While the Email Discussions below have developed from Malik Magdon Ismail’s modelling of the likely chart for Sri Lanka, the items beyond ÖNE” have been responses to that article viz, https://thuppahis.com/2020/04/24/prediction-covid-19-in-sri-lanka-heading-for-peak-in-august/#more-41891….
| ONE: A Comment from “Fair Brit,” mid-April 2020
Do you get emails from Information Clearing House? Interesting article below (click on the relinkto subscribe) …. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/55075.htm. As I mentioned to you,many countries are including deaths from other diseases, (e.g. coronary heart disease, cancer) in thefigures for corona deaths. So: they are included in the corona death figures if a person died WITH corona (in their body), rather than died OF corona. How can we possibly know the truth about this? TWO: Visit Chandre Dharmawardana: “Is complacency marring Sri Lanka’s Covid-19 effort?Fatality figures and the number of “confirmed cases” = https://thuppahis.com/2020/04/25/sri-lankas-problematic-covid-data/#more-41951 …… AND Gerald H Peiris: “The Problem with Spatial Diffusion Models,” https://thuppahis.com/2020/04/25/the-problem-with-spatial-diffusion-models/#more-41914 THREE: A Comment from “Fair Brit,” 25 April 2020 I have just read Dr Chandre Dharmawardana’s interesting article on Thuppahi.1 Put this together with other articles, and the only conclusion I can come to is that we can’t really take seriously any of the figures being bandied around. Not only in Sri Lanka (SL), but worldwide. Dr Dharmawardana referred to articles by Prof. Prasanna Cooray and Prof. Marc Lipsitch.2, 3 Since then, you will see that cases in SL did indeed rise, and, I believe, for the moment will keep on rising. As of 25 April 2020, we have 452 cases, and 7 deaths, from Covid-19, that makes the death rate 1.55% (no longer 3.2%) so that’s already halved. It’s an ever changing situation, but, more importantly, the situation is not being reported accurately. I can’t comment on how deaths are identified and recorded as a fatality from Covid in SL, but in many countries (eg Australia, the UK and the US) they are recording anyone who died WITH Covid, as a Covid death, rather than those who died OF Covid. That is to say people who went into hospital with pre-existing medical conditions and died are included in these figures. So if people die of Ischaemic Heart Disease, Diabetes, Lung Disease, Cancer, Hypertension, Asthma, Kidney Disease, and Liver Disease, etc, they are being included in the number of fatalities from Covid, whereas realistically they most likely would have died anyway from those conditions. But because they happened to be Covid positive, they are counted in the numbers of fatalities from Covid.4 You can see why we therefore can’t know the correct numbers. The SL authorities seem to be dealing extremely well with a difficult situation. It is, however, a little concerning the way people are being quarantined. “In quarantine” should mean “in isolation”, in order to prevent a disease from spreading. You saw from your previous article about Dr Lucien Jayasuriya’s experience5, that the people being quarantined were in a dormitory type room, in bunk beds, breathing the same air, (though he and his wife were in a separate room) where the virus could have easily spread to all of them, if anyone had it (fortunately they didn’t). The isolated people were asked how they were feeling and temperatures were recorded twice a day, they were not actually tested for Covid! In fact evidence from other articles suggest monitoring people’s oxygen saturation is a better indicator than measuring temperatures, since many patients appeared normal and were having a normal
cases as low as 20-30%)6, 7. Normal oxygen saturation in a healthy person should be around 95-98%. It was evident that the quarantined people were treated very well, albeit not in isolation, which was the reason for them being detained. Then let’s throw into all of this, the batch of testing kits which were headed to the UK that were found to be contaminated with corona virus.8 Then we have a country leader allegedly proposing injecting disinfectant into people to kill the virus!9 The articles and videos are out there, you only have to search for them. Bibliography:
A COMMENT from Lakshman F. B. Gunasekara, 26 April 2020 Most interesting discussion. Some quick thoughts by a veteran journo and commentator after years of reporting disasters, riots, wars, racism and authoritarianism (have also advised/taught disaster communications) :- 1) Need for Pro-active testing as well as reactive testing (i.e. on symptom ): Pro-active testing would be done on selected human cohorts designed to identify current numbers of infected people, their geophysical locations, their potential geophysical directions their physiological vulnerability to COVID-19, and their social transmission directions and frequency. I believe the GMOA and other medical specialists are advocating pro-active testing. I am sure they have their scientifically formulated objectives for such testing which would be far more precise than those I have listed above. 2) Issue of correctly identifying direct COVID-19-caused fatalities: Unless all human deaths are examined for COVID-19 infection and examination (either while alive or post-mortem), we can NEVER have a full quantifying of actual COVID-caused fatalities. At present the COVID fatalities in SL only those found COVID-positive and whose deaths were medically monitored. Also, there is inadequate information being provided to the local news media industry (Web, electronic, print etc) on the COVID tally – e.g. when positive cases are identified only occasionally are the locations provided and their circumstances (e.g. whether the new cases are part of existing ‘contact’ circles or entirely new ones). 3) Ideological challenge :- Valuation of COVID-19’s impact on society (social, economic, political) : Different country political leadership are making their own valuations when assessing depths of societal impact and devising both counter-measures as well as long term recovery measures. I have impression that the more socially collectivised nation-states (collectivised for whatever reason) seem to be handling the epidemic better than the classically individualist-capitalist-modernist nation-states/regional groups (i.e. EU). See China, S. Korea, Vietnam. I think part of the reason for Sri Lanka’s own partial success so far is also this socio-political element. Thus, we have the classical ‘advanced capitalist’ societies (EU., US, Japan) preferring to take enforced state regulatory measures (as opposed to be ‘advice’ and ‘guidance’) ONLY after relatively large numbers (in the 100s) of actual COVID fatalities. The London FT newspaper over a month ago published a graph showing when countries began to go into various types of lockdown – China began such measures after just 30 fatalities! SL began controls even before a single fatality. The political and technocratic discourse in the media in the advanced capitalist Western powers has been dominated by the weighing of the number of fatalities against the importance of keeping the economy running. In SL there was at least one serious columnist commentator (from the economics side) who argued strongly for continuing economic ‘normalcy’ despite the death rate arguing that the deaths PER POPULATION should be the criteria for economic strategy decisions and that SL need NOT go into full curfew and suspension of normal life. Just yesterday, the Mayor of an American mid-West American city (Las Vegas??) argued on CNN TV that given the ratio of fatalities PER POPULATION fatalities, she was right to revive normal socio-economic life and re-open pubs, casinos, salons etc etc as the size of the population hit by the lockdown did not justify continued economic disruption. Sadly, Sri Lanka seems caught in-between these two approaches. While, true to our yet partially traditional collectivised socio-cultural formation, the country instinctively went into lockdown relatively early in the COVID cycle, and we can see its benefits, subsequently, for some reason/s (I could guess), there has been a failure to sustain counter-measures and take them to the next levels despite much advocacy/lobbying by the technical experts (including the GMOA!). I am perplexed by this failure by a regime that to date has seemingly pursued (even if partially) a more technocracy-based governance (even the military is a technocracy) approach especially in relation to epidemic response. Of course, although a longtime observer and reporter, in this area of a massive epidemic disaster-crisis, I am a novice and await comments. Lakshman. |