Skip to content

Coronavirus Growth in Western Countries: April 1 Update

Published on 12 Comments on Coronavirus Growth in Western Countries: April 1 Update

Here’s the officially reported coronavirus death toll through April 1. The raw data from Johns Hopkins is here.

12 thoughts on “Coronavirus Growth in Western Countries: April 1 Update”

  1. Joseph Harbin

    Prioritizing vaccines for people in high-risk groups is common sense. So Vermont is prioritizing vaccines for people of color and people like Noah Smith and Matt Yglesias are questioning the legality and wisdom of that kind of policy.

    Seems to me the policy is common sense and I don't understand why prioritizing based on age, occupation, health (like BMI), etc., is perfectly okay but prioritizing based on race should be out of the question.

    The objections seem very dumb to me.

        1. Clyde Schechter

          The problem is that we don't really know, scientifically, what is and is not relevant here. The data showing that age is a very large risk factor for death from COVID-19 is clear and compelling. But all the others that are bandied about are confounded with each other. Non-whites are more likely to be overweight or obese, have diabetes or heart or lung disease, are more likely to work in jobs that expose them more intensely to the virus, are more likely to live in crowded, multi-generational households, are more likely to be poor and have poor health care. And, for all we know, there may be genetic or other biological susceptibilities that are more prevalent in some gene pools than others. The existing data have not sorted these out to see what is really driving the disparities in Covid-19 mortality, and what is just a proxy. We simply don't know, and we won't know any time soon because the available data are too limited and of too poor quality to tease this all out.

          Fortunately, it's also true that all of these risk factors are relatively small ones and no matter how we choose to prioritize among them, we probably won't be doing much injustice to anybody.

          And arguing about it is pretty pointless. The big priority is the elderly, and we are doing a decent job with that. The time is almost at hand where supplies and policies will make the vaccine available to every American who wants it. Between now and then, the most important thing is to vaccinate as many still unvaccinated people as we can. It will not make much difference how we prioritize these categories, especially since soon we won't need to prioritize at all.

          Frankly, the whole argument feels to me like a lot of manufactured outrage on all sides.

          1. Joseph Harbin

            I agree that we won't know how all the risk factors affect people with any precision until sometime later. We are in a health emergency and need to make policy decisions in the meantime. So if we do know that Covid is affecting Black and Latino communities more than white communities, it makes sense to prioritize those communities for vaccination.

            My point is that pushing back against that policy not productive.

    2. HokieAnnie

      It's all a roundabout way of whining that they cannot use their White Privilege to jump to the head of the line. I'm seeing it a lot on Nextdoor these days as Virginia is handling vaccine distribution rather tightly to favor job categories that put the workers at higher exposure to COVID on the job now that most of the oldsters have been vaccinated. Virginia will be opening up to all comers on 4/18/21 so it's only 2 more weeks for the whiners.

      1. Joseph Harbin

        Yglesias already got the vax. He's in his 30s but his BMI is 30+, so he qualified early where he lives. He's skeptical about Blacks getting the vax for being a high-risk group despite being in a different group that allowed himself to jump the line.

        I don't know what the relative risks are for different BMI readings. There's a lot of arbitrariness to state and local policies, and I don't begrudge anyone from getting vaccinated as soon as they officially qualify. (I got my first shot yesterday, the first day my age group qualified here in California.) I do think we should be happy to see everyone vaccinated as soon as possible. Resentment about anyone getting priority is wasted energy.

        If we have data showing people in Group A have greater risk, we should make them a priority for vaccination. Whether the criterion is age, occupation, or hair color, it shouldn't matter. Nor should skin color. But to rule out skin color as a worthy differentiator is the opposite of sound policy.

      1. Joseph Harbin

        Equal protection? What's the issue?

        If it's reasonable to prioritize some people because their age or occupation puts them at a higher risk, why shouldn't people whose race puts them at a higher risk also qualify for earlier vaccination?

        1. ey81

          If it's reasonable to deny some people bail because their familial or employment status puts them at greater risk of recidivism, why shouldn't people whose race puts them at higher risk also be denied bail? (The answer, if you're wondering, is the concepts of "suspect classification" and "strict scrutiny.")

  2. golack

    Things were relatively quiet of the past couple of days, though PR did climb out of the pool (10 new cases/day/100K). But now, some things are starting to move.

    No changes in red and yellow states, but FL cases numbers jumped up a bit from 24 to 24.7, and WV numbers jumped from 23 to 23.8.
    NJ took a breather, but then climbed to the 50+ club to join MI. MI has seen deaths join its rising numbers, NJ--no so much--but still has higher death rate then MI. In MI, the UP has been hit too.
    WI still doing relatively well at 12.4, esp. since it MN (28.5) and MI (ok, across the lake) are doing poorly, and IL has numbers going up (20.8).

    CA happy at 6.6, TX holding around 12.6, its panhandle has cleared up a bit, and PA at 32.1 and rising.

Comments are closed.