An interesting thread, with links, from Yale's Professor Christakis.
To be worth using, a detector needs not only (A) not get very many false positives, but also (B) get…
4 responses to “Sweden’s approach to the pandemic hasn’t worked very well”
-
This response to Christakis is apt, as he acknowledges:
Cam Crain
@camacrain
·
May 17
Replying to
@NAChristakis
Doesn’t this miss the whole point of the strategy, Nicholas? I thought condensing the infections into a shorter amount of time to lessen the other costs was the point. The real test will be if the final death toll at the end of this all is higher, right? -
Good catch and good point!
-
I will read the Economist article when I remember my Economist password which I seem to have forgotten.
In the meantime without having read it I would say a) we won't know who has won until the race is over, although some likely losers can be identified now and b) if I had a crystal ball I would have considered going to Sweden when our kids' Swedish au pair decamped home in March, rather than being where I live in the UK.
We here seem to have managed to trash our country even worse than recent years' idiocy had already achieved whilst still having amongst the worst c19 stats.
Meanwhile if things don't get worse they seem to be getting better. Very slowly.
-
A propos, the Covid death toll in New York City, currently around 16,000, suggests that the city is half way to herd immunity. Assuming a fatality rate of .5% (derived from the Diamond Princess cruise ship and age-adjusted to match NYC's population), we can infer that over 3 million people in NYC have already been infected. If you add another 4,000 probable Covid deaths in NYC to the confirmed figure, that takes the number up to 4 million. (The fraction of antibody-positive NYers in the poorer areas like the Bronx was reported by the NY Times the other day as over one-third.) This knocks R-nought way down.
—–
KEYWORDS:
Primary Blog
Leave a Reply