【#小马四点日记 0524】
➊. #发病率与感染率都第一名☝️
不是什么值得骄傲的事情,反而是我们需要担心的。
前卫生部长祖基菲里,引述统计数据,我国的冠病发病率(Incidence Rate),已经超越印度和美国,更成为了全球发病率最高的国家!
大马每天每100万人中,有200.61宗确诊病例,印度:186.45宗、加拿大:120.05宗、德国:96.63宗,美国:85.62宗。马来西亚是最高的!
东南亚国家前一周的粗率感染率(Crude Infection Rate),大马以每10万人中,有11.99人染疫,成为感染率最高的东南亚国家。
这些数字是我们在昨天接近7千宗的时候,已经多少感受到紧迫感了。但,还是很没有概念到底怎么一回事。
再简单一点就是:「我们都有非常高的几率感染COVID-19」。Wake Up Call ~
▪️▪️▪️▪️▪️▪️▪️▪️▪️▪️▪️▪️
➋. #单单5月就新增了742宗死亡病例
昨天新增6976宗确诊病例,再创最高纪录,距离7k也只有24人的数字。
其他数字也创新高,分别是
🟥治疗中:5万7022人
🟥加护病房:681人
昨天也通报49人不幸离世。单单5月的前23天,国内就多了742宗死亡病例,占过去COVID-19总死亡人数的33%。意思就是:发病率高,致死人数也跟着提高。
一般周末收集到的筛检人数,会相对来说比较少,但我们数字已经吓死我们了。所以,6976还不能反映真实现况。
▪️▪️▪️▪️▪️▪️▪️▪️▪️▪️▪️▪️
➌. #英超结束
2020-21赛季英超落幕。总结一下
🏆冠军:Man City
欧冠资格:Man City、Man Utd、Liverpool、Chelsea
降级:Fulham、WestBrom、Sheff Utd
Man City主场5比0大胜 Everton。亮点是确定在这个赛就告别的Aguero,65分钟替补出场,连进两球,为自己的英超生涯画上了完美的句点。下一站,应该就是披上巴萨战袍吧。
⚽️Harry Kane:23球14助攻,包办英超最佳射手和助攻王
今年也是历史第一次,客场赢球多过主场的。客场153胜,主场144胜。
值得一提的是,虽然中间几次因为有球员中covid而有一些状况,但还是让最多球迷的英超联赛顺利打完38场。这在这个时代,算是一项丰功伟绩了。
英超结束,接下来寄望NBA季后赛了。我的湖人今早丢掉了第一场,没关系,这是试探敌人的虚实。
▪️▪️▪️▪️▪️▪️▪️▪️▪️▪️▪️▪️
➍. #眼睛看不到不代表不存在
早安你好,今天会更好,我是小马。来跟我打声招呼吧~
昨天看完了韩剧《Move to Heaven》,那句「眼睛看不到,不代表不存在;只要你记得,就永远不会消失。」很应景,也跟电影《Coco》一样的概念。
现在发生的一切,都要学会豁达了。
▫▫▫▫▫▫
#看完记得帮我LIKE和SHARE #感恩
incidence rate 在 Facebook 的精選貼文
还不怕吗?
incidence rate 在 Roger Chung 鍾一諾 Facebook 的最佳貼文
今早為Asian Medical Students Association Hong Kong (AMSAHK)的新一屆執行委員會就職典禮作致詞分享嘉賓,題目為「疫情中的健康不公平」。
感謝他們的熱情款待以及為整段致詞拍了影片。以下我附上致詞的英文原稿:
It's been my honor to be invited to give the closing remarks for the Inauguration Ceremony for the incoming executive committee of the Asian Medical Students' Association Hong Kong (AMSAHK) this morning. A video has been taken for the remarks I made regarding health inequalities during the COVID-19 pandemic (big thanks to the student who withstood the soreness of her arm for holding the camera up for 15 minutes straight), and here's the transcript of the main body of the speech that goes with this video:
//The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, continues to be rampant around the world since early 2020, resulting in more than 55 million cases and 1.3 million deaths worldwide as of today. (So no! It’s not a hoax for those conspiracy theorists out there!) A higher rate of incidence and deaths, as well as worse health-related quality of life have been widely observed in the socially disadvantaged groups, including people of lower socioeconomic position, older persons, migrants, ethnic minority and communities of color, etc. While epidemiologists and scientists around the world are dedicated in gathering scientific evidence on the specific causes and determinants of the health inequalities observed in different countries and regions, we can apply the Social Determinants of Health Conceptual Framework developed by the World Health Organization team led by the eminent Prof Sir Michael Marmot, world’s leading social epidemiologist, to understand and delineate these social determinants of health inequalities related to the COVID-19 pandemic.
According to this framework, social determinants of health can be largely categorized into two types – 1) the lower stream, intermediary determinants, and 2) the upper stream, structural and macro-environmental determinants. For the COVID-19 pandemic, we realized that the lower stream factors may include material circumstances, such as people’s living and working conditions. For instance, the nature of the occupations of these people of lower socioeconomic position tends to require them to travel outside to work, i.e., they cannot work from home, which is a luxury for people who can afford to do it. This lack of choice in the location of occupation may expose them to greater risk of infection through more transportation and interactions with strangers. We have also seen infection clusters among crowded places like elderly homes, public housing estates, and boarding houses for foreign domestic helpers. Moreover, these socially disadvantaged people tend to have lower financial and social capital – it can be observed that they were more likely to be deprived of personal protective equipment like face masks and hand sanitizers, especially during the earlier days of the pandemic. On the other hand, the upper stream, structural determinants of health may include policies related to public health, education, macroeconomics, social protection and welfare, as well as our governance… and last, but not least, our culture and values. If the socioeconomic and political contexts are not favorable to the socially disadvantaged, their health and well-being will be disproportionately affected by the pandemic. Therefore, if we, as a society, espouse to address and reduce the problem of health inequalities, social determinants of health cannot be overlooked in devising and designing any public health-related strategies, measures and policies.
Although a higher rate of incidence and deaths have been widely observed in the socially disadvantaged groups, especially in countries with severe COVID-19 outbreaks, this phenomenon seems to be less discussed and less covered by media in Hong Kong, where the disease incidence is relatively low when compared with other countries around the world. Before the resurgence of local cases in early July, local spread of COVID-19 was sporadic and most cases were imported. In the earlier days of the pandemic, most cases were primarily imported by travelers and return-students studying overseas, leading to a minor surge between mid-March and mid-April of 874 new cases. Most of these cases during Spring were people who could afford to travel and study abroad, and thus tended to be more well-off. Therefore, some would say the expected social gradient in health impact did not seem to exist in Hong Kong, but may I remind you that, it is only the case when we focus on COVID-19-specific incidence and mortality alone. But can we really deduce from this that COVID-19-related health inequality does not exist in Hong Kong? According to the Social Determinants of Health Framework mentioned earlier, the obvious answer is “No, of course not.” And here’s why…
In addition to the direct disease burden, the COVID-19 outbreak and its associated containment measures (such as economic lockdown, mandatory social distancing, and change of work arrangements) could have unequal wider socioeconomic impacts on the general population, especially in regions with pervasive existing social inequalities. Given the limited resources and capacity of the socioeconomically disadvantaged to respond to emergency and adverse events, their general health and well-being are likely to be unduly and inordinately affected by the abrupt changes in their daily economic and social conditions, like job loss and insecurity, brought about by the COVID-19 outbreak and the corresponding containment and mitigation measures of which the main purpose was supposedly disease prevention and health protection at the first place. As such, focusing only on COVID-19 incidence or mortality as the outcomes of concern to address health inequalities may leave out important aspects of life that contributes significantly to people’s health. Recently, my research team and I collaborated with Sir Michael Marmot in a Hong Kong study, and found that the poor people in Hong Kong fared worse in every aspects of life than their richer counterparts in terms of economic activity, personal protective equipment, personal hygiene practice, as well as well-being and health after the COVID-19 outbreak. We also found that part of the observed health inequality can be attributed to the pandemic and its related containment measures via people’s concerns over their own and their families’ livelihood and economic activity. In other words, health inequalities were contributed by the pandemic even in a city where incidence is relatively low through other social determinants of health that directly concerned the livelihood and economic activity of the people. So in this study, we confirmed that focusing only on the incident and death cases as the outcomes of concern to address health inequalities is like a story half-told, and would severely truncate and distort the reality.
Truth be told, health inequality does not only appear after the pandemic outbreak of COVID-19, it is a pre-existing condition in countries and regions around the world, including Hong Kong. My research over the years have consistently shown that people in lower socioeconomic position tend to have worse physical and mental health status. Nevertheless, precisely because health inequality is nothing new, there are always voices in our society trying to dismiss the problem, arguing that it is only natural to have wealth inequality in any capitalistic society. However, in reckoning with health inequalities, we need to go beyond just figuring out the disparities or differences in health status between the poor and the rich, and we need to raise an ethically relevant question: are these inequalities, disparities and differences remediable? Can they be fixed? Can we do something about them? If they are remediable, and we can do something about them but we haven’t, then we’d say these inequalities are ultimately unjust and unfair. In other words, a society that prides itself in pursuing justice must, and I say must, strive to address and reduce these unfair health inequalities. Borrowing the words from famed sociologist Judith Butler, “the virus alone does not discriminate,” but “social and economic inequality will make sure that it does.” With COVID-19, we learn that it is not only the individuals who are sick, but our society. And it’s time we do something about it.
Thank you very much!//
Please join me in congratulating the incoming executive committee of AMSAHK and giving them the best wishes for their future endeavor!
Roger Chung, PhD
Assistant Professor, CUHK JC School of Public Health and Primary Care, @CUHK Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong 香港中文大學 - CUHK
Associate Director, CUHK Institute of Health Equity
incidence rate 在 Incidence and Prevalence - Everything you need to know 的推薦與評價
This video is ideal for anyone who's just diving into clinical epidemiology. As you will learn, incidence is a measure of risk whereas ... ... <看更多>
incidence rate 在 7 Day Incidence Rates: Countries of the world | OSCOVIDA 的推薦與評價
Location Population Cases in last 7 days 7 Day Incidence Rate
Slovakia 5,459,643 79,461 1,455.4
Czechia 10,708,982 132,041 1,233.0
Belgium 11,492,641 120,133 1,045.3 ... <看更多>
相關內容