national

Japan reports 49,979 new coronavirus cases

36 Comments

Japan on Wednesday reported 49,979 new coronavirus cases.

The Tokyo metropolitan government reported 5,327 new cases, up 80 from Tuesday.

The number of infected people hospitalized with severe symptoms in Tokyo is 14, down three from Tuesday, health officials said. The nationwide number is 204, down 21 from Tuesday.

Other prefectures reporting high numbers were Osaka (3,595), Kanagawa (3,229), Hokkaido (3,088), Aichi (2,955), Saitama (2,762), Hyogo (1,962) and Chiba (1,900).

The number of coronavirus-related deaths was 96.

© Japan Today

©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.

36 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

Tokyo reports 5,327 new coronavirus cases

Huge numbers again!

And the 8th wave is coming soon!!

-23 ( +7 / -30 )

Down 25% from a week ago and down 50% from two weeks ago, I hope this trend continues for a while and that the next wave is very small indeed as we have seen elsewhere.

Yes its inevitable that more waves will come, but they will almost certainly be tolerable like in every other country with an earlier outbreak, and shouldn't affect our way of life or strain the healthcare system.

I think mask use among the general public will decline sharply when they see the millions of happy, vibrant and full-of-life tourists flocking to our cities, and seeing people maskless is more normalised.

On a side note: I'm sure the person who translated 入院 治療 等を要する者 as simply 'hospitalized' is adequatelg proficient in both Japanese and English but this was a poor unnuanced translation, owing to the more esoteric and technical language used (afterall we can't expect all translators to be familiar with all terminology in all fields). Sadly this has led some people to believe that there are half a million people undergoing active treatment!

4 ( +10 / -6 )

PickleToday  05:05 pm JST

Down 25% from a week ago and down 50% from two weeks ago, I hope this trend continues for a while and that the next wave is very small indeed as we have seen elsewhere.

Which trend?

The one where Tokyo's rates are up about 3500% from this day last year?

-7 ( +7 / -14 )

My whole family just had it. All three of us. Sore throat, fever and general feeling of being under the weather. We all recovered with no trips to a doctor or hospital in four days. I am sure some people get it a lot worse. However, for most of the population in Japan, it probably won’t be worse than a bad cold fortunately. So when some posters here write ‘ huge numbers ‘ ‘ another wave is coming’ , just ignore them

0 ( +8 / -8 )

@painkiller

That's two points of reference in a broad timescale. A trend is by definition an ongoing current development.

Using the word incorrectly as you are means that nobody could ever say if any problem is improving or getting worse, only how it compares to a specific point that you have determined. You're effectively eliminating the active nature of the word and there is only 'then' (whatever point you decide fits your agenda best) and 'now'.

Will the trend only have improved by your definition when daily cases fall below those on this day last year?

5 ( +7 / -2 )

Also for the record, cases in Tokyo today are just 44% higher than this date one year ago and the trajectory has been on a steep decline for months, so it should be just a few weeks now before we are in a better position than one year ago.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Panic everybody!!

This daily reporting really needs to stop sometime soon.

-1 ( +8 / -9 )

Still reporting this?

0 ( +8 / -8 )

This daily reporting really needs to stop sometime soon.

Why?

1 ( +9 / -8 )

Sadly this has led some people to believe that there are half a million people undergoing active treatment!

They're fully aware - the faux doomer up top included. Also, it's actually pretty funny when you realize that the other guy has been rilling up this comments section for months based on just that translation.

1 ( +7 / -6 )

think mask use among the general public will decline sharply when they see the millions of happy, vibrant and full-of-life tourists flocking to our cities, and seeing people maskless is more normalised.

I think that it is the only hope to see people give up these masks one day. A large number of the Japanese I talk to privately tell me that the only reason that they keep wearing them is that everybody else is doing it! The idea that these masks may never go is really frightening.

4 ( +7 / -3 )

I think a valid point is being made, that people seem to be ignoring.

There have been more Covid-19 deaths in Japan in 2022 than in any year prior.

-Fully vaccinated, much of the population boosted at least once, some of the population boosted twice, about to be boosted a third time with the new formula.

-Most of the population masked.

-Weaker variant of the virus.

-More treatment options available.

-More experience managing the virus.

This begs the question: why were strict measures acceptable two years ago, or a year ago, but not now? What changed?

What was the point of shutting down bars and limiting dining hours last year? Why has the border been closed so long? Why push testing and the COCOA app on people only to abandon it?

If these policies shouldn't be in place now, they should have never been put into place to begin with.

My guess is Japan, like all other countries, will stop testing, and then pretend vaccines solved the problem.

3 ( +9 / -6 )

Wait until we hear from the big fat controller for his words of wisdom

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Wolfyboy…. That’s a lot to unpack there but it can be summed up completely with this …. Omicron is by far and away the deadliest variant and it was because of vaccines that were not available during alpha and delta that the death count and serious case count hasn’t been drastically higher …. However, there are still 500k people correctly listed as hospitalized rather in a hospital or hotel…. Under the care of Drs and nurses around the clock! The number of net hospitalizations is flattering which is not good …. Just yesterday it was a net zero …. As for “strict measures” …. We’ve never had any so not quite sure what you’re point is …. Border controls? Every country has had them…. Masking ? This is Japan…. Long before Covid… the society was always masked up …. When the healthcare system which includes healthcare professionals have recovered for total collapse…. Come spread your glee .!. Currently… we are nowhere near the end….

-6 ( +5 / -11 )

However, there are still 500k people correctly listed as hospitalized rather in a hospital or hotel…. Under the care of Drs and nurses around the clock

Currently:

Truly “hospitalized”: 19,347 out of 48,088 beds.  

ICU: 918 out of 5556 beds.

Hotels(No doctors/nurses here) 7,932out of 68,968 beds.  

https://www.mhlw.go.jp/stf/seisakunitsuite/newpage_00023.html

2 ( +5 / -3 )

why.why again.why again?when will you stop this "reports"?

-4 ( +5 / -9 )

I think a valid point is being made, that people seem to be ignoring.

There have been more Covid-19 deaths in Japan in 2022 than in any year prior.

-Fully vaccinated, much of the population boosted at least once, some of the population boosted twice, about to be boosted a third time with the new formula.

-Most of the population masked.

How did you eliminate the likelihood that cases and deaths would be higher if there were no vaccines and other measures?

2 ( +5 / -3 )

This begs the question: why were strict measures acceptable two years ago, or a year ago, but not now? What changed?

Compare the rates of hospitalization and death per number of infected people, it should be obvious by now.

If these policies shouldn't be in place now, they should have never been put into place to begin with.

So if a patient gets weaned of antibiotics when his infection subsides, do that mean he should have never been prescribed antibiotics? The measures were much more effective for previous variants, and also much more necessary when vaccines and better treatments were not available. Now the cost of the measures do not justify the much lower benefit obtained from them, and they are also less urgently needed, since the risk that comes with the infection is gradually decreasing.

My guess is Japan, like all other countries, will stop testing, and then pretend vaccines solved the problem.

When your guesses are all based in a wilfull lack of understanding about the current situation they become meaningless. The scientific consensus is that vaccines have been a great help against the pandemic, do you have any actual scientific argument to prove the scientific community is wrong?

1 ( +6 / -5 )

How did you eliminate the likelihood that cases and deaths would be higher if there were no vaccines and other measures?

Ian,

I didn't.

What I do assert is that that number of lives saved can only be speculated by considering theoretical mortality rates and excess annual deaths. I call it theoretical because the actual number of infections (asymptomatic included) is impossible to count.

Therefore I question the extent to which cases and deaths would be higher if there were no vaccines and/or other measures.

I'm not a scientist but I have spent extensive amounts of time perusing numbers and data that just don't add up to me.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

Now the cost of the measures do not justify the much lower benefit obtained from them, and they are also less urgently needed, since the risk that comes with the infection is gradually decreasing.

How so? The number of deaths are higher. Also, got a source to support that conclusion?

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

Ian,

I didn't

Which makes your point completely invalid. Because for that you need to prove this likehood is not valid, even if the experts in the field clearly say this is the case.

*Therefore I question the extent to which cases and deaths would be higher if there were no vaccines and/or other measures.*

And what epidemiological and statistical arguments do you have to question it? obviously you can't just make an appeal to your authority, so the experts in the field that say vaccines and other measures have had a huge impact on the decrease of the risk (and can show their data and methods in their scientific reports) have a much stronger argument than just saying "I don't know about the topic but everybody must be wrong".

Perusing data has no meaning if you have not put the necessary effort and time to actually understand how to examine that data. Either you can present your scientific arguments in a way that can be examined and qualified or you have to refer to the experts that do it for a living.

How so? The number of deaths are higher. Also, got a source to support that conclusion?

The risk after infection is incredibly lower this year compared with last year, Exactly one year ago there were less than 2000 positive cases, but still 40 deaths, if the death rate was the same the 50,000 cases of today would mean 1000 deaths, instead we have 10 times less this number, it is not rocket science and anybody looking at the data with attention would have noticed this immediately.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

The new government mandated Covid reporting rules had the intended effect - lower numbers and minimal business disruptions. Brilliant!

0 ( +4 / -4 )

The new government mandated Covid reporting rules had the intended effect - lower numbers and minimal business disruptions. Brilliant!

How does not reporting names and addresses of people of low risk lower the number of cases?

2 ( +6 / -4 )

Nearing the end of a 2-week visit here to visit family, my observation is that nobody really gives a hoot about Covid anymore, same as back home in the US. Everyone seems to know that it's just a fact of life at this point. It really hasn't been particularly fatal here, as even though there are a ton of old people, most people eat pretty healthy- tons of fermented foods, not much processed crap, etc. Unlike back home, there aren't a bunch of 400-pound slobs waddling around here, which cuts down significantly on fatalities. The elephant in the room in the US was that the Covid ICUs at the hospitals were mostly populated by obese people (a bunch of elephants in the room, I guess). But acknowedging that would have been 'fat shaming', so we had to pretend that we were all equally vulnerable.

The masks here in Japan are a charade, and most people seem to realize this, because as soon as the doors close they come off. Hopefully as time goes on more and more people have the guts to go against the grain and shed them.

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

And the 8th wave is coming soon!!

For as long as the media wants to drag this thing out.. waves will forever be rolling in.. starting to feel who seriously gives af anymore?

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

The risk after infection is incredibly lower this year compared with last year, Exactly one year ago there were less than 2000 positive cases, but still 40 deaths, if the death rate was the same the 50,000 cases of today would mean 1000 deaths, instead we have 10 times less this number, it is not rocket science and anybody looking at the data with attention would have noticed this immediately.

Doesn't matter in the greater context of what I'm saying. There are still lots of people dying. A higher number of people dying than before.

The main moral justification for lockdowns, school closures, mask mandates, and vaccine mandates, was:

"If it saves lives, we should do it"

...without regard for the effect it will have economically, socially, or within the scope of personal freedoms. That is to say, if you didn't support these measures, you didn't care about the lives of those vulnerable and were acting selfishly. Not sure if you were one of these people. I've heard it enough to generalize the "follow the science" crowd.

But, now I am hearing a completely different tone on this. All of a sudden, it's now about

"weighing the costs and benefits"

as opposed to "stay home, save lives". Considering what I said earlier about the number of deaths being higher, morally, this is incongruent with the previous position, and doesn't make sense: even if the mortality rate itself is lower, isn't worth pursuing a lockdown (or in the case of Japan, "limitations on peoples' activities") in order to save lives?

Take for example the movement to cancel the Tokyo Olympics. This seems utterly farcical a year later, but consider the arguments being made back then. The same people that wanted to shut it down have thrown their arms up in the air and are now saying, "Time to open the borders!" As though letting in millions of (vaccinated) travelers somehow poses a lower risk overall than the Olympics did a year ago.

I support the opening of the border, just as I supported not cancelling the Olympics a year ago. But rest assured, Covid will spread in Japan, and people will die as a result. My point is, if it doesn't matter now, why did it matter back then? It's not that less people are dying. It's because the mortality rate is hypothetically lower.

Indeed, I am not qualified in epidemiology and can't support every theory of mine with home tested experimentation. Research is valuable when it's profitable. At the end of the day, the vaccines are still consumer products.

What I can say, is that I will never trust people who engage in morally conditional duplicity and double speak. I also support thorough investigation, and want to see anyone in government positions who tried to pursue vaccine mandates prosecuted if their interests were compromised and they should to profit.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Doesn't matter in the greater context of what I'm saying. There are still lots of people dying. A higher number of people dying than before.

Which is explained completely by the higher transmissibility of the variant currently responsible for the cases so your argument becomes not only irrelevant but also wrong. Is like saying that seatbelts don't work and using as an argument that more people die now in car crashes than before they were invented.

Unless you can prove with actual arguments the vaccines and other measures do not have an effect then you are still wrong by baselessly assuming this is the case.

Not sure if you were one of these people. I've heard it enough to generalize the "follow the science" crowd.

Since the science can prove the measures have a protective effect, and you instead just like to assume lots more of dead peopple would have zero economical, social etc. costs, which obviously makes no sense. Again, you have failed to prove this is the case, just that you like to think you can understand the risks better than the professionals but without demonstrating any actual knowledge.

even if the mortality rate itself is lower, isn't worth pursuing a lockdown (or in the case of Japan, "limitations on peoples' activities") in order to save lives?

Again no, because the benefit of lockdowns are much lower with a variant with higher transmissibility, and the benefits are also less, if now would be necessary to lose 10 times more, to reduce only one tenth of the risks then the costs (that also include lives) are no longer justified.

What I can say, is that I will never trust people who engage in morally conditional duplicity and double speak.

Since you have not demonstrated any duplicity (just that you want to baselessly assume this is the case) then this is just an excuse, the experts say the risk is decreasing, the measures are not longer so easily justified and they can actually cause worse public health problems then to use the argument of them being incongruent you actually need to prove it first, with actual data and validated methods to demonstrate your conclusions, not just wanting to believe you are better than the people that actually use science to justify their decisions.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

How did you eliminate the likelihood that cases and deaths would be higher if there were no vaccines and other measures?

I didn't.

But you did.

The mysteriously vanished part of your post said that "the vaccines are a total dud" which means they didn't help at all and would make no difference if not implemented

It sure seems to me that Ian was correct, and you were saying that cases and deaths would be higher if there were no vaccines and other measures. But, I'm open to having my opinion changed. So, are you of the opinion that the cases and deaths would have been higher or lower with no vaccines?

0 ( +2 / -2 )

PickleSep. 28  05:21 pm JST

That's two points of reference in a broad timescale. A trend is by definition an ongoing current development.

You using the term to refer to the last several months is correct but my using it to refer to the last 12 months is incorrect?

PickleSep. 28  05:28 pm JST

Also for the record, cases in Tokyo today are just 44% higher than this date one year ago and the trajectory has been on a steep decline for months

No, 5327 cases today versus the @150 cases a year ago is not only 44% higher. A couple 1000% higher.

Again no, because the benefit of lockdowns are much lower with a variant with higher transmissibility, and the benefits are also less,

And, no, because the lockdowns reduced death rates dramatically according to statistical data, and continue to do so where used and any argument to the contrary is only based on personal bias.

the experts say the risk is decreasing, the measures are not longer so easily justified and they can actually cause worse public health problems then to use the argument of them being incongruent you actually need to prove it first,

No experts say this and your failure to provide a valid source further exemplifies that this is a falsity you try to continue to project.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

What is going on in Japan? I left one month ago for the USA and life is pretty much back to normal here. Very few people wear masks or even talk about the pandemic. Seems Japan loves continuing the propaganda to keep the people in order. What else could it be?

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

And, no, because the lockdowns reduced death rates dramatically according to statistical data, and continue to do so where used and any argument to the contrary is only based on personal bias.

That is not an argument to contradict what you quote, lockdowns are much less effective against omicron which means the costs can become unjustified, there is no point in causing more deaths than what is prevented by using them, there is no statistical data that proves lockdowns are still as effective, something you already recognized by calling the lack of lockdowns and instead focused protection "excellent points"

https://japantoday.com/category/features/kuchikomi/more-kids-showing-signs-of-premature-aging#comment-3257354

No experts say this and your failure to provide a valid source further exemplifies that this is a falsity you try to continue to project.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/your-health/risks-getting-very-sick.html

There, experts saying that vaccination, treatment and previous infection have reduced the risk after infection, which demonstrate your personal opinion about it is completely wrong.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

As much as I disagree with Steven and Painkiller as I now and have always opposed lockdowns, they are right and the point still stands: the most recent Covid wave produced the most deaths of them all. In a fully vaxed and boosted country. I can respect them for having genuine positions, as opposed to the morally duplicitous snake oil salesmen telling us,

"Hey guys, everything's good now, even though I just told you two years ago we needed to shut everything down."

Japan will be 90% open again soon, but the damage down by the Covid-19 era moral panic crowd and quarantine warriors has already been done.

It is up to voters to politically displace people in government that pushed these policies!

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

> As much as I disagree with Steven and Painkiller as I now and have always opposed lockdowns, they are right and the point still stands: the most recent Covid wave produced the most deaths of them all. 

You agree they are right then you agree there should be lockdowns.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

d the point still stands: the most recent Covid wave produced the most deaths of them all.

You stated a fact . What is the point?

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites