Specifically on the death rate in various countries, this has mainly to do with the age and gender of those getting infected. This is easily seen if you compare South Korea, which has a low number of deaths for the number of confirmed cases, with Italy which has a high number.
Italy has an aging population, 28.6% are sixty and older (only Japan has an older population). The outbreak of COVID-19 in Italy has largely been among the older population, and 90% of the deaths are aged 70 or older. It is also a reasonable suggestion that many of these were smokers, 24% of Italians smoke today and this would have been much higher in prior decades.
In south Korea, 18.5% of the population is over 60 and the outbreak has largely been among the younger demographic, only 20% of cases diagnosed have been over 60. Gender is also a factor, while worldwide rates of infection are roughly 50:50, men are almost twice as likely to die as women. In south Korea, 62% of cases are among women. Also, while 50% of men in Korea smoke, only 5% women do.
So in summary, Italy has a high mortality rate as it is a high rate of infection of older people, many of whom were smokers, and Korea has a low rate as more young people than old are getting infected, more women than men, and women donât have a history of smoking.
1 Like
My question is how soon will the need to improve the economies of the world trump the need to adequately manage the virus.
They are certainly not compatible.
1 Like
Bob Fleming had COVID-19 before it ever existed.
2 Likes
I have no skin in this game and would have like you assumed that Boris is making a bollocks of it but thereâs a lad on a British forum I occasionally lurk on thatâs a virologist who has essentially said that the UK seem to be the only country with an actual proper plan and there is science to back up their approach
1 Like
Germany has a higher median age than Italy. 47.1 years. Italy is 45.5.
Irelandâs is 36.8.
Up to this point the main priority of governments has been to try and contain the rate of spread of the disease. As more regions and countries move to lock down, and if this has to be extended, the risk of at least partial societal breakdown becomes a real possibility.
I honestly canât see any short term solution other than helicopter money to prevent this outcome.
It isnât about science. Itâs about what you want science to achieve in real world terms.
Why did they abandon their plan? They abandoned it because they found out it would cost a minimum of 250k lives.
In the actual words of the scientific modeller, Professor Ferguson, they âgot bad news from Italyâ. Who would have thunk it?
Ultimately this is about saving lives v the economy.
The UK chose the economy. They also copped on that going for the economy wouldnât actually work on an economic level, and definitely wouldnât work politically, because an accelerationist plan to cost 250k minimum lost lives basically amounts to a deliberate holocaust.
Now theyâre caught between two stools and donât actually know what theyâre doing.
2 Likes
Youâve already made a show of yourself using this narrative for France mate.
You are just using tired stereotypes to make gigantic leaps.
South Koreans smoke more than Italians.
Italy has a high population of CN people.
Italians live in close quarters.
Italians have a culture of hugging and kissing.
Italy has an aging population.
Italians all get out and socialize at evening as they live in flats with little space.
Italians dont have great personal hygiene.
Lots of Italians smoke.
Thereâs no one thing, they all played a part.
They also went into lock down and took measures too late
2 Likes
If there was a workable plan to isolate and protect the vulnerable, then the UK approach has some validity. There doesnât appear to be such a plan though. This is a very infectious disease and will continue to infect until such time as enough people have immunity or there is a vaccine. If say this takes 12 months to achieve, thatâs 12 months with recurring periods of the strict measures we have in place in many areas currently.
Probably not sustainable. For example in the San Fran bay area where I live, we now have 7 million people on virtual lock down for 3 weeks, nobody other than health care workers or essential services are allowed to go to work. Working from home is fine, but not many low income workers can do that.
If you can somehow protect those who are most vulnerable, for the great majority who get this disease it is somewhere between a bad cold and the flu. We live with that every season, regardless of flu shots millions worldwide get the flu.
Itâs been six years since this was turned on. Thereâs always a chanceâŚ
4 Likes
Great work from the Tanaiste.
I think having a government that doesnât have their eye on an an upcoming election will work in our favour. Frees them up to take unpopular decisions. Theyâve done well so far in my opinion anyway.
Rent and mortgage relief needed for a period of 3 months. Hopefully they can action something on that in the next few days. Would calm a lot of nerves.
2 Likes
But does a massive shock to the economy for an unknown length not bring lives into question as well?
The only ones making a show of themselves are lads like yourself and others who failed to inform themselves at the beginning of this outbreak and dismissed it as paranoia.
Try and read my post again. The combination of the age profile of those infected, the fact many were smokers or had been smokers for decades, and the fact men worldwide are dying at twice the rate of women is why Italy has such a high mortality rate. It takes more than one factor to build a hypothesis.
If you have another hypothesis, then out with it.
You have 3 months to master that skill. I believe in you.
How about being utterly rude wankers?
That must feature in there somewhere.
