COVID-19: Michigan v. Sweden - Surprising results
Since the two places have similar populations, here is an interesting comparison:
Michigan Sweden
9.9 Million population 10.2 Million population
700K largest city 900K largest city
4800/sq. mi. pop density largest city 4800/sq. mi. pop density largest city
COVID Timeline:
Michigan Sweden
March 10 - First reported COVID death
March 16 - All schools closed
March 18 - First reported COVID death
March 23 - Stay Home & businesses closed
March 23 - 1300 cases, 15 deaths March 23 - 2000 cases, 25 deaths
April 2 - HS, colleges and big groups banned
Considered one of the strictest states Criticized for just social distancing
Restaurants/shops open, no masks
Objective: Slow spread - 14 days at home Objective: Herd immunity
Note: Michiganders are following the order and staying home extremely well
ONE MONTH LATER:
Michigan Sweden
April 24 - 36,000 cases, 3,100 deaths April 24 - 18,000, 2,200 deaths
April 24 - 310 deaths per million April 24 - 217 death per million
Average age: 75 Average age: 80 (87% deaths over age 70)
(Testing criteria has varied over time in the two places, but both places will have tested all those who passed away over the last month.)
Michigan acted quicker and harder than Sweden since March 23. That cannot be disputed. Since that time, Michigan COVID-related deaths have increased 206% and Sweden is up only 88%. Michigan appears to be doing "worse" over the last four weeks than a place trying to infect its population to some degree. That was not expected.
Not saying Michigan's stricter rules have caused more COVID problems and not saying herd immunity will prevail. (Maybe it will. Maybe it won't.)
HOWEVER, regardless of the objective, how do you argue shutting everything has been a better course of action than simple social distancing at this point? What is the argument that extending it would somehow miraculously start to help six weeks later?
The results do not appear to support it (after TWICE the quarantine time).
i'm not gonna lie, i didn't read this, but scrolling through i'm very impressed with the formatting, quite beautiful
Can’t we just enjoy the draft in peace?
Well, see, Sweden had more five-star PPE, and Michigan just can't compete with that kind of skill.
Socialized medicine in Sweden. More Lysol.
You are free to ignore all the evidence that is contrary to your pre-conceived notions. What is the prevalence of diabetes in Michigan and Sweden? What are the percentages of people that are covered by health insurance? How many people live in poverty? How does the rest of Michigan compare to the tri-county area?
Very good factors to consider the slight difference in numbers. Also if you look at neighboring Denmark and Norway, they have less than 400 deaths between and their collective population equals that of Sweden. Sweden has more than 5 times the deaths.
This the key, you need to compare apples to apples. Here are some comparisons in Nordic countries:
As of March 28, the reproduction numbers for Sweden and Norway are estimated to be 2.47 and 0.97 respectively, with Denmark’s around one. Unsurprisingly, the spread of the virus is also estimated to be among the highest in Sweden (3.1% of the population infected) and lowest in Norway (0.41% of the population), likely reflecting the radically different containment strategies. This compares with 9.8% and 2.5% for Italy and the UK, respectively.
Indeed, one Swedish academic has predicted that up to half the Swedish population will be infected by the end of April. Although it is probably too soon to see a clear effect of interventions on mortality rates, by April 1, COVID-19 deaths in Sweden accounted for 24 per million citizens, whereas in Norway it was only eight deaths per million. Finland was lower still with just three per million.
Not sure why you would follow the Sweden approach compared to Norway.
This Swedish epidemiologist, former WHO member and current advisor, and the first Chief Scientist of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, believes that all European death rates will end at the same place. He says Sweden had a rash of deaths in nursing homes - which the head of current Swedish strategy Anders Tegnell cannot currently explain, but does not believe had anything to do with his country's approach - which essentially "pulled ahead" deaths in Sweden. He believes elderly and vulnerable need to be quarantined since it's a devastating disesse for them, but not others. Hence the strategy to.seek herd immunity.
This is why you would follow Sweden's model: because if he's correct, the quarantine will not be effective, and there's a massive societal loss with the economic impact of quarantine. ***His argument assumes that all economies will eventually need to open, and when they do, the total infection rates (and therefore death rates) will be the same. It's just that Sweden's approach will get them there early. One could make an argument that quarantine could be maintained until there's a vaccine. But I don't believe any serious thinking on this subject would believe any nation could subject itself to stay at home protocols for at least a year and hakf, which are the best case scenarios estimated for a vaccine.
Given this guy is one of the top epidemiologists in the world, why wouldn't we put deep consideration into what he says?
https://unherd.com/thepost/coming-up-epidemiologist-prof-johan-giesecke-shares-lessons-from-sweden/
April 26th, 2020 at 12:04 PM ^
Because we can see whose methods are working better?
To get to herd immunity as fast as possible.....that, or lockdown until vaccine maybe in 18 months, maybe in 4 years. I prefer the former.
These are good questions, but they are not evidence. Which is what you are criticizing him for lacking. He posts data and asks a question. You criticize him, then post several questions, and provide no data.
You're probably a partisan who's taken the asinine position of rooting against Sweden for political reasons. If Sweden's approach works, it will be excellent for the entire world. I don't give a shit about your political party (or the other one).
Sweden's model absolutely needs to be followed obsessively by the world. I don't think this post has enough data to declare their approach superior to Michigan's. And yes Klima certainly has an obvious political angle of his own, given his posts for several weeks now. But he's at least providing data and science and proferring discussion. He's cherry picking the data he likes certainly, but to me that's fair game as long as it's based on valid studies and actual data.
You're free to.cherry pick your own factual data and studies in response, then there can be a debate. It would be best if everyone tossed politics aside, but for the most part that doesn't seem possible.
It's his post, not mine. I don't really feel the need to argue with someone who has so many logical fallacies. I'm not a partisan. I'm an independent and a scientist. I understand how the scientific process works. Cherry-picking data only leads you down a road that confirms your pre-conceived notions.
I can cherry-pick to support my opinion just as easily. In the United States, we herd our elderly into old folks home, making it that much easier for the virus to infect the most susceptible population. In Sweden, "Priority is given to aging in place." Did Klima factor that into his statistics?
You haven't proven they are logical fallacies. You've only posed questions that are very likely cherry picked on your part. You've provided no data whatsoever.
You're criticizing and posting questions. That's not debate. You can hold yourself aloof and say you're above arguing with someone, but that's not meaningful. Who cares if you think you're better than someone else
EDIT: you've edited your post. I'm glad you realized I was correct and tried to provide some level of data. In answer to this, in Sweden 50% of the deaths have been in nursing homes (forgive the link to The Sun but it contains text from a valid interview) https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11472216/coronavirus-lockdowns-waste-time-50-deaths-care-homes-sweden-expert/
Socrates would disagree with you.
Very much doubt that.
Though Diogenes would read your comment and ask you to only stand a little out of his sun.
So you're calling me a liar? Cool, dude.
Another incorrect conclusion from a coolness aside, I'd like to say thank you guy.
The point of what Diogenes said to Alexander has nothing to do with truth.
And let's be clear about what you did: 1) engaged the debate, 2) criticized an OP for ignoring data, 3) posed questions without adding any data of your own (which is hypocritical to point 2)) , 4) when called on it, said you didn't have to post an argument, 5) reconsidered and edited your post to provide data, 6) invoked an ancient Greek philosopher, 7) claimed you were too cool to engage the debate (hypocritical to 1))
Socrates, Plato, Aristotle would have all said GTFO. And they would all have despised today's political parties. Such weak reasoning to begin any discussion while beholden to a predisposed view.
Ever heard of Plato? Aristotle? Socrates? Morons.
Sure did.
Sweden has "instructed" those over 70 to isolate, but they are not in homes.
Michigan "herds its elderly" into homes. They have become prisons in the last month. Residents do not mingle. Every conceivable precaution is taken.
Which elderly population do you think is more likely to be infected?
And the R number in Michigan is 2nd lowest in the country. To ignore that nursing homes have contributed to the problem is asinine. The first major outbreak occurred at a nursing home.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/02/us/virus-kirkland-life-care-nursing-home.html
Data! So glad you've come around. Thanks for posting
Though resorting to insulting someone in a debate is a clear indicator you feel weak in your position.
April 26th, 2020 at 12:22 PM ^
The lockdown in Michigan is beyond counter-productive now. Quarantine the elderly and morbidly unhealthy until some effective antiviral treatments come available which should be sometime this summer. Stop imprisoning everyone else and destroying the economy which will cause much more damage (including health damage) than Covid has, will, or could.
Covid isn't about a virus IMO. If it were the politicians would not be behaving like Hitler.
I don’t think you know what it was that Hitler did.
He did Socialism: LINK
Or better called "Statism," which is what Socialism, Fascism, and Communism all amount to in the end.
People have literally no understanding of history.
People have literally no understanding of history.
People have literally no understanding of history.
I’ve heard that those who forget history are doomed to repeat it.
Interesting
There are a myriad of possible reasons. Here are a few:
- Detroit's population generally had a lot of underlying conditions, thus more susceptible to complications
- Differences in culture and activity patterns necessarily lead to different spread patterns
- There are 15,000 tests / M people in the U.S vs 9,000 test / M people in Sweden, so they perhaps have more asymptomatic carriers
A couple reason why we should be skeptical of the conclusion:
- WHO says it's not impossible to catch the virus again, so herd immunity may not be effective
- The long term effects and "second wave" data is still to come
- When making these decisions, it's best to compare Michigan to a "what-if" scenario in Michigan should nothing had been done. In which case, most epidemiologists would say that the right course of action had been followed.
WHO says it's not impossible to catch the virus again, so herd immunity may not be effective
They didn't say that. They said they don't know. Also, the WHO has been a fountain of misinformation.
When making these decisions, it's best to compare Michigan to a "what-if" scenario in Michigan should nothing had been done. In which case, most epidemiologists would say that the right course of action had been followed.
The other option wasn't "doing nothing." It was the Swedish route. Might have worked better?
Detroit's population generally had a lot of underlying conditions, thus more susceptible to complications
Sure, but that wouldn't explain 206% increase to 88%. Even if it COULD explain that difference, we should be more than equal to Sweden. We should be ahead because of the stronger rules.
Half of Michigan's population is in 3 counties whereas Sweden is much more spread out.
We also have a lot more international travel to here from China than they do, so we probably had much more community spread before it was identified.
Also, your agenda is clear. Funny how none of the "open back up" advocates have actually had the virus.
Your first two points are good ones. Your third is a personal attack and certainly untrue. I personally know someone who's has covd, recovered, and has all along wanted the economy back up.
But you already know that was an attack and not scientific.
I may have had it.
So, how does a lockdown do better than social distancing?
Waiting....
Hoping to get an antibody test next week to see if I've had it as I suspect I did in late January. I'll let you know.
Forgot one;
Michigan uninsured residents 7.8% or 790,000 people..
sweden uninsured residents 0% or 0 people..
Everyone has coverage for COVID. Not a factor.
This is a wrong take. If you don't have insurance and don't know if you have COVID or are unaware that COVID care is being covered, you are going to be very hesitant to take the chance on a big hospital bill.
So, those people wouldn't be part of these numbers anyway, right? Since they never went to the hospital or got tested?
They wouldn't be a part of the numbers. That doesn't mean they wouldn't be contributing to the overall spread of the virus. How does that not track?
April 25th, 2020 at 11:42 PM ^
That’s understood. The difference is that those with access to free healthcare are more likely to use it instead of ignoring health issues like we do in the States. It would also reduce the chances for underlying conditions as regular visits to your doctor would more than likely result in a preventive illness plan. Poor people in America don’t go to the doctor when they’re sick because they can’t afford it, poor people in Sweden can..
Socioeconomics.
Sweden has an excellent social safety net and is one of the best places to live in the world.
Michigan (specifically Detroit/the east side of the state) has been destroyed over the past four decades by the hollowing out of manufacturing, combined with both political parties pursuing economic agendas that have diminished the middle class and utterly destroyed the working class.
The US has large swaths of the country, both urban and rural, that are for all intents and purposes, 3rd world. When you combine this with virulent streaks of anti-government and anti-science elements that exist across all segments of society it makes sense to me.
There are probably a lot more people in Sweden who can afford to take time off to quarantine without being financially destitute. They also have a far better healthcare system for the average person.
This is an amazing stretch.
This is about the spread of a virus. One that every person can get treatment for for free. Plus, people in the US will be getting money to stay home too.
Your post might explain why the people in Detroit are in worse health. (That, plus the famous self-inflicted American diet.) But, that wouldn't explain such a stark advantage for the Swedish method.
There is a lot to unpack here, but I'll just keep it simple.
Does everyone know that treatments are free? Most people associate healthcare with exorbitant prices. The areas in Michigan that are most effected by the virus are poorer, urban areas.
Are there enough tests to go around so if you are admitted, do you feel confident will be tested and therefore get free treatment? Or are you afraid you will simply get dicked around by insurance companies and a healthcare system that has been underserving you and dicking you around your entire life?
Do you even have access to a hospital? If you live in an overwhlemed/unpreppared rural community or an overwhelmed urban community? Are there any beds available? Can you even receive proper treatment?
Do you trust the healthcare system enough to even bother? This is a real thing. There are large swaths of people who simply never go to the doctor (generally because they either don't have insurance or are underinsured), so why would they start utilizing a service they may have never used or are scared to use due to a life of associating it with high costs and medical debt?
Do people have trust in government to follow the guidelines, or that this is in fact a problem?
Are people's financial situations as such that self-quarantining is a possiblity? Do they have to choose between gambling that they might get a deadly virus, or knowing that if they don't expose themselves there will be no food on the table, no heat, no lights, no apartment/house, etc..?
As far as stimulus, a one time payment of $1200 dollars helps....largely to pay for one month of rent. Then when you combine this with the fact that a lot of checks wont go out for 3 to 4 months to people who don't have direct deposit (usually poorer) and its really not enough.
I could go on, but my main point is you can't simply look at this problem as one that just happened a month or so ago. The festering material conditions surrounding all of these American institutions for decades are the largest contributing factor in why we as a country, and Michigan as a state, have been hit so hard. Michigan is a microcosom of everything that has gone wrong economically for the working and middle class over the last 40 years. It makes perfect sense to me that we would be at the epicenter of this pandemic in the US.
The US has large swaths of the country, both urban and rural, that are for all intents and purposes, 3rd world.
LMAO. Please give me ONE example of a large swath of the USA that would qualify as third world. Just one...
Basically every Native American reservation ever.
Tons of rural communities throughout the American south that do not have access to clean or running water. Shanty towns where people live in extreme poverty.
I would argue most communities in poor urban centers have conditions that are indistinguishable from poor urban centers in the 3rd world writ large.
Central America and Sub-Saharan Africa want to know if there's anything they can do to help the Mississippi Delta and Appalachia.
As noted in a link posted here a week ago, Michigan had a primary on March 10. I suggest a look at all the states that had primaries that day. Most or all suffered more than other states. It was the day before the NBA shut down, and not a word was mentioned that I heard in coverage by any news organization. Did Sweden have a national election then?
That's a really excellent point I haven't heard before.
But this would speak to the reason Michigan may have been one of the worst states in terms of infection. I.don't know that it tells the story of why Sweden - as the OP notes, is basically trying to infect its residents to a degree for herd immunity - would have lower rates than Michigan.