Analysis of COVID-19 deaths for the month of June reveals some intriguing realities about this mysterious pandemic. And a few surprises.
It is possible to successfully suppress the coronavirus even without a vaccine. More than 20 major developed countries have done so, if we regard fewer deaths than five per million inhabitants per month as success.
This is not the headline, however. The glaring reality the June figures confirm is that the pandemic is far from under control globally.
Total deaths worldwide during June were 135,358. That is only slightly below the May tally of 142,532. The grand total at the end of June was 513,211, according to Worldometers.
Best 10 highly developed countries by deaths per million
Taiwan, New Zealand and Slovakia achieved the creditable outcome of zero deaths in June.
Australia came close to this until June 24 when a Victorian man in his 80s died, the first fatality in 31 days. Another was recorded the following day in NSW, although this was a reclassification of an April death.
Eleven countries recorded fewer than one death per million population, as shown in the chart, below.
After these 11, another 12 recorded deaths per million between one and five. Eight recorded deaths between five and 10 per million. This suggests close to two thirds of the world’s developed countries have beaten the pandemic, or soon will.
Note: Countries analysed here are the 52 major nations — above 1 million inhabitants — classified by the UNDP as very highly developed. These are most of the world’s wealthy countries with strong health care systems and which we assume provide reliable data, although this is an assumption. Full data on all countries, including those outside this list of 52, is available at Worldometers.
Worst 10 developed countries by deaths per million
At the other end of the spectrum, 10 countries copped more than 25 deaths per million inhabitants, as shown in the next chart. Four conspicuous failures recorded more than 60 deaths per million in June — the USA, Sweden, the UK and Chile.
This is an intriguing list. Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Kuwait are run by unelected families or individuals. The United States and Chile have self-proclaimed billionaire tycoons as president running unconventional and divisive administrations.
British Prime Minister Boris Johnson took control of his Conservative Party and the nation between elections last July by surfing the wave of anti-European Union sentiment. He subsequently won the December 2019 national election. Canada and Sweden are liberal democracies with progressive or centrist federal governments.
Success in Western Europe
Stunning reversals of the course of the pandemic have occurred in several European countries most severely whacked in the early weeks. Spain is the standout with a dreadful toll of 8,464 dead in March and then an even worse April when 16,079 lives were lost. The Spanish government’s strict shutdown took effect in May with just 3,487 deaths. June was even better with 325 deaths — one fiftieth of April’s losses, or 2%.
Switzerland’s bell curve is almost as impressive as Spain’s with June deaths at 43, which is 3.3% of April’s 1,304. Other western European countries to slash fatalities in June to below 10% of their April toll were Finland, Austria, Germany, Norway and Denmark.
These nations should soon be able to declare victory also.
Disaster in the Americas
The opposite is happening in North and South America where several countries watched the pandemic explode in western Europe but failed to take the precautions adopted in Australia, New Zealand, Taiwan and Malaysia. Canada, Chile and the USA are all in the bottom 10 by deaths per million in June.
Brazil and Peru, while not very highly developed countries and hence not part of this analysis, have also been badly impacted. In fact, those five nations which comprise 8.1% of the world’s population accounted for 48.1% of the world’s June deaths.
We shall now see what happens in July, and hope more countries emulate the efforts of those showing definite reward for effort. Current trajectories, however, suggest many won’t.
As usual, the fundamental issue is leadership. Thereafter, resources ie medical, both personnel and infrastructure. Even those nations caught on the hop ie Spain, Japan were able to re-group.
Failed Leadership self evident. Let’s start with AMERICA!
Tragedy . . . is all those individuals and families. Dead or destroyed! Let’s all build a monument . . . and mourn. “The world could end the pandemic, but won’t”??
To say that Russia is run by “unelected families or individuals” is utter nonsense.
Then to say “Brazil and Peru, while not very highly developed countries” is even more nonsense.
Sorry, but Crikey should be better than this.
Any review of COVID19 that doesn’t reference China, then references others as you point out John is more concerned with being politically correct than giving honest analysis. I also found it interesting that the day after a major, major announcement on Australia’s defence and strategic posture moving forwards we get a 10 part series on how the Rush verdict has affected journalism. The bite is going out of Crikey, it appears to be moving onto the ‘central’ ground once occupied by the old Fairfax papers.
If there is one thing the bien pissants cannot, will not, abide nor tolerate it is having their comfy delusions disturbed.
Seems to be rather a high price to pay for momentary feel-goodizm – the longer one ignores reality the harder the consequences hit.
Why is it nonsense, John McLeod?
The United Nations Development Program classifies all countries in the world into levels of advancement based on specific criteria. Brazil and Peru are not in the top category ‘very high human development’.
I’ll let John answer for himself but firstly, Alan, you might be able to take a cue from Lancert or ‘Science’ or the programme at John Hopkins in regard to an approach to the topic and not be too concerned with UN or WHO approaches (which, typically have their own agendas).
Secondly, the effects of Covid-19 are not any big deal. What is a big deal is that the animal-human transmissions are expected to increase. For any country the maximum theoretical death rate is 2% of 40% of a population which compares to people dying in their sleep each night.
Following the paragraph “Worst 10 developed countries” (but ought to read : Ten worst developed ..) in which a magical “25 deaths per million” has not been justified (and trivial in any event) we are presented with the heinous value of 60 deaths per million”.
Alan, just how large is one million and could you compare that number to “60”? I will provide an example. There are one million millimetres in a kilometre. Look at the ruler on desk and identify the 6cm marl. THEN compare that distance to a kilometre or imagine 60 millimetres sprinkled over one kilometre.
To infer a correlation between democracy and deaths by Covid-19 is a tad mateurish. Even if the correlation exists (at some level of significance) the causality would need to be explained. However, with regard to the the following “offending” paragraph your own remarks refute a correlation so what is the point of the remark?
On the one hand, Alan, just where in the world would say that ‘democracy’ operates effectively? It is a clip-board exercise to see that an extreme minority party can form a coalition with a major party. Then there is the knowledge base of the electorate to take into account. Secondly, there is a process for elections in Russia and of the Asian “tigers” but the process may not accord with your sensibilities. The reference “families” may be relevant to North Korea or the House of Saud but that is about it. As an aside, just which African state would you say emulates a democracy that would pass as one in the first world? No. Not SA (or the proceedings of the gov where the Gini Coefficient [a measure of wealth disparity] is above 50%; mid 30s for the USA and Australia).
As a general remark the articles in Crikey, contrary to the claims of the management, are wafting towards the lowest common multiple of the electorate with its desire to to be “sensationalist” Just be analytic (which ought to suffice).
I wonder how many of the fatalities in Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Kuwait are Arabs and how many are migrant workers from South and South East Asia. I suspect and fear the latter will be severely over-represented.
“This is an intriguing list…” Then a reference to the types of government. The results seem to show that the type of government has nothing to do with the result. Some dictatorships, some liberal democracies, some in between. Among the most successful Singapore runs a one-party system, China and its territory Hong Kong have never been democracies and Malaysia is somewhere in between, others with varying levels of democracy. Thailand and Vietnam have also been notably successful, one a military dictatorship, the other a one-party state. So the only intriguing thing here seems to be that some dictatorships and some democracies have been very successful and some have utterly failed, including the one that has long held itself up as the democratic example for all others to follow.
Another ‘witch doctor’ analysis I’m sorry to say.
> It is possible to successfully suppress the coronavirus even without a vaccine.
Yes Alan : agreed(!) but do NOT confuse ‘suppression’ with ‘elimination’. If we remained “locked down” for year the virus may well have “appeared” to have disappeared but the reality would be no more than that. All any virus requires is a host and we’re not seeing a 2nd (or further) round for nothing.
> More than 20 major developed countries have done so, if we regard fewer deaths than
> five per million inhabitants per month as success.
The upper bound on deaths, Alan (see Lancet or any authoritative Journal) is 2% of 40% of the population. Sweden applied ‘distancing’ but no more. Sweden has a population of 10 million so the upper-bound is about 80 thousand people which is fractional when compared to the actual
deaths. Your “good” and “bad” tables are of no value at all other than for the arithmetic; certainly NOT for extrapolation.
Then there is the issue of recording which was far from uniform even within countries. For those that were going to die within the next fortnight in any event but happened to have Covid-19 such persons were counted WITH the covid-19 deaths whereas those deaths ought to have been subtracted.
The greatest criticism of the article presupposes that the time for analysis is now. By all means collect data but sitting in judgement over Sweden or (e.g.) NZ will NOT be useful for another three to five years. In the meantime, Alan, keep an eye on the “new” G4 which is a derivative of H1N1
A note to John McLeod. Try to get used to it John. Frankly, I’m sick of correcting the ignorance of the scribblers at Crikey and I do have to leave for months at a time to take a lie-down. This online neo chat is about two grades up from FB and identical with News Corp but peddles the identity and post-modern stuff; the opposite side of the coin as it were.
The corrections to the articles of the writers are appreciated by a minority of the readership but generally not appreciated by the majority of the readership – who would prefer to remain in their Crikey-massaged padded cells.
Thanks for the ‘lived’ experience Erasmus, validates my understanding of China and the wider Asian response. Thailand notified WHO that they had confirmed a COVID19 case the day after China first published the Cv genome quickly followed by Japan and Korea.
• On 12 January 2020, China shared the genetic sequence of the novel coronavirus for countries to use in developing specific diagnostic kits.
• On 13 January 2020, the Ministry of Public Health, Thailand reported the first imported case of lab-confirmed novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) from Wuhan, Hubei Province, China.
• On 15 January 2020, the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, Japan (MHLW) reported an imported case of laboratory-confirmed 2019-novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) from Wuhan,
Hubei Province, China.
On 20 January 2020, National IHR Focal Point (NFP) for Republic of Korea reported the first case of novel coronavirus in the Republic of Korea.
Situation update:
• As of 20 January 2020, 282 confirmed cases of 2019-nCoV have been reported from four countries including China (278 cases), Thailand (2 cases), Japan (1 case) and the Republic of Korea (1 case);
In essence they were onto it from the very first opportunity having experienced COVID19’s SARS predecessor.
The Trump Administration, for entirely its own purposes, is referring to the current strand of the coronavirus as the China Virus. Perhaps we will just have to tread water until a type of coronavirus presents itself in the USA – which could be referred to as the American Virus.
The bigger picture is that the choice on a host of matters from Covid-19 to the control of the Pacific is one of either cooperation or conflict. The choice is actually binary and from about late 2017 the White House as elected conflict. I can foresee someone with a blood nose within 18 months if a 2nd term is obtained (and it could be Morrison).
Thanks, that perspective is what we need to understand how Vietnam coped. The national culture is a very important factor. A similar approach wouldn’t work in Indonesia where I lived for several years under the nominally authoritarian rule of Soeharto. No heavy government hand was felt by the average citizen there because, as somebody pointed out, if you tell Indonesians to do something they are not willing to do they smile and say yes. (It would be rude to refuse.) Then they do whatever they originally intended to do. We Australians, bronzed Anzacs all, are much more obedient and in the effort to control the pandemic that’s working in our favour.
Sorry, I meant to put this response after Erasmus’ helpful eyewitness explanation of how Vietnam coped.