COVID-19: Australia turning the corner

Australia's new COVID cases are plummeting:

... and the cumulative number of cases is flattening, per this logarithmic scale:

These charts and others are courtesy of the state-owned Australian Broadcasting Corporation; they are updated daily.

We're in lockdown, with non-essential business closed, and people working from home where possible.  But in so many ways, the whole word is in a strange place right now - a singularity for which we may never have a similar experience.  The solutions are well known: test, test, test, trace known cases, and isolate.  But testing depends on the number and quality of test kits, which is quite variable around the world - as is both political and social will.

Per the top 30 countries by GDP, our death rate - the number that matters the most - is 20th, one better than China, which implemented faster and more draconian lockdowns.  the 10 worst death rates per million are:

	Country	Deaths/ 1M pop
1	Spain	368
2	Italy	329
3	Belgium	311
4	France	221
5	Netherlands	160
6	UK	156
7	Switzerland	128
8	Sweden	89
9	USA	67
10	Iran	53
	:	:
20	Australia	2

However, I have learnt from reading between the lines on the numbers is that comparisons are fraught.  Australia, for example, shares no borders with other countries, which is a great advantage.  New Zealand: even more isolated.  Numbers of cases and deaths reported is quite variable, depending on the country and how much testing they do.  Sweden is another exception, as they did not lock down, which is something they have come to regret.

My friend Bill says you should look at the US by individual State.  That puts his State, Oregon, way down with only one death per million.  New York is at top, with 32 deaths per million, followed by New Jersey with 17.  Also above Australia and China's 2 deaths per million is: Louisiana, Michigan, Conneticut, then 11 more.


Actual numbers will never be certain.  I expect that a few years after it's over, analysts will get closer to true numbers by interpolating from existing death rates in the previous few years - and we will be surprised to find the countries whose COVID-related deaths are much higher than reported, as not all COVID deaths are known cases.  This will clearly be so for countries like Indonesia, India and Iran, but may also surprise us in countries like USA, China and UK.

I expect that at least in part, the eventual numbers per country will depend on social cohesion, and willingness to heed lockdowns and isolations.  Governments can mandate or recommend, but it's up to the people as a whole whether they do the right thing.  Complacency is literally a killer.  I see it well in evidence in Sydney - although we have done well by and large by clamping down reasonably early.

How will the world look when we come out of this?  I don't know what permanent changes will be wrought, but I'm pretty sure it will take several years for economies to recover, and many already-disadvantaged people will be far, far worse off.  Expect to see a longer tail of mortality from other poverty-related causes, particularly in less developed economies and pockets of the US.

Sinus Solution

I've had chronic sinus problems all my life.  Now I've found a solution, at least partial.

Sometimes I've had particular problems breathing through my nose in bed at night.  I've noticed it's been more likely to be a problem in winter.  Summer has been much less of a problem, although the pattern has been quite obscured by other factors, such as colds - which for me come on more in autumn than winter - and allergies.

Recently this winter, I started wearing a woolly hat to bed at night.  And it's worked a treat.  I've been able to breathe through my nose most of the time at night, and my sleep has been less disrupted.  This effect is definitely unrelated to viral colds, where congestion changes over the course of days, not hours.


It's easy to say that's obvious: much of our body heat is lost through the head, and since my hair is quite short I'd clearly suffer more than average in that respect.

Yet the link between losing heat and sinus congestion is not clear.  I have discussed sinus trouble with a number of doctors, and one or two specialists - none of them has mentioned the idea that local temperature in the head can affect congestion.  I've not heard of the connection in literature either.  Doubtless it's been broached in the past, but anecdotally it doesn't seem to be ready knowledge in the medical fraternity.

The nose fulfils a number of biological functions - smell is only one of them.  In an evolutionary sense, there is variability simply because of its function as a temperature regulator: living further away from the equator favours longer noses, to help warm the incoming air; such function is not needed by humans closer to the equator, and noses tend to be broader and flatter.  That it acts as a general heat preserver does not necessarily say much about the heat exchange at a local level.  Maybe for me there's a more marked local heat exchange effect than for many other people.


This is conjecture.  All I can say with certainty - so far - is that I'm experiencing incontrovertable improvement in nighttime breathing through the nose by wearing a woolly hat to bed at night.  The effect is somewhat less pronounced during the day - perhaps because I travel in and out of airconditioned environments frequently enough to make the effects less obvious.

 So far, internet searches have turned up just a single reference to this issue - on a forum about hats.  There were several anecdotes about wearing a hat easing sinus congestion.  Just one of those comments mentioned medical advice to do so - by a surgeon, after a sinus operation.  So the truth is out there, but not well known.

I'm keen to hear of other experiences.

Shortsightedness in kids: get outside!

There is an answer to the epidemic of short-sightedness - and it's not what you'd expect.


Studies of myopia (short-sightedness) tested children for the amount they read, the amount they watched computer/tv screens, the amount they played sports - none of these were factors.

What mattered was the amount of time they spent outside.

Send your kids outside more, to reduce the likelihood that they'll need glasses.

Reported in New Scientist this month.

Hans Rosling: health insights, presentation excellence

Insights - wisdom and knowledge - are precious.  Too often information is lacking context, or context is lacking information.  News media is particularly guilty of this; most reports give scant weighting to the why over the what, and the event becomes mere spectacle.

Hans Rosling is a Swedish professor of global health.  I stumbled across his presentations in the context of software tools, but found myself riveted by Rosling's ability to communicate on his subject matter - something he brings alive, even for those who may not have an immediate interest.

Those presentations, available on the website of the excellent organisation TED (devoted to "ideas worth spreading"), are every one of them worth watching: entertaining yet full of information and insight.

In the first presentation in the above series, Rosling's discussion revolves around four dimensions: time, health, wealth, and location (region/country).  He gives his audience a good understanding of how the other three factors affect health outcomes, yet argues cogently for a more complex perspective on factors that affect health.

His second presentation is briefer, but includes an impressive feat which might seem gratuitous, yet he does it with purpose: to illustrate his point on achieving better health outcomes that "the seemingly impossible is possible".  I won't divulge the climax: something that has to be seen for itself.


Rosling is, first and foremost, a Subject Matter Expert.  But crucially he is a very effective communicator.  He presents with knowledge and clarity, in a way that engages the audience.  Part of the 'wow' factor lies in the fluid use of  the presentation software he uses, which leaves the world's Powerpoints for dead.  And if you explore the links, you'll find out that that software was originally developed by Rosling's foundation, no doubt to achieve the sort of communication at which Rosling excels.

Alternative medicine bites back

I was talking to a practitioner of Ayurvedic medicine. This is an Indian-originated wholistic/traditional/form, developed over a few thousand years.

He illustrated some of the problems with western medical practice, particularly the corruption by pharmaceutical companies, who routinely bias their research and bribe doctors to use their products. That's a fair cop, and I depicted this aspect as being one of the cruder manifestations of capitalistic infiltration of the western "tradition".

There are of course other aspects of evidence based treatment that are not so tainted, and in fact the analysis and research that takes place outside pressures of profit are manifestly more worthy of being taken seriously. I would also suggest in turn that tradition (stretching back for centuries) does not ipso facto amount to proof.


One interesting point he mentioned was that in his practice, he often referred his patients on to regular medical doctors when he felt it appropriate - and that they in turn sometimes referred patients to him. This was a new one on me - although I guess that amounts to the "complementary" in the term "complementary and alternative medicine". This is by no means the norm. I have in the past, at the urging of friends, tried a couple of alternative treatments. I vaguely recall an acupuncture session once that seemed to ease some flu symptoms. But another time, I attended a naturopath, who prescribed a homeopathic remedy for what seemed to be rashes on my legs and feet. However, they turned out to be mosquito bites (from exposing my feet in bed at night to keep cool). That experience greatly reduced my confidence in alternative treatment. Later, there was a case in the news about a naturopath in the Hunter region who, from memory, treated a girl who turned out to have major organ failure, and died because she wasn't given proper treatment. The naturopath, naturally, ended up before the courts.

My trust in alternative medicine is improved whenever I see that the practice is more properly integrated with the western stream which, whatever its faults, can generally tell when a horse is a horse. You get your cowboys in any profession. And how much more emphasis does that complementary/alternative medicine place on wholistic health - that is, keeping people in good health rather than treating the failures? Lord knows western medicine doesn't plough enough resource into prevention - which is far cheaper than cure.

Glucosamine questioned

Choice, Australia's leading consumer advocacy organisation, has characterised glucosamine as a placebo.

Glucosamine, derived from sources such as crustaceans and grain starch, is a widely-used medicine for arthritis.


Choice's research (overview here) was effectively a literature review, taking in studies up to 2005, although it also examined the stated content of a number of products containing the substance.

As a result, Choice expressed doubt that glucosamine is effective for osteoarthritis pain, suggesting strongly that the only benefit was the placebo effect.

Further, they said there's more benefit to sufferers in regular exercise and losing weight.


I have a personal stake in this, having been diagnosed with osteoarthritis of the knee a few years ago. This condition has two outward effects for me: some aching in the knees, and the occasional quite bad twinge when a leg twists about the knee.

The doctor had some x-rays done, and showed me in them a build-up of spurs of cartilage around the knee. He prescribed glucosamine, and said it would help reduce further buildup of the unwanted cartilage that was causing the problems.

So I set out on a course of this over-the-counter medicine, at the dosage that he recommended. However, having been back to a doctor to verify the recommended daily dosage, I found GPs are somewhat more vague on this area than I first thought.

Now glucosamine of itself is an unstable substance, and usually compounded with any of several other substances, including sulphate (as my doctor prescribed), hydrochloride, potassium chloride, etc. But I can vouch that the range of available products is difficult to compare, as they quite frequently don't state their equivalent dosage of the active ingredient. This Choice mentions, perversely stating that some products don't have enough glucosamine sulphate to be effective. This from an organisation that said it wasn't effective anyway.

At one point, not being confident that the doctors were confident of an 'appropriate' dosage, I bought a product that contained a fair bit more active ingredient than I had been taking to date.
Within a few days of bumping up the dosage, the intensity and presence of the osteoarthritis reduced very noticeably. Placebo? I was sceptical, and not optimistic of any change, but was surprised by the result.

I still don't know if it is effective in reducing excess cartilage buildup. The Wikipedia article actually states the opposite - cartilage increase - as a positive effect may occur.

Uncertainty on a number of fronts: effectiveness for pain relief, effect on cartilage, and dosage. Wikipedia's article suggests there remains insufficient scientific consensus, although various international bodies recommend it as a treatment, including recommending the sulphate compound for the knee.


An industry ad in Saturday's Herald responded to Choice: "independent research proves glucosamine helps maintain the normal structure of cartilage in the joints". Also: "Choice Magazine found about 75% of their online members who were arthritis sufferers claimed... benefit from using glucosamine" - although that begs a question of who was motivated to respond.


Meantime, I'm going to keep taking a decent dose of glucosamine sulphate, plus regular swimming, as the best I can do for my knees.