• Jury Still Out on Swedish Coronavirus Strategy

    Over the past few weeks, a huge amount of energy has been spent trying to prove Sweden’s more lenient approach to the coronavirus a failure. Freddy Sayers writes in Unherd that liberal news outlets in the U.S. have commissioned opinion pieces from Right-wing Swedish commentators accusing the country of a pivot to national chauvinism; President Trump has talked about the Swedish “herd” approach and how “they are suffering very, very badly“; and Twitter is full of apocalyptic charts that are shared thousands of times and which seem to prove beyond doubt that the Swedes should have locked down better, and sooner. The truth is, the Swedish epidemic is far from the out of control disaster its critics would like to believe. A clearer way of looking at death numbers in Sweden and other countries, courtesy of the excellent Our World in Data, is the daily trend of deaths per million. Here you get a good sense of the trajectories. All of the countries listed, except Sweden, have full national lockdowns. And yet Sweden is roughly in the middle of the pack. This is quite remarkable in itself, when set against the dominant narrative that lockdowns are the only thing capable of ‘flattening’ these curves and preventing tragedies that are many times worse.

  • Top Israeli Prof Claims Simple Stats Show Virus Plays Itself Out after 70 Days

    A prominent Israeli mathematician, analyst, and former general claims simple statistical analysis demonstrates that the spread of COVID-19 peaks after about 40 days and declines to almost zero after 70 days — no matter where it strikes, and no matter what measures governments impose to try to thwart it. Prof. Isaac Ben-Israel, head of the Security Studies program in Tel Aviv University and the chairman of the National Council for Research and Development, told Israel’s Channel 12 that in Israel, about 140 people normally die every day. To have shuttered much of the economy because of a virus that is killing one or two a day is a radical error that is unnecessarily costing Israel 20 percent of its GDP, he charged. He said the policy of lockdowns and closures was a case of “mass hysteria.” Simple social distancing would be sufficient, he said.

  • COVID-19 & World Commerce | Tracking NYC COVID-19 Cases | Eradicate COVID-19 by Decree?, and more

    ·  The Cold Political Calculation Behind Donald Trump’s WHO Funding Suspension

    ·  The Coronavirus Crisis Will Change the World of Commerce

    ·  Trump Aide Peter Navarro Warned of a Deadly Pandemic Emerging from China—in 2006

    ·  As the Coronavirus Spreads, Conspiracy Theories Are Going Viral Too

    ·  Viktor Orban Can’t Eradicate the Coronavirus by Decree

    ·  Did the Coronavirus Escape from a Chinese Lab? Here’s What the Pentagon Says

    ·  Pentagon Bristles at Anti-American Rhetoric in Foreign Coronavirus Reports

    ·  How China Deceived the WHO

    ·  How the World Health Organization’s Failure to Challenge China over Coronavirus Cost Us Dearly

    ·  How the Hunt for a Coronavirus Vaccine Could Go Horribly Wrong

    ·  China’s Initial Coronavirus Outbreak in Wuhan Spread Twice as Fast as We Thought, New Study Suggests

    ·  Why We Can’t Trust Positive COVID Test Counts to Track the Pandemic in NYC

  • The Challenge of Proximity Apps For COVID-19 Contact Tracing

    Around the world, a diverse and growing chorus is calling for the use of smartphone proximity technology to fight COVID-19. In particular, public health experts and others argue that smartphones could provide a solution to an urgent need for rapid, widespread contact tracing—that is, tracking who infected people come in contact with as they move through the world. Proponents of this approach point out that many people already own smartphones, which are frequently used to track users’ movements and interactions in the physical world. But it is not a given that smartphone tracking will solve this problem, and the risks it poses to individual privacy and civil liberties are considerable.

  • Bluetooth Signals from Your Smartphone Could Automate COVID-19 Contact Tracing While Preserving Privacy

    Imagine you’ve been diagnosed as Covid-19 positive. Health officials begin contact tracing to contain infections, asking you to identify people with whom you’ve been in close contact. The obvious people come to mind — your family, your coworkers. But what about the woman ahead of you in line last week at the pharmacy, or the man bagging your groceries? Or any of the other strangers you may have come close to in the past 14 days? Researchers are developing a system that augments “manual” contact tracing by public health officials, while preserving the privacy of all individuals. The system enables smartphones to transmit “chirps” to nearby devices could notify people if they have been near an infected person.

  • The Defense Production Act and the Failure to Prepare for Catastrophic Incidents

    When early data from Mexico suggested that a new strain of influenza, H1N1, might have a mortality rate between 1 and 10 percent in April 2009, the U.S. government sprang into action. Washington anticipated that the H1N1 virus might lead to a public health catastrophe as bad or worse than what is happening today with COVID-19. Jared Brown writes that the lessons of 2009 were not learnt – or implemented. “The executive branch’s ad-hoc application of the Defense Production Act’s authorities to this pandemic is Exhibit A of how our government, across multiple Republican and Democratic administrations and throughout the national security enterprise, has failed to develop or adapt the Act’s tools for the threats of the 21st century,” he writes.

  • Studies: Hand Sanitizers Kill COVID-19 Virus, E-Consults Appropriate

    In a study yesterday in Emerging Infectious Diseases, Swiss and German researchers found that alcohol-based hand sanitizers recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO) are effective in killing the novel coronavirus. The authors noted that while 30 seconds is the recommended time to rub hand sanitizers into the skin and was the time used in this study, most people don’t use them for that long. And a study yesterday in the Annals of Internal Medicine with important COVID-19 ramifications found that 70.2 percent of 6,512 electronic consultations (e-consults) made by 1,096 referring clinicians to 121 specialists were appropriate. While e-consults can increase patient access to specialists, minimize travel, reduce the time between referral and specialist feedback, and lower unnecessary in-person clinic visits—which is essential during the COVID-19 pandemic—data on their appropriateness and utility have been limited.

  • Head Lice Drug Ivermectin Being Studied as Possible Coronavirus Treatment

    An antiparasitic drug sometimes used to treat head lice has undergone preliminary studies for use in the fight against the coronavirus — and has shown promising results, according to reports. Yaron Steinbuch writes in the New York Post that while recent reports have focused on the anti-malarial hydroxychloroquine as a possible miracle treatment, experts have expressed cautious optimism that ivermectin also could be used for COVID-19, ABC News reported. Ivermectin — which was developed in the 1970s and 1980s — was first used to treat tiny roundworms called nematodes in cattle, then for river blindness in humans, and most recently to rid people of head lice, ABC News reported. The drug’s antiparasitic prowess has landed it on the World Health Organization’s list of essential medicines. And recently, a team of Australian scientists has studied ivermectin in vitro in connection with the coronavirus pandemic.

  • Coronavirus Cases: Mathematical Modeling Draws More Accurate Picture

    Mathematical modeling can take what information is reported about the coronavirus, including the clearly underreported numbers of cases, factor in knowns like the density and age distribution of the population in an area, and compute a more realistic picture of the virus’ infection rate, numbers that will enable better prevention and preparation, modelers say. “Actual pandemic preparedness depends on true cases in the population whether or not they have been identified,” says one researcher. “With better numbers we can better assess how long the virus will persist and how bad it will get. Without these numbers, how can health care systems and workers prepare for what is needed?”

  • Here’s How We Extricate Ourselves from This Lockdown

    No politician or public-health expert can say when the novel coronavirus pandemic, and attendant lockdowns and social distancing, will end. But there is a roadmap—actually, a competing array of them—for extricating the United States from social isolation. Olivia Messer writes for the Daily Beastthat public-health experts surveyed by the Daily Beast said there were three main things authorities need to be able to provide—effectively, affordably, and with quick results—to the American public before it’s safe to send at least some people back to work and into public life. 

  • Ministers Told to Plan Gentle Path to Recovery With Ban on Alarming Talk of Coronavirus “Exit Strategy”

    British government ministers have been told to abandon talk of a coronavirus “exit strategy” as they try to ease public fears about an eventual end to the lockdown by moving towards a gradual “unwinding” of social distancing rules. Gordon Rayner and Harry Yorke write in The Telegraph that the government has been so successful in convincing people of the need to stay at home that there are concerns it could prove difficult to persuade them it is safe to return to work once the decision is taken to ease the current restrictions. Dominic Raab, the acting Prime Minister, made clear on Monday that the lockdown will stay in place beyond a legally required review of it this Thursday, but said there were “positive signs” that Britain was “starting to win this struggle.” He is being urged by some members of the Cabinet to announce that the lockdown will be reviewed again next week – rather than next month – to signal that the lifting of some restrictions is under consideration.

  • The Coronavirus Crisis: A Catalyst for Entrepreneurship

    Throughout human history, crises have been pivotal in developing our societies. Pandemics have helped advance health-care systems, wars have fueled technological innovations and the global financial crisis helped advance tech companies like Uber and Airbnb. The present coronavirus pandemic will arguably not be an exception; entrepreneurs can be expected to rise to the challenge. Businesses play a key role both in helping society get through an economic crisis and in creating innovations that shape society after a crisis. So one key question is: how will the ongoing crisis influence future society? While it’s hard to predict the future, we can develop an understanding of what is ahead by analyzing current trends. It’s clear the post-pandemic future will be different. What’s happening during the crisis will have a lasting impact on society. Current signs of entrepreneurial initiative and goodwill give us some cause for optimism. In the words of Stanford economist Paul Romer: “A crisis is a terrible thing to waste.”

  • Lockdown Shock Could Trigger “Unexploded Debt Bomb”

    An “unexploded bomb” of debt is being destabilised by the coronavirus shock, the global banking body has warned, as it predicted an “unprecedented surge” in borrowing ahead. Tom Rees writes in The Telegraph that more than $20 trillion (£16 trillion) of global bonds and loans due before the end of the year pose a “refinancing risk” with vulnerable emerging markets heavily exposed to the latest crunch, according to the Institute of International Finance (IIF). The global economy is starting a new crisis with corporate, household and government debt at levels never seen before after a decade of ultra-low borrowing costs and risky investor behavior. Signs of strains have already emerged in corporate credit, particularly the junk bond and leveraged loan markets, while government borrowing is set to enter uncharted territory. Rees notes that the world economy is entering a recession with $87 trillion more debt than at the onset of the financial crisis. The global debt to GDP ratio has risen by 40 percentage points over that period to an eye-watering 322pc and will hit 342pc this year, the IIF said. Unprecedented government support for economies and interest rates being slashed to new record lows are expected to drive debt even higher in the coming years.

  • Coronavirus Disease 2019: The Harms of Exaggerated Information and Non‐Evidence‐Based Measures

    Those arguing in favor of lockdowns say that postponing the epidemic wave (“flattening the curve”) gains time to develop vaccines and reduces strain on the health system, which otherwise might be overwhelmed. John P. A. Ioannidis writes in the European Journal of Clinical Investigation, however, that vaccines take many months (or even years) to develop and test properly. “Maintaining lockdowns for many months may have even worse consequences than an epidemic wave that runs an acute course,” he writes. “Focusing on protecting susceptible individuals may be preferable to maintaining countrywide lockdowns long-term.” He also notes that different coronaviruses actually infect millions of people every year, and they are common especially in the elderly and in hospitalized patients with respiratory illness in the winter. The only unique aspect of this year’s coronavirus outbreak is the unprecedented attention it has received in the media.

  • Population-Level COVID-19 Mortality Risk for Non-Elderly Individuals Overall and for Non-Elderly Individuals without Underlying Diseases in Pandemic Epicenters

    John P. A. Ioannidis and his colleagues did research aiming to evaluated the relative risk of COVID-19 death in people <65 years old versus older individuals in the general population; provide estimates of absolute risk of COVID-19 death at the population level; and understand what proportion of COVID-19 deaths occur in non-elderly people without underlying diseases in epicenters of the pandemic. The researchers concluded that “People <65 years old have very small risks of COVID-19 death even in the hotbeds of the pandemic and deaths for people <65 years without underlying predisposing conditions are remarkably uncommon. Strategies focusing specifically on protecting high-risk elderly individuals should be considered in managing the pandemic.”