swedish approach to be “profitable,” the average life lost must be valued lower than that.” https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/10/20/sweden-economy-pandemic-strategy https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/10/20/sweden-eco... https://covid19.who.int/region/euro/country/se https://covid19.who.int/region/euro/country/se

maxerickson 6y ago

How is 1 in 200 people between the ages of 50 and 70 "very very low"? In the US, it would be hundreds of thousands of deaths in just that age group. And 1 in 20 people over 70 obviously isn't low.

matz1 6y ago
Low or high can be very subjective, at least I consider it very very low. I wouldn't ask my parent/grand parent to isolate, if they don't want it. >And 1 in 20 people over 70 obviously isn't low People in over 70 has already high chance of death regardless of covid or not. So given that they are infected with covid, 1 in 20 chance is not high.
- maxerickson 6y ago
  So given that they are infected with covid That this is not some uncontrollable inevitability is the whole point. Places that were proactive have less economic harm and far less death and illness. I suppose people aren't going to change, so the ship has sailed for much of the world, but it wasn't inevitable for vast numbers of people to get infected. As far as 1/200 being subjectively low, if something had a 1/200 chance in killing you, would you do it 5 times a day? We can answer probably not of course, because you probably wouldn't do it once a week (or you wouldn't be).
  - lostlogin 6y ago
    > As far as 1/200 being subjectively low, if something had a 1/200 chance in killing you, would you do it 5 times a day? It would probably be considerably more fun to self isolate while taking up drinking, smoking, motor biking without a helmet and a variety of other risky activities. At least those are interesting, and they are probably less risky.
  - matz1 6y ago
    The point is, even without any precaution, they might never be infected in the first place, so probably death from covid for this specific age group is : probability of getting infected * 1/200. So even less than 1/200. If I'm in this age group, obviously I would happily take this chance, if the alternative is lockdown/restriction.

ska 6y ago

> the death toll is still manageable and the life is pretty much still normal. It's probably worth noting that this statement is currently contentious both inside and outside Sweden.

andylynch 6y ago

I’m not sure about Sweden. This week their king was on TV saying ‘we have failed’. Nearly 8,000 dead. This is not normal.

matz1 6y ago
That is his opinion, which I disagree. I myself would not consider it 'failed'. Sweeden total death this year is not significantly different compared to previous year.
- kiko_2 6y ago
  What are you taking about? Sweden reported that this November was the deadliest in the last 100 years since the Spanish flu in 1918. Compared to Norway, Sweden has 20x more deaths from covid (Sweden 8000 vs Norway 400 deaths) and Sweden has only 2x population (10M vs 5M). And Norway has a better GDP than Sweden despite stricter lockdown policies.
  - matz1 6y ago
    Number of death for 2020 are not significantly different than previous year: https://www.statista.com/statistics/525353/sweden-number-of-deaths/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/525353/sweden-number-of-... yes it said the dec 2020 data is only up to dec 11 but its unlikely that the number its going to be substantially increase with half month to go. another stats: death per million for 2020 is not much different compared to five year average: https://legionsletters.com/mortality#SWEDEN-MORTALITY https://legionsletters.com/mortality#SWEDEN-MORTALITY
    - lostlogin 6y ago
      Searching about I see data like yours and ones like those I include below, which show an excess. Why these differ, I don’t understand. In your link, if you assume the death rate for the remainder of the year will remain static and calculate the end of year total (it’s roughly adding 5%) you get a number that looks like it spikes, but not hugely. The below show a clear excess and a long tail after the spike in deaths. https://www.efta.int/Publications/news/COVID-19-Excess-Mortality-Selected-European-Countries-521261 https://www.efta.int/Publications/news/COVID-19-Excess-Morta... https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-1112-0 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-1112-0 https://academic.oup.com/eurpub/advance-article/doi/10.1093/eurpub/ckaa218/5968985 https://academic.oup.com/eurpub/advance-article/doi/10.1093/...