Coronaviruset i verden: Nyheter og diskusjon

[Sandy Koufax]

Pc Lynet skrev (6 timer siden):

Iran har begynt på andre runde, får håpe ikke det samme skjer her i Europa...

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/01/iran-rapid-rise-in-covid-19-cases-stokes-fears-of-second-wave

Iran er vel glovarmt på denne tiden også. Tar bort noe av argumentet fremsatt av mange om varmen kan svekke viruset (selv om det sannsynligvis er sant).

Bør vel sies at lockdown og sosial distansering er det beste virkemiddelet.

[Snikpellik]

Storm_Eagle skrev (2 timer siden):

Anders Tegnell er jo verre enn "komiske Ali" i sine uttalelser. Tragisk at Sverige ledes av slike tullinger. Og media i Sverige følger lydig med og sprer propagandaen myndighetene ønsker.

 

[Wer2w]

Snikpellik skrev (12 minutter siden):

 

Sverige har Tegnell og Norge har Magnus Carlsen ? tenker jeg 

De er ju verdensmestere i Corona nå.

Ja, svenske aviser går ikke og lese lenger. De er bare lommelykt-poesi. Norske holder fortsatt litt høyere kringkasting. Ikke mye da 

Endret 2. juni 2020 av Wer2w

[tigerdyr]

https://www.vg.no/nyheter/utenriks/i/mRkkRE/ap-lekkede-dokumenter-fra-who-viser-at-kina-holdt-tilbake-informasjon-om-coronaviruset

"AP: Lekkede dokumenter fra WHO viser at Kina holdt tilbake informasjon om coronaviruset
Mens WHO utad roste Kina for rask respons på coronaviruset, viser lekkede dokumenter en annen historie, ifølge nyhetsbyrået AP."

 

Endret 2. juni 2020 av tigerdyr

[knipsolini]

Har vel vært (og er fortsatt?) full lockdown i Frankrike. Likevel er det titusenvis som står som sild i tønne i Paris for å demonstrere for George Floyd. Det er vel en grei oppskrift på potensiell full oppblussing igjen.

Endret 3. juni 2020 av knipsolini

[bakstrever]

10 hours ago, tigerdyr said:

"AP: Lekkede dokumenter fra WHO viser at Kina holdt tilbake informasjon om coronaviruset
Mens WHO utad roste Kina for rask respons på coronaviruset, viser lekkede dokumenter en annen historie, ifølge nyhetsbyrået AP."

I artikkelen står det:

Quote

USAs president Donald Trump har flere ganger anklaget WHO for å ha hjulpet Kina med å dekke over omfanget av krisen. De lekkede dokumentene viser imidlertid at WHO selv manglet informasjon, skriver AP.

VGs bruk av ordet imidlertid her viser dårlig språkforståelse. Uavhengig av hva man synes om Trump så bekrefter disse opplysningene langt på vei det han har sagt. Hvis WHO utad roser Kina og internt er frustrert over at de ikke har fått informasjon – da har de jo hjulpet Kina med å dekke over omfanget av krisen.

[tigerdyr]

27 minutes ago, bakstrever said:

I artikkelen står det:

VGs bruk av ordet imidlertid her viser dårlig språkforståelse. Uavhengig av hva man synes om Trump så bekrefter disse opplysningene langt på vei det han har sagt. Hvis WHO utad roser Kina og internt er frustrert over at de ikke har fått informasjon – da har de jo hjulpet Kina med å dekke over omfanget av krisen.

Korrekt, men man skal nok se langt etter å se VG innrømme at Trumpeten kanskje hadde rett i noe av kritikken mot WHO. 

[Morromann]

knipsolini skrev (4 timer siden):

Har vel vært (og er fortsatt?) full lockdown i Frankrike. Likevel er det titusenvis som står som sild i tønne i Paris for å demonstrere for George Floyd. Det er vel en grei oppskrift på potensiell full oppblussing igjen.

Tja, det er vel etterhvert blitt klarere at viruset ikke smitter noe særlig utendørs. Jeg tror nesten det var større smittefare da hele befolkninger ble jaget innendørs. Da hele Spania var innestengt i sine hjem var det rundt 8000 som ble smittet daglig. Ikke rart med familier sammenstuet innendørs hvor de smittet hverandre. Og vis ser at med mer gjenåpning i land etter land så går smitten ned og ikke opp.

[bakstrever]

11 hours ago, bakstrever said:

Når eldre ved sykehjem blir alvorlig syke gir man palliativ behandling, eller man gir altså behandling for å fjerne symptomer, men gir ingen behandling for å hjelpe dem med å bli friske. Lavt oksygennivå (hypoksi) i blodet er ubehagelig hvis man har dysepné (åndenød), men det er mye enklere å behandle ubehaget ved åndenøden ved å gi morfin enn ved oksygenbehandling. De som ikke har dysepné trenger ikke noen behandling fordi de ikke har noe spesielt ubehag. Videre sier de at generelt sett (utenfor COVID-19) kan man ha åndenød uten å ha hypoksi, og da vil ikke oksygenbehandling hjelpe. Og så er det ingen vits i å teste for lavt oksygennivå når pustebesværet uansett kan lindres med morfin.

Det de gjør er altså å definere seg vekk fra å gi oksygenbehandling. De velger altså bevisst å gi den palliative behandlingen som garantert ikke vil kurere pasienten (morfin), heller enn å gi en palliativ behandling som muligens kan gi pasienten en sjanse (oksygenbehandling).

Dette fenomenet skjer ikke bare i Sverige, men tydeligvis i mange andre land også. Kanskje er dette en del av årsaken til at noen land har høyere dødsrater enn andre?

Etter å ha konferert med en bekjent som kjenner systemet i Norge og lest flere Dagens Nyheter-saker stiller det seg noe annerledes enn inntrykket man fikk fra den ene artikkelen. Det er visstnok ikke vanlig å gi oksygen ved sykehjem i Norge og det er en del mer problemer med det enn bare å stille inn og justere dose (som også krever ekstra bruk av tid). Det gis på sykehus eller via sykehus til en kommunal avdeling. Altså er vi ikke så forskjellige fra Sverige på dette punktet.

Flere artikler i DN viser at det er store forskjeller (10–30%) mellom regioner av hvor mange sykehjemspasienter som blir sendt til sykehus, på tross av at det ikke finnes mangel på plass i noen svenske regioner. Det det imidlertid finnes mangel på er nok legeressurser til å gjøre en vurdering av om de eldre skal bli sendt på sykehus eller ikke og da gjøres vurderingen ofte over telefon.

Selv om det ikke nødvendigvis er riktig at de burde fått oksygenbehandling på sykehjemmet så er det riktig, slik jeg forstår det, at for få eldre i Sverige behandling på sykehus. Grunnen til det er altså at det (1) i forskjellige regioner vurderes forskjellig og (2) at det ikke er nok legeressurser til å gjøre vurderingene skikkelig.

 

[0laf]

tigerdyr skrev (11 timer siden):

"AP: Lekkede dokumenter fra WHO viser at Kina holdt tilbake informasjon om coronaviruset
Mens WHO utad roste Kina for rask respons på coronaviruset, viser lekkede dokumenter en annen historie, ifølge nyhetsbyrået AP."

Nå er originalartikkelen fra AP noe mer nyansert.

 

Chinese government labs only released the genome after another lab published it ahead of authorities on a virologist website on Jan. 11. Even then, China stalled for at least two weeks more on providing WHO with detailed data on patients and cases, according to recordings of internal meetings held by the U.N. health agency through January — all at a time when the outbreak arguably might have been dramatically slowed.

WHO officials were lauding China in public because they wanted to coax more information out of the government, the recordings obtained by the AP suggest. Privately, they complained in meetings the week of Jan. 6 that China was not sharing enough data to assess how effectively the virus spread between people or what risk it posed to the rest of the world, costing valuable time.

“We’re going on very minimal information,” said American epidemiologist Maria Van Kerkhove, now WHO’s technical lead for COVID-19, in one internal meeting. “It’s clearly not enough for you to do proper planning.”

After repeatedly praising the Chinese response early on, U.S. President Donald Trump has blasted WHO in recent weeks for allegedly colluding with China to hide the extent of the coronavirus crisis. He cut ties with the organization on Friday, jeopardizing the approximately $450 million the U.S. gives every year as WHO’s biggest single donor.

The new information does not support the narrative of either the U.S. or China, but instead portrays an agency now stuck in the middle that was urgently trying to solicit more data despite limited authority. Although international law obliges countries to report information to WHO that could have an impact on public health, the U.N. agency has no enforcement powers and cannot independently investigate epidemics within countries. Instead, it must rely on the cooperation of member states.

The recordings suggest that rather than colluding with China, as Trump declared, WHO was itself kept in the dark as China gave it the minimal information required by law. However, the agency did try to portray China in the best light, likely as a means to secure more information. And WHO experts genuinely thought Chinese scientists had done “a very good job” in detecting and decoding the virus, despite the lack of transparency from Chinese officials.
 

WHO staffers debated how to press China for gene sequences and detailed patient data without angering authorities, worried about losing access and getting Chinese scientists into trouble.

Under international law, WHO is required to quickly share information and alerts with member countries about an evolving crisis. Galea noted WHO could not indulge China’s wish to sign off on information before telling other countries because “that is not respectful of our responsibilities.”

In the second week of January, WHO’s chief of emergencies, Dr. Michael Ryan, told colleagues it was time to “shift gears” and apply more pressure on China, fearing a repeat of the outbreak of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome that started in China in 2002 and killed nearly 800 people worldwide.

“This is exactly the same scenario, endlessly trying to get updates from China about what was going on,” he said. “WHO barely got out of that one with its neck intact given the issues that arose around transparency in southern China.”
 

“It’s obvious that we could have saved more lives and avoided many, many deaths if China and the WHO had acted faster,” said Ali Mokdad, a professor at the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington.

However, Mokdad and other experts also noted that if WHO had been more confrontational with China, it could have triggered a far worse situation of not getting any information at all.

If WHO had pushed too hard, it could even have been kicked out of China, said Adam Kamradt-Scott, a global health professor at the University of Sydney. But he added that a delay of just a few days in releasing genetic sequences can be critical in an outbreak. And he noted that as Beijing’s lack of transparency becomes even clearer, WHO director-general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus’s continued defense of China is problematic.

“It’s definitely damaged WHO’s credibility,” said Kamradt-Scott. “Did he go too far? I think the evidence on that is clear….it has led to so many questions about the relationship between China and WHO. It is perhaps a cautionary tale.”

 

 

 

The race to find the genetic map of the virus started in late December, according to the story that unfolds in interviews, documents and the WHO recordings. That’s when doctors in Wuhan noticed mysterious clusters of patients with fevers and breathing problems who weren’t improving with standard flu treatment. Seeking answers, they sent test samples from patients to commercial labs.

By Dec. 27, one lab, Vision Medicals, had pieced together most of the genome of a new coronavirus with striking similarities to SARS. Vision Medicals shared its data with Wuhan officials and the Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, as reported first by Chinese finance publication Caixin and independently confirmed by the AP.

On Dec. 30, Wuhan health officials issued internal notices warning of the unusual pneumonia, which leaked on social media. That evening, Shi Zhengli, a coronavirus expert at the Wuhan Institute of Virology who is famous for having traced the SARS virus to a bat cave, was alerted to the new disease, according to an interview with Scientific American. Shi took the first train from a conference in Shanghai back to Wuhan.

The next day, Chinese CDC director Gao Fu dispatched a team of experts to Wuhan. Also on Dec. 31, WHO first learned about the cases from an open-source platform that scouts for intelligence on outbreaks, emergencies chief Ryan has said.

WHO officially requested more information on Jan. 1. Under international law, members have 24 to 48 hours to respond, and China reported two days later that there were 44 cases and no deaths.

By Jan. 2, Shi had decoded the entire genome of the virus, according to a notice later posted on her institute’s website.

Scientists agree that Chinese scientists detected and sequenced the then-unknown pathogen with astonishing speed, in a testimony to China’s vastly improved technical capabilities since SARS, during which a WHO-led group of scientists took months to identify the virus. This time, Chinese virologists proved within days that it was a never-before-seen coronavirus. Tedros would later say Beijing set “a new standard for outbreak response.”

But when it came to sharing the information with the world, things began to go awry.

..

On Jan. 8, the Wall Street Journal reported that scientists had identified a new coronavirus in samples from pneumonia patients in Wuhan, pre-empting and embarrassing Chinese officials. The lab technician told the AP they first learned about the discovery of the virus from the Journal.

The article also embarrassed WHO officials. Dr. Tom Grein, chief of WHO’s acute events management team, said the agency looked “doubly, incredibly stupid.” Van Kerkhove, the American expert, acknowledged WHO was “already late” in announcing the new virus and told colleagues that it was critical to push China.

Ryan, WHO’s chief of emergencies, was also upset at the dearth of information.

“The fact is, we’re two to three weeks into an event, we don’t have a laboratory diagnosis, we don’t have an age, sex or geographic distribution, we don’t have an epi curve,” he complained, referring to the standard graphic of outbreaks scientists use to show how an epidemic is progressing.

After the article, state media officially announced the discovery of the new coronavirus. But even then, Chinese health authorities did not release the genome, diagnostic tests, or detailed patient data that could hint at how infectious the disease was.

By that time, suspicious cases were already appearing across the region.

.....

WHO officials complained in internal meetings that they were making repeated requests for more data, especially to find out if the virus could spread efficiently between humans, but to no avail.

“We have informally and formally been requesting more epidemiological information,” WHO’s China representative Galea said. “But when asked for specifics, we could get nothing.”

Emergencies chief Ryan grumbled that since China was providing the minimal information required by international law, there was little WHO could do. But he also noted that last September, WHO had issued an unusual public rebuke of Tanzania for not providing enough details about a worrisome Ebola outbreak.

“We have to be consistent,” Ryan said. “The danger now is that despite our good intent...especially if something does happen, there will be a lot of finger-pointing at WHO.”

Ryan noted that China could make a “huge contribution” to the world by sharing the genetic material immediately, because otherwise “other countries will have to reinvent the wheel over the coming days.”

On Jan. 11, a team led by Zhang, from the Shanghai Public Health Clinical Center, finally published a sequence on virological.org, used by researchers to swap tips on pathogens. The move angered Chinese CDC officials, three people familiar with the matter said, and the next day, his laboratory was temporarily shuttered by health authorities.

 

...

 

Some scientists say the wait was not unreasonable considering the difficulties in sequencing unknown pathogens, given accuracy is as important as speed. They point to the SARS outbreak in 2003 when some Chinese scientists initially — and wrongly — believed the source of the epidemic was chlamydia.

“The pressure is intense in an outbreak to make sure you’re right,” said Peter Daszak, president of the EcoHealthAlliance in New York. “It’s actually worse to go out to go to the public with a story that’s wrong because the public completely lose confidence in the public health response.”

Still, others quietly question what happened behind the scenes.

Infectious diseases expert John Mackenzie, who served on a WHO emergency committee during the outbreak, praised the speed of Chinese researchers in sequencing the virus. But he said once central authorities got involved, detailed data trickled to a crawl.

“There certainly was a kind of blank period,” Mackenzie said. “There had to be human to human transmission. You know, it’s staring at you in the face… I would have thought they would have been much more open at that stage.”

...

WHO went back and forth. Van Kerkhove said in a press briefing that “it is certainly possible there is limited human-to-human transmission.” But hours later, WHO seemed to backtrack, and tweeted that “preliminary investigations conducted by the Chinese authorities have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission” – a statement that later became fodder for critics.

A high-ranking official in WHO’s Asia office, Dr. Liu Yunguo, who attended medical school in Wuhan, flew to Beijing to make direct, informal contacts with Chinese officials, recordings show. Liu’s former classmate, a Wuhan doctor, had alerted him that pneumonia patients were flooding the city’s hospitals, and Liu pushed for more experts to visit Wuhan, according to a public health expert familiar with the matter.

On Jan. 20, the leader of an expert team returning from Wuhan, renowned government infectious diseases doctor Zhong Nanshan, declared publicly for the first time that the new virus was spreading between people. Chinese President Xi Jinping called for the “timely publication of epidemic information and deepening of international cooperation.”

Despite that directive, WHO staff still struggled to obtain enough detailed patient data from China about the rapidly evolving outbreak. That same day, the U.N. health agency dispatched a small team to Wuhan for two days, including Galea, the WHO representative in China.

They were told about a worrying cluster of cases among more than a dozen doctors and nurses. But they did not have “transmission trees” detailing how the cases were connected, nor a full understanding of how widely the virus was spreading and who was at risk.

In an internal meeting, Galea said their Chinese counterparts were “talking openly and consistently” about human-to-human transmission, and that there was a debate about whether or not this was sustained. Galea reported to colleagues in Geneva and Manila that China’s key request to WHO was for help “in communicating this to the public, without causing panic.”

On Jan. 22, WHO convened an independent committee to determine whether to declare a global health emergency. After two inconclusive meetings where experts were split, they decided against it — even as Chinese officials ordered Wuhan sealed in the biggest quarantine in history. The next day, WHO chief Tedros publicly described the spread of the new coronavirus in China as “limited.”

For days, China didn’t release much detailed data, even as its case count exploded. Beijing city officials were alarmed enough to consider locking down the capital, according to a medical expert with direct knowledge of the matter.

On Jan. 28, Tedros and top experts, including Ryan, made an extraordinary trip to Beijing to meet President Xi and other senior Chinese officials. It is highly unusual for WHO’s director-general to directly intervene in the practicalities of outbreak investigations. Tedros’ staffers had prepared a list of requests for information.

“It could all happen and the floodgates open, or there’s no communication,” Grein said in an internal meeting while his boss was in Beijing. “We’ll see.”

At the end of Tedros’ trip, WHO announced China had agreed to accept an international team of experts. In a press briefing on Jan. 29, Tedros heaped praise on China, calling its level of commitment “incredible.”

The next day, WHO finally declared an international health emergency. Once again, Tedros thanked China, saying nothing about the earlier lack of cooperation.

“We should have actually expressed our respect and gratitude to China for what it’s doing,” Tedros said. “It has already done incredible things to limit the transmission of the virus to other countries.”

https://apnews.com/3c061794970661042b18d5aeaaed9fae?utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=AP&utm_campaign=SocialFlow

____________________

Helt klart mye som har vært kritikkverdig her, spesielt fra Kina, men også fra WHO, men det fremstår som om WHO har presset Kina internt, men forsøkt å smigre de offentlig, for å få mer informasjon osv.

[Evil-Duck]

Benbjo skrev (På 2.6.2020 den 11.25):

Antall innleggelser i Norge øker sakte men sikkert. 31 nå mot 27 i går. 

Bet meg litt i merke denne kommentaren fra i går, i dag er vi ned i 26 innlagte , det laveste det har vært siden 12. mars  

https://direkte.vg.no/nyhetsdognet/news/5ed77c6ad32deb00186d2d47 

 

[frohmage]

Ser ut som de av oss med blodtype 0 har rundt 30% mindre sjanse enn andre for å utvikle alvorlig lungesykdom av viruset.

https://www.nrk.no/norge/ny-koronastudie_-faerre-med-blodtype-0-blir-alvorlig-lungesyke-1.15034988

[knipsolini]

Morromann skrev (1 time siden):

Tja, det er vel etterhvert blitt klarere at viruset ikke smitter noe særlig utendørs. Jeg tror nesten det var større smittefare da hele befolkninger ble jaget innendørs. Da hele Spania var innestengt i sine hjem var det rundt 8000 som ble smittet daglig. Ikke rart med familier sammenstuet innendørs hvor de smittet hverandre. Og vis ser at med mer gjenåpning i land etter land så går smitten ned og ikke opp.

Kan ikke helt forstå at man ikke blir smittet om en hoster deg i ansiktet fordi du er utendørs...? Noe forskning du kan vise til på at viruset i liten grad smitter utendørs (selv om man står tett på hverandre)? Blir også for enkelt å trekke slutningen "smitten har gått ned etter gjenåpning, ergo vil åpning føre til lavere spredning enn ved lockdown".

[Morromann]

knipsolini skrev (19 minutter siden):

Kan ikke helt forstå at man ikke blir smittet om en hoster deg i ansiktet fordi du er utendørs...? Noe forskning du kan vise til på at viruset i liten grad smitter utendørs (selv om man står tett på hverandre)? Blir også for enkelt å trekke slutningen "smitten har gått ned etter gjenåpning, ergo vil åpning føre til lavere spredning enn ved lockdown".

Er du så vant til at folk hoster deg i ansiktet når du er utendørs? Jeg må innrømme at det er ikke noe jeg har opplevd hverken ute eller inne for den saks skyld. Joda, om noen går opp til deg og hoster på deg når du er ute så kan det fort skje, men ehh....hvor skjer det egentlig?

[Snikpellik]

Sverige:

Anders Tegnell innrømmer feil med strategien, og tar selvkritikk. Sier han ville gjort annerledes i dag, og at Sverige burde innført flere tiltak.

Tegnell självkritisk: Fler åtgärder hade behövts

Sitat

Statsepidemiolog Anders Tegnell hade satt in fler åtgärder tidigare för att stoppa pandemin i Sverige om han hade kunnat backa bandet, säger han till Sveriges Radio Ekot. Socialminister Lena Hallengren (S) säger att det är svårt att veta vilka åtgärder som skulle kunna ha gjorts. – Han kan ju fortfarande inte ge ett exakt svar på vilka åtgärder man skulle ha vidtagit, säger hon till DN.

Mer: https://www.svt.se/nyheter/inrikes/tegnell-sjalvkritisk-mer-atgarder-hade-behovts

Anders Tegnell självkritisk i ny intervju

Sitat

Statsepidemiolog Anders Tegnell säger att Sverige skulle ha satt in fler åtgärder i början för att stoppa coronaviruset.

– Det finns säkert förbättringspotential i det vi har gjort i Sverige, helt klart, säger Anders Tegnell till Ekot.

Mer: https://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/a/lAGGnk/anders-tegnell-sjalvkritisk-i-ny-intervju

Endret 3. juni 2020 av Snikpellik

[knipsolini]

Morromann skrev (19 minutter siden):

Er du så vant til at folk hoster deg i ansiktet når du er utendørs? Jeg må innrømme at det er ikke noe jeg har opplevd hverken ute eller inne for den saks skyld. Joda, om noen går opp til deg og hoster på deg når du er ute så kan det fort skje, men ehh....hvor skjer det egentlig?

Du påstår at det knapt smitter om man er utendørs, hvor har du det fra? Hoster man kun når man er innendørs? Om man står titusenvis av mennesker tett inntil hverandre, så kan du nok oppleve at noen hoster uten å dekke til munnen. Tro det eller ei. Det er litt av tanken med at man skal holde minimum én eller to meters avstand. Man klarer nok fint å få spredd en del smitte bare ved prating og ikke minst roping under demonstrasjoner.

[Svein M]

Ser at Sverige har passert 10x ganger så mange døde som Norge i forhold til folketallet

SE: 44.2   DK: 10.0   FI: 5.8   NO: 4.4   IS: 2.9

Endret 3. juni 2020 av Svein M

[Gjest Slettet+3165]

Svein M skrev (13 minutter siden):

Ser at Sverige har passert 10x ganger så mange døde som Norge i forhold til folketallet

SE: 44.2   DK: 10.0   FI: 5.8   NO: 4.4   IS: 2.9

Da passer det seg med denne igjen:

For en gjeng.

[ok67]

I Sverige kan kanskje utsagnet "Fake news" ha noko for seg ...

[Snikpellik]

Dagens tall fra Sverige:

74 nye dødsfall - 4,542 totalt
2,214 nye påvist smittede - 40,803 totalt

Soleklart den dagen med flest nye påvist smittede i Sverige hittil med hele 2,214 nye. Rekorden før i dag var 812, den 24. april.