@COVID_19_Canada The index scores correspond to the percent excess all-cause mortality due to COVID we expect.
For example, we expect ~6% excess mortality for the week ending Nov 18 in Canada.
@COVID_19_Canada The annual average % excess all-cause mortality for the epidemic to date in Canada is 7% (after adjusting for any excess deaths attributable to accidents, suicie, toxic drugs and heat dome).
That's about 21K untimely (extra) deaths/year. From QC data it looks like most is COVID.
@COVID_19_Canada We don't have all-cause mortality reporting for 2022 for most of Canada, but we do have it to Sep 3/22 for 4 fast-reporting provinces: AB, BC, QC and NL.
So far, during Omicron avg % excess mortality in these provinces is 12%. Their average for the epidemic to date is 9%.
@COVID_19_Canada A MAJOR concern is that excess mortality (black line in graph) has been increasing quickly in these provinces over 2022, and is currently at the highest point of the epidemic so far.
This is without all reporting in yet, especially the most recent deaths.
We should be concerned
@COVID_19_Canada If we are seeing 12% excess mortality across Canada during Omicron, this means 36,000 excess (untimely) deaths by December of this year.
By our estimates, as of Nov 18 there have been over 37,000 Omicron deaths in Canada, with 52% of these deaths undetected/unreported.
@COVID_19_Canada I focus a lot on deaths because they're the easiest indicator to assess using data sources independent of provincial data reporting differences.
They're the tip of the iceberg indicator--they give a sense of the scale of the underlying problem.
@COVID_19_Canada You can find a lot of the details in the weekly report linked at the top of this thread, and in our Excess Mortality Tracker at the link here:
@COVID_19_Canada Our estimates of total COVID mortality during Omicron are similar to the % excess mortality we expect for Canada, based on fast-reporting provinces (12-15%).
They're also similar to COVID mortality estimates from models such as IHME.
Anyway, for all the difference it makes.
@COVID_19_Canada OK, following are the weekly COVID "weather reports" for individual provinces.
Yes, we will have less number-y, easier/faster to read versions soon. These are a placeholder!
@COVID_19_Canada I suspect that "HIGH" may be the baseline. Estimated total infections have been declining from a high peak in late October, but that decline looks like it may be slowing.
Several provinces that have been stably high (NL, QC, SK) have increasing waste water signal.
@COVID_19_Canada These provinces don't appear to have gone through surges as intense as other regions over the last few weeks (see coloured grid below), so I'm not sure if this means they're about to go through the same as others.
Here are the weekly weather reports.
CANADA
VERY HIGH COVID hazard, but improving slowly
1 in 39 people infected
0.8-1.1 million infections per week
If this keeps going, Canada may fall to HIGH hazard in next week or two.
Unfortunately, no data were posted by PHAC for any Northern Territory this week, although we finally have waste water tracking for Haines Junction at the entrance to the beautiful Kluane National Park, Yukon!!!
Usually, as long as we have test positivity data for the 3 territories and data for at least the Yukon, we can try to estimate the situation compared to neighbouring provinces. However, this week we only have waste water from Haines Junction (signal is declining there BTW).
So, unfortunately this week I won't share the COVID weather report for the North (although based on trends in last week's data and waste water I think the hazard is likely currently HIGH but declining).
Sorry about that, Northern friends. We try really hard to do a report for you, but we need a bit more data. I'm hoping that we haven't lost all national reporting for the region. I may have to start digging around to see how we can standardize territorial government sources.
Finally, need incentive to start wearing your (high quality) mask again?
Here's the current @IHME_UW projection for how many lives could be saved if 80% of Canadians started masking again today.
@IHME_UW By Christmas Day, we could cut daily COVID deaths in half if 80% of Canadians start masking again today. We were doing that until Feb or March of this year. We can do it again.
What better present could we give than saving a life and preventing the grief of so many families.
@IHME_UW Without 80% of us wearing masks again, the IHME projection predicts that we'll continue to grind along for months much as we are now, with a steady 5-6% excess mortality and hospitals at 5-10% over-capacity from COVID alone, not to mention flu and RSV.
@IHME_UW Reducing excess mortality from 5% to 2.5% by masking in high risk periods might prevent 7,500 untimely deaths/year. That's double the average annual mortality of flu in Canada.
Anecdotally, there’s a lot of chatter about absenteeism and staff shortages already this school year. Even with the ongoing pandemic, there’s no need for children and education workers to be sick all the time.
We can make our classrooms safer.
Spoiler alert: The data is clear, masking protects the most vulnerable and by doing so, protects everyone.
The Data Cards now model going to school in 3 different conditions: children wearing fit tested N95, regular N95 for little kids, or unmasked.
For those 3 conditions, the model also shows two kinds of school – schools with HVAC, those schools without HVAC. Lastly, the model shows the effects of including portable air purifiers in the classroom. We modelled Corsi-Rosenthal boxes, but tested Merv13 or HEPA filters also work.
This shift in presenting the data gives us a striking picture of risk progressions.
The story the Data Cards tell is that the most important thing you can do to protect your children is to put them in a well-fitting mask.
Masks reduce risk 100- fold, no matter the school ventilation situation.
Masks drive the risk down for your family dramatically.
A few things that might help people understand differences in Canadian COVID Forecast scores across provinces....
I'll focus on comparing Alberta and British Columbia, since I get asked a lot why Alberta's scores aren't as high as BC scores in the summer, even though the provinces are adjacent.
In BC, most people live in parts of the province with winters that are considerably warmer than most provinces in Canada, including Alberta.
Even southern Alberta has MUCH colder winters than the BC lower mainland, and cooler spring and fall too. I know. I've lived in both the BC lower mainland and Calgary, and couldn't get over how summer in Calgary didn't seem to really start until July.
This graph shows infections/100K people per day in BC (pink), AB (teal) and Canada (blue) since Dec 4/21.
All provinces have essentially had the same number of infections since then--the timing of when they happened just differs.
Something you'll notice about BC is that fall/winter waves often aren't as big as in Alberta or the rest of Canada.
But....infection waves are bigger in BC from spring-summer.
This is likely because infections don't start taking off till mid-summer in other provinces because there's immunity from the fall-winter infections that hasn't worn off enough until then so that people are susceptible to a new infection.
It's sort of like the brakes have been applied to new infections after the big fall/winter wave in most province, and the pressure on those brakes starts getting lighter toward mid-summer, when infections pick up again.
It's a bit different in BC, since there historically haven't been quite as many infections in the fall/winter waves, which means the population is susceptible to new infections earlier than in colder provinces.
So, in spring and especially summer BC infections tend to take off sooner than in the rest of Canada. By contrast, in winter infections are often lower in BC.
I think we're basically seeing seasonal forcing of infections in most provinces that doesn't affect BC as much because most of the population lives in a more temperature climate.
In most of Canada, there has always been a strong seasonal forcing effect on influenza seasons--stronger than in many more temperature countries, and I suspect that's what we're seeing in most Canadian infection data except those from BC.
Scores can also differ between provinces because of intrinsic differences in population susceptibility to serious outcomes.
Alberta is the youngest province in Canada, and now that uptake of fresh vaccine doses is abysmal across Canada (AB had higher uptake than ON this past season, for example), differences in things like infection fatality and hospitalization rates between provinces are strongly driven by things we can't control, like the average age of the population and rates of underlying health issues.
So, even if AB and BC had exactly the same number of infections in the same week, the Forecast score for Alberta would be slightly lower than the score for BC, because Alberta is younger than BC.
It's also why scores for some Atlantic provinces, particularly Newfoundland and Labrador can be a fair bit higher than the Canadian average.
Newfoundland and Labrador is particularly strongly affected by this because the population is considerably older, plus higher rates of underlying health issues, plus an acute healthcare system that doesn't function quite as well as in big provinces at treating things like heart attacks (probably translating also to treatment of COVID).
And smaller provinces have suffered from poaching of healthcare staff to larger provinces that can pay more.
So, it's not always just about number of infections either. Populations differ in their susceptibility to COVID, and outcomes per infection in Canada range from the highest number of serious outcomes per infection in NL and the lowest in Alberta.
Hope this helps.
Actually, one more thing about BC.
BC is somewhat younger than QC. Its life expectancy is similar--somewhat less than QC now.
QC, followed by BC has the highest life expectancy in Canada, which means that on average the populations in these provinces are generally healthier than populations in other provinces.
Vaccination rates are also generally similar in both provinces, dating back to the start of vaccine availability.
So, infection fatality and hospitalization rates should be pretty similar in both provinces.
However, BC reports fewer than half the hospitalizations per infection than QC, and about a third of the deaths per infection as QC.
Part of this certainly reflects reporting differences between the provinces.
Reporting of serious COVID outcomes in BC has always been considerably lower than in QC, dating back to 2020.
However, the population infection fatality rate (pIFR) for BC calculated from excess mortality is 19% higher than the pIFR for QC, even though QC is slightly older (but also has a slightly healthier population).
By comparison, the pIFR for Ontario is 4% lower than for QC, pretty similar to what you'd expect based on the difference in ages of QC and ON populations.
So why is the BC pIFR higher?
It's not just toxic drugs. We correct for this, and BC actually has more complete, faster toxic drug death reporting than QC.
Plus, the age distribution of excess mortality in QC and BC is pretty similar, with respectively 90% and 80% of excess deaths happening in people 65 and older, as you'd expect for COVID.
It does look like there may be some additional drug deaths in the 45-64 year old age group in BC that aren't yet accounted for, but not enough to explain big differences in the pIFRs in the two provinces.
It is also possible that BC is actually hospitalizing fewer than half the number of people with COVID than are hospitalized in QC, which could certainly contribute to lower survival rates.
That is, maybe BC hospitalizations are much lower than QC hospitalizations not because of under-reporting, but because of "under-treatment" (not sure if that's the right word). Or maybe it's a mix of both under-reporting and under-hospitalization in BC and QC.