COVID-19 Coronavirus Containment Efforts

[OmCheeto]

Just got news that Wheeler county Oregon got its first case of Corona virus today. There are now only 3 counties in the USA without cases.

Tracking the count of counties with cases is pretty amazing.

We went from <1% to >50% in only 4 weeks.
4 weeks later we were over 85%.
Currently @ 99.9%.

date	counties with cases	% of US counties with cases
2/28/20​	11​	0.34%​
3/6/20​	55​	1.70%​
3/13/20​	296​	9.17%​
3/20/20​	896​	27.8%​
3/27/20​	1732​	53.7%​
4/3/20​	2328​	72.1%​
4/10/20​	2595​	80.4%​
4/17/20​	2701​	83.7%​
4/24/20​	2775​	86.0%​

 

[mfb]

US counties have a population from under 100 to over 10 million. Not surprising that a few small counties (which usually have a low population density, too) stay without cases.

Wheeler County has 1300 people in 4400 km².

 

[Astronuc]

Scientists Confirm Nevada Man Was Infected Twice With Coronavirus
https://www.npr.org/sections/corona...evada-man-was-infected-twice-with-coronavirus

A 25-year-old was infected twice with the Coronavirus earlier this year, scientists in Nevada have confirmed. It is the first confirmed case of so-called reinfection with the virus in the U.S. and the fifth confirmed reinfection case worldwide.

The two infections in the Nevada patient occurred about six weeks apart, according to a case study published Monday in the medical journal The Lancet. The patient originally tested positive for the virus in April and had symptoms including a cough and nausea. He recovered and tested negative for the virus in May.

But at the end of May, he went to an urgent care center with symptoms including fever, cough and dizziness. In early June, he tested positive again and ended up in the hospital.

"The second infection was symptomatically more severe than the first," the authors of the study write. The patient survived his second bout with COVID-19.

Apparently rare, but consequential.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(20)30764-7/fulltext

 

[Ygggdrasil]

Scientists Confirm Nevada Man Was Infected Twice With Coronavirus
https://www.npr.org/sections/corona...evada-man-was-infected-twice-with-coronavirus
Apparently rare, but consequential.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(20)30764-7/fulltext

See also discussion of the paper here: https://www.physicsforums.com/threa...e-reinfection-of-covid-19.992805/post-6385131 along with the previous report from Hong Kong of COVID-19 re-infection.

For summary here's what I posted previously on the studies:

while these reports show that short term re-infection is possible, we still need statistics to determine the prevalence of re-infection. Given the number of infected people, it is likely that re-infection leading to severe disease (as in this case) is rare, though it is difficult to determine how prevalent re-infections that are asymptomatic would be.

 

[bob012345]

Apparently, the president has tested negative twice now for two consecutive days only a week and a half after his original diagnosis. Is that typical or did the experimental treatments he received work extremely well?

 

[mfb]

Apparently rare, but consequential.

Where is the large consequence?
Let's consider the US alone: 7.7 million cases out of a population of 330 million. If confirmed infections would be random across time and space (and no immunity) then we would get a Poisson distribution with a mean of 0.023. This means we would expect 90,000 cases of confirmed double infections and even 700 triple infections. Brazil would have 60,000 double infections, India would have 20,000, and many more countries would have thousands. Correlations between infections would increase these numbers more: Infection rates that differ by region, testing probability that depends on the job or environment of the person, all this would give us even more confirmed double infections. We don't see that at all. We have five cases globally, not hundreds of thousands. Yes it happens, but having a confirmed infection* seems to protect the person with more than 99.99% probability within the time frame we have data for. So what is the consequence? These few people who get it again won't have a relevant impact on the pandemic.

*this is an important distinction, of course. We don't know how well a weak infection (that never gets tested) protects.

 

[waternohitter]

Sporadic reports of Covid-19 patients seemingly becoming reinfected with the Coronavirus have sparked doubts about whether people can ever gain immunity against the pathogen—and although current research suggests reinfection within a short time frame is unlikely, some researchers are hesitant to completely dismiss the idea.

Since the Coronavirus pandemic began, there have been reports from doctors throughout the world about recovered Covid-19 patients seemingly becoming reinfected with the novel coronavirus, leaving some people doubting whether humans can become immune to the virus.

Given that antibodies help to neutralize the Coronavirus and are believed to provide people with immunity against the pathogen, those findings have raised alarms among some observers that people may gain natural immunity to the Coronavirus for only a few months.

 

[mfb]

doubts about whether people can ever gain immunity against the pathogen

See above, if they couldn't then we would have hundreds of thousands of reinfections. The vast majority of people do get immunity, or at least can handle another infection way better than the first, at least for a few months. For a year or longer? Nobody knows, obviously.

----

Letting COVID-19 spread to achieve herd immunity is "unethical," WHO chief says
Nothing surprising here but still worth a mention.

 

[OmCheeto]

...
Letting COVID-19 spread to achieve herd immunity is "unethical," WHO chief says
Nothing surprising here but still worth a mention.

There is a group advocating a "controlled spread".
Although I agree with them, the implementation gives us a bit of a "Sophie's Choice" problem.
Just like when giving flu shots, there's a risk.

The following is a critique of the idea:



I've watched about a dozen or so of his videos, and he strikes me as someone worthy of listening to.

 

[Astronuc]

Where is the large consequence?

Note that I did not write 'large' but only consequential, primarily to those who become reinfected, and more so who have a more adverse reaction during the subsequent event. I also indicated rare.

Concerning the 7,770,673 positive cases (there are likely more with an unknown number of positive cases that are asymptomatic or mild symptoms for which testing is not conducted) out of 116,428,059 test (some represent the same person more than once), the spread of infection seems rather low because many people and communities have taken steps to mitigate the spread. Let us see if the number of severe cases and deaths increase in December and January coincident with increased mortality of those with heart disease.

On a separate but related topic, many folks have long term injury.

COVID-19 also has left her with health problems she never had before: prediabetes, high cholesterol, high blood pressure and premature ventricular contractions — a heart flutter caused by extra beats in one of the heart’s pumping chambers.

https://news.yahoo.com/symptoms-covid-19-dont-away-183957021.html

Ostensibly, such persons will be more susceptible to other diseases, such as inflenza, and could potentially have lower life expectancy, or otherwise, diminished quality of life.

 

[Rive]

If confirmed infections would be random across time and space...

I think that math is a bit on a high side.

Up till end of April USA had ~ 300k cases. From May to end of September is six month, this is kind of the expected 'expire' delay. In October it's 500k new cases so far, that's around 0.15% of the population. 0.15% should apply on the early 300k population too => around 450. I think that's the expected 'double' cases registered in case of uniform six month 'expiry'.

But just one month longer 'expiry' and the numbers are far lower.

Of course there are many possible weak points in this calculation (expiry length, distribution of expiry, severity of cases might different between 1st and 2nd round), but the main point is, that right now the number of 'doubles' is not expected to be too high since the basis: the number of early cases is still low.

 

[Vanadium 50]

There is a group advocating a "controlled spread".

"Controlled spread" is not a phrase they use, so I don't know why you put it in quotes. (And who wouldn't want to control the spread?)

The whole thing is short enough to fit in a quote.

The Great Barrington Declaration – As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection.

Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice.

Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed.

Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza.

As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity.

The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection.

Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent PCR testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals.

Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity.

 

[Vanadium 50]

The Conversation has an article on the Remdesivir trials.

The trial showed that it is helpful, but not a magic bullet: "They found that patients receiving the drug improved and recovered more quickly, were less likely to progress to severe disease, were discharged from hospital sooner, and had a lower death rate of 11.4% compared with 15.2% in patients receiving “usual” treatment. "

The article discusses the expense, at $2340 per treatment, as a negative. This seems kind of crazy to me. Taking US numbers, out of 7.7M cases, we have 400K hospitalizations and 200K deaths. Giving it to everyone hospitalized would cost a billion dollars and saved 50,000 lives - $20K per life saved.

That's peanuts compared to the lockdown costs.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Skeptical, @atyy ? That's what they said.

 

[mfb]

From May to end of September is six month, this is kind of the expected 'expire' delay.

• Who expects that and why?
• You already assumed 6 months of immunity here. It's no surprise that your number differs from a calculation "what if there is no immunity".

A scenario of ~7 month immunity that matches observations cannot be evidence against immunity.

The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection.

This could be an interesting approach if death would be the only possible negative outcome. It is not. How many millions of younger people will be left with long-term health effects? Do they even have a number for that?

But even if death would be the only possible issue: We have seen how difficult it is to isolate the high risk groups from others.

 

[Rive]

A scenario of ~7 month immunity that matches observations cannot be evidence against immunity.

Still, it has its own value against a scenario about no immunity which does not matches any observations at all.

Who expects that and why?

The length and reliability of the 'natural' immunity was already questioned from the early days, when the low and inconsistent antibody levels among recovered patients were revealed.

The assumption about the actual length of immunity is based on the under-studied group of illnesses of 'colds', which has some realtives of Covid19 amongst them. As of now, a recovered patient is expected to be 'mostly safe' for at least six months. This will be adjusted as data comes in, and is not expected to be necessarily valid for future vaccines.

 

[mfb]

Still, it has its own value against a scenario about no immunity which does not matches any observations at all.

But that's the point!
A scenario with no immunity doesn't match observations. What do we learn from it? People get immunity against the virus. That was my point the whole time. So what exactly is your point? Do you disagree? If not, why are we having this discussion?

The assumption about the actual length of immunity is based on the under-studied group of illnesses of 'colds', which has some realtives of Covid19 amongst them.

Well, that's a really poor comparison. To make it worse, the 6 months is a rounded "half a year, sort of".

As of now, a recovered patient is expected to be 'mostly safe' for at least six months.

That's purely a result from the time span we can observe. There is no indication that immunity would go down towards the end of that time span.

 

[Rive]

So what exactly is your point?

My point is that an absurd example never makes a good point.

It was never a question that (usually) some kind of immunity follows the recovery. There is no point in making a counter-example for a no-question.

Well, that's a really poor comparison.

Not really. This stuff does have many common points with common colds: the inconsistent antibody level is an important one, to start with.

There is no indication that immunity would go down towards the end of that time span.

Expectations needs prior comparable examples, not immediate indication.

 

[StevieTNZ]

Melania Trump says her 14-year-old son, Barron, has tested positive for the Coronavirus but has no symptoms.

-- https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/world/donald-trumps-14-year-old-son-barron-tests-positive-covid-19?fbclid=IwAR2SoSDqqdHCyJwTB7Sy4deYrebrAwGGlOg1weaAY9tJXpOs1SQM3fpLq14 more to come I would think.

 

[mfb]

My point is that an absurd example never makes a good point.

Of course it does: It demonstrates the premise of that example must be wrong.

It was never a question that (usually) some kind of immunity follows the recovery.

It was for some people. Now it's not any more.

Expectations needs prior comparable examples, not immediate indication.

Expectations can be made based on extrapolations. Better than blindly copying a rough estimate from a group of diseases that's way weaker than COVID-19.

 

[Rive]

It was for some people.

Could you please provide an example (of somebody suspecting no immunity at all)?

Better than blindly copying a rough estimate from a group of diseases that's way weaker than COVID-19.

Weaker or stronger has not much to do with relations, especially since the 'human coronavirus' part of the 'common cold' group actually can cause severe illness too.

But the more important/relevant common point here is the waning antibody response, though.

But I can't help wondering whether cowpox would be dismissed in a discussion of 'pox' on basis that it's way weaker.

 

[mfb]

There is a group advocating a "controlled spread".

That group includes Dr. I.P. Freely, Dr. Person Fakename, homeopaths and more, all listed as "medical experts".

@Rive: Somewhere on the past pages. I don't want to go through the whole discussion again.

Weaker or stronger has not much to do with relations

Oh really? It is important even if we compare cases of the same disease, e.g. COVID-19.

especially since the 'human coronavirus' part of the 'common cold' group actually can cause severe illness too.

Which is extremely rare.

But I can't help wondering whether cowpox would be dismissed in a discussion of 'pox' on basis that it's way weaker.

Both diseases give a lifetime immunity as far as I know. I don't see how this would tell us anything about the validity of copying numbers from one disease to another.

 

[atyy]

@Rive, do you know the status of the idea that although antibody levels might wane, immunity might still be retained via T-cell memory?
https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(20)30610-3
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2550-z
https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(20)31008-4
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41590-020-0782-6

 

[Rive]

do you know the status of the idea that although antibody levels might wane, immunity might still be retained via T-cell memory?

I do know about this. Actually, T-cell response was one of the things what connected covid19 back to colds (and that's not necessarily a good news, given that this kind of immunity is so unreliable in case of colds).

 

[nsaspook]

Lost Containment.
https://assets.publishing.service.g...ummary_of_effectiveness_and_harms_of_NPIs.pdf

A “circuit-breaker”, in which a package of stringent non-pharmaceutical interventions is reintroduced for 2-3 weeks should act to reduce R below 1. Over a fortnight’s “break”, two weeks of growth could be exchanged for two weeks of decay in transmission, assuming good adherence to measures, and no additional increase in contacts before or after the break. If this were as strict and well-adhered to as the restrictions in late May, this could put the epidemic back by approximately 28 days or more. The amount of “time gained” is highly dependent on how quickly the epidemic is growing – the faster the growth or stricter the measures introduced, the more time gained.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...pe-overtakes-u-s-in-virus-surge-idUSKBN26Z1F8

With new cases hitting about 100,000 daily, Europe has by a wide margin overtaken the United States, where more than 51,000 COVID-19 infections are reported on average every day.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/15/europe/europe-coronavirus-paris-curfew-intl/index.html

A preprint paper written by scientific advisers to the UK government claims that thousands of Coronavirus deaths could be averted before the end of the year if a two-week circuit-breaker lockdown were to be imposed soon.
The paper suggests it could reduce deaths between now and the end of the year by up to 49%, depending on the growth rate of the virus. But the authors cautioned that it was not a forecast of lives that would be saved since "the worst-case scenarios would never be allowed to continue without intervention."

 

[mfb]

But the authors cautioned that it was not a forecast of lives that would be saved since "the worst-case scenarios would never be allowed to continue without intervention."

In other words: Have strict measures now, keeping the spread at a lower level, or have these strict measures later, keeping the spread at a higher level. The latter means more people die for no good reason.

 

[nsaspook]

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-54557549

France has reported a large jump in new Covid-19 cases ahead of a night-time curfew being imposed on Paris and eight other cities on Saturday.
A further 30,621 infections were confirmed on Thursday, up from 22,591 the day before.
The World Health Organization (WHO) has warned that tough restrictions are "absolutely necessary" to save lives.
Millions in Europe have been told they must live under strict new measures as governments battle a second wave.

Things are looking very much like the Imperial College models with lower death numbers so far.

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/im...-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf

Illustration of adaptive triggering of suppression strategies in GB, for R0=2.2, a policy of all four interventions considered, an "on" trigger of 100 ICU cases in a week and an "off" trigger of 50 ICU cases. The policy is in force approximate 2/3 of the time. Only social distancing and school/university closure are triggered; other policies remain in force throughout. Weekly ICU incidence is shown in orange, policy triggering in blue.

A continuous circuit-breaker strategy will be a tough sell to the public IMO.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-54527400

Ministers are "planning very seriously" for a circuit breaker lockdown for Wales, the first minister has said.
"We're very actively talking about and preparing for that should it be necessary," Mark Drakeford told Sky News.
The short-term measures could include closing pubs and restaurants.
However disease expert Dr Roland Salmon said such circuit breaker lockdowns were "doomed to failure" and would only bring "cost without benefit".
A circuit breaker is a short, set period of maybe two or three weeks, where tighter restrictions are brought into break the trajectory of Coronavirus cases rising.

 

[mfb]

Opening and closing schools on short notice multiple times sounds chaotic.
By mid 2021 it's likely that vaccines will contribute to the measures, by the end of 2021 they could be sufficient to keep this under control without other measures.

Germany's latest update on new confirmed cases reached the levels of late March. New deaths are still at a really low level. They are likely to go up in the next two weeks but it doesn't look like we'll get anywhere close to the March/April death rates.

 

[Ygggdrasil]

The Conversation has an article on the Remdesivir trials.

The trial showed that it is helpful, but not a magic bullet: "They found that patients receiving the drug improved and recovered more quickly, were less likely to progress to severe disease, were discharged from hospital sooner, and had a lower death rate of 11.4% compared with 15.2% in patients receiving “usual” treatment. "

The article discusses the expense, at $2340 per treatment, as a negative. This seems kind of crazy to me. Taking US numbers, out of 7.7M cases, we have 400K hospitalizations and 200K deaths. Giving it to everyone hospitalized would cost a billion dollars and saved 50,000 lives - $20K per life saved.

That's peanuts compared to the lockdown costs.

It's worth noting that the while the study cited by the Conversation article did see reduced mortality in the remdesivir arm vs control, the reduction in mortality was not statistically significant (quoting from the study's abstract):

The Kaplan–Meier estimates of mortality were 6.7% with remdesivir and 11.9% with placebo by day 15 and 11.4% with remdesivir and 15.2% with placebo by day 29 (hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.52 to 1.03).

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2007764?query=featured_home

Furthermore, a non-peer reviewed pre-print of a large randomized controlled trial conducted by the WHO was released yesterday that also finds no evidence for a decrease in mortality among those taking remdesivir:

the Solidarity trial suggests the drug does little in severe cases. Of 2743 hospitalized patients who received the drug, 11% died, versus 11.2% in a control group of roughly the same size. The difference is so small it could have arisen by chance.

When the authors pooled Solidarity’s data with those from the three other trials, they found a slight reduction in mortality that wasn’t statistically significant either. "This absolutely excludes the suggestion that remdesivir can prevent a substantial fraction of all deaths,“ the authors write. "The confidence interval is comfortably compatible with prevention of a small fraction of all deaths but is also comfortably compatible with prevention of no deaths.”

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/202...fall-flat-who-s-megastudy-covid-19-treatments

Death rate ratios (with 95% CIs and numbers dead/randomized, each drug vs its control) were: Remdesivir RR=0.95 (0.81-1.11, p=0.50; 301/2743 active vs 303/2708 control)

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.10.15.20209817v1

There could still be uses if the drug does improve recovery (as the ACTT-1 trial did see statistically significant evidence for this), but as you said, the evidence points to the drug being helpful by not a magic bullet (esp. with respect to preventing deaths in the most severe cases).

 

[Astronuc]

First case of MIS-C confirmed in B.C. child, health officials say
https://bc.ctvnews.ca/first-case-of-mis-c-confirmed-in-b-c-child-health-officials-say-1.5147202

VANCOUVER -- Health officials in British Columbia have confirmed the province's first case of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children.
. . .
The child, who is under the age of five, was diagnosed with the syndrome after a serology test came back positive for COVID-19, Dr. Bonnie Henry said. The child has fully recovered and is at home.

However, MSI is showing up in adults too.
https://www.nbcnews.com/health/heal...ation-was-reported-children-now-it-s-n1243161

Kids were developing dangerous inflammation around the heart and other organs, often weeks after their initial infections with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes Covid-19.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention alerted physicians to MIS-C in May. As of Oct. 1, the CDC had reported 1,027 confirmed cases of MIS-C, with more cases under investigation. Twenty children have died.
. . .
MIS-A's "true prevalence is unknown," Morris said. "We have to get physicians realizing that. It may be rare, but we don't know. It might be more common than we think."

Many MIS-A patients report fevers, chest pain or other heart problems, diarrhea or other gastrointestinal issues — but not shortness of breath. And diagnostic tests for Covid-19 tend to be negative.

Instead, patients will test positive for Covid-19 antibodies, meaning they were infected two to six weeks previously, even if they never had symptoms.

The most sensitive and reliable test for Covid-19, called a PCR test, wasn't always available, and it could take several days to return results. Abbo turned to antibody testing to get the influx of patients triaged to a Covid-19 unit or elsewhere in the health system.

Dr. Lilian Abbo is chief of infection prevention for Jackson Health System in Miami.

There's no proven treatment for MIS-A. "We need to recognize this syndrome and develop data" to figure out which therapies may be most effective," Abbo said. "We are all just shooting blind."

Meanwhile - a blood test may predict which hospitalized COVID-19 patients are at risk for severe illness
https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/thi...are-at-risk-for-severe-illness-233553450.html
Or, is it a particular type of severe illness due too much IL-6, or too little IL-10?And - how to contain vs how to spread a virus (June 16, 2020) - 3,555,076 positive cases (confirmed + probable), 112,297 deaths
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/film/the-virus/

Just got news that Wheeler county Oregon got its first case of Corona virus today. There are now only 3 counties in the USA without cases.

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/last-covid-free-counties-america-101900192.html

The four counties in the United States that haven't reported a single COVID-19 case have some commonalities. They're sparsely populated and geographically isolated. They're solidly middle-class. In two counties, tourism has ground to a sudden halt because of the pandemic. But testing in areas without strong health infrastructure can complicate the picture, experts warn. You can't report COVID-19 cases if you don't test for them, and rural America has historically lacked access to health resources available in more populated areas.

Garfield County, the least populous county in Washington state (pop. 2,247 (2019)), was the last to report a COVID-19 case. They now have 13 cases, passing up Wahkiakum County, which has 10 cases. So far, no hospitalizations or deaths in either county.

October 16 - US, 8,007,690 cases of Covid-19 (confirmed + probable), 210,217 deaths (confirmed + probable)

 

[mfb]

Sweden is moving away from its no-lockdown strategy and preparing strict new rules amid rising Coronavirus cases
So far nothing that is being enforced, but discussions are ongoing.

Umea University's Dr Joacim Rocklov told The Telegraph newspaper that after being an outlier earlier in the year, Sweden was shifting to a strategy closer to those adopted by most other governments.

 

[Ygggdrasil]

Here's a plot comparing the COVID-19 cases per million (seven day rolling average) in the United States (black line) vs European Union + United Kingdom (red line):

(data from the ECDC)

As noted earlier in the thread, the per capita infection rate in Europe has appeared to surpass that of the US. The rapid growth of infections in Europe definitely seems like cause for concern. Cases also appear to be rising in the US, though at a lower rate than in Europe.

 

[bhobba]

Sweden is moving away from its no-lockdown strategy and preparing strict new rules amid rising Coronavirus cases
So far nothing that is being enforced, but discussions are ongoing.

I never thought Sweden's approach was a good idea. Nor are lockdows worth it except as a stop-gap until proper measures are in place. Why people do not base their approach on Taiwan beats me. The only issue I can see is what happened here in Aus - you do not need to do that much - but what you need to do you must do with no stuff ups. It has shown government bureaucracies-politicians shortcomings only too easily.

Thanks
Bill

 

[Astronuc]

October 20 - https://foxchattanooga.com/news/cor...who-died-on-flight-had-covid-19-officials-say

DALLAS COUNTY, Texas (WOAI/KABB) - A woman who died while on a flight from Arizona to Texas had COVID-19, officials said this week. Dallas County Judge Clay Jenkins announced the woman's death on Sunday during a media briefing. He said the woman, in her 30s, was on the flight when she died on July 25th.

Odd this comes out about 3 months later, but perhaps testing and/or autopsy was involved. Perhaps the reduced oxygen at altitude precipitated cardiac distress during the flight? She apparently died after the plane landed.

https://www.nbcdfw.com/news/coronav...ports-592-cases-of-covid-19-3-deaths/2462390/

 

[Vanadium 50]

It's very odd that a judge would announce such a thing - apparently on Twitter.
Apparently she also had additional medical conditions. No idea exactly what that means. This might be related to your autopsy theory.