Coronavirus Coronavirus: In-Iowa General Discussion (Not Limited)
- Thread starter Jer
- Start date
- Status
These reporters may want to research some of their questions before they ask them. Or maybe if you ask one that is past a level of total cluelessness that you get a one day timeout from asking questions.
I think you're right - but you also have to assume that there is lead time for those treatments to improve. It's not a consistent rate of increase (i.e. your chances to survive the disease don't increase by X% each day), it's got step changes. Each time a new treatment is developed then there's a (relatively) large jump in your chance to survive. So if social distancing is relaxed to some extent before an effective treatment is developed, which seems likely, then the social distancing countries will have a period of trickling in deaths where (theoretically) Sweden would not.
In the end it will come down to the math after 6-12 months. Obviously at this point it's all guesses. We don't know when or if a treatment will be developed. We don't know how long you are immune to the disease after getting it. If it's only 3-6 months, Sweden's going to look pretty bad come fall when they have a second spike as bad as the first. So while I feel terrible that there may be people dying who don't have to, I'm glad there is at least one country trying this strategy so that in a year from now we will know if it works and results in similar or even fewer deaths over time.
Whether we like it or not, states are going to start opening up by the end of the month. No one has a clue what that will do to the numbers, but its safe to assume one way or another that Trump will either take the credit if it goes well, or scapegoat the Governors and others if it does not.
You say this like everything is going to open all up at once. Hopefully that’s not what you mean. We are still far away from bars and restaurants being able to open up to the public.
I expect restaurants to be partially open by the end of May at the latest. Honestly I expect them to be partially open early to mid May. Bars I agree are quite a ways off.
You can already see people beginning to evaluate whether they’d rather risk getting sick or living like this. Whether people are making the right decisions or not is different from the decisions they will make.
I'm warming up to the "herd immunity" approach.
1. If we are to believe that our measures that have taken help curb the spread of the virus (no reason to believe that it doesn't), then it would stand to reason that less measures/more interaction would absolutely lead to more cases, correct?
2. Gross deaths are immaterial to statistics when comparing them. Deaths per million is the relevant stat when attempting to do that.
1. The mortality rate is not going to remain constant. People dying now would not have died if mitigation had been implemented.
2. Obviously.
https://www.kcci.com/article/new-co...ted-at-another-iowa-packing-facility/32211932
Another plant outbreak
Another plant outbreak
Compare the deaths per million column (it's in order). Then compare the amount of restrictions placed on their respective populations. Sweden has allowed schools and restaurants to stay open, and gatherings of up to 50 people. The rest they have left to voluntary cooperation and good practices. Other countries have placed much more aggressive control over their citizens. The results are very similar statistically.
The demographics of those countries are drastically different. Comparing Sweden to its neighbors is the true comparison, Sweden's neighbors have much lower deaths per million.
To an extent. You still have to weigh the value of achieving herd immunity earlier, and not having to worry about this so much going forward. It would be strange if their mortality rate was any different than anyone else's, which tells you that A) they have a lot more cases and B) the mortality rate for this thing is likely going to be low once it is all sorted out.
Last edited:
- Status
