Indicators of the coronavirus COVID-19 outbreak development

IMPEER of the NAS of Ukraine
5 min readDec 5, 2020

(A.B. Alyokhin, B.V. Burkynskyi, A.N. Grabovoi, N.I. Khumarova)

Statistical Monitor

26/11/2020. S-No 171.

After a two-week break, we are publishing another statistical monitor with country ratings according to the IP progress indicator level. This frequency is due to the inertia of the indicators of short-term changes in the IP indicator, even in the context of the active development of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The dynamics of the IP progress indicator for the countries we tracked as of December 4, 2020 is showing in Fig. 1 and will allow you to see clearly what path different countries are going in the process of fighting the coronavirus.

Without any understatement, China can serve as an undoubted model in this struggle, which, with its thoughtful and decisive actions, almost completely stopped the spread of coronavirus back in March, shifting the development of the epidemic into an asymptotic mode of approaching the finish (100% according to the IP progress indicator) mark.

For many weeks, the daily number of new infections (as a rule, these are newcomers) does not exceed several dozen people. The number of deaths (4634 people) has not increased since mid-May this year. The number of active cases (current patients) has not exceeded several hundred people for a long time, and as of yesterday, it was 271 people.

Not surprising, against the background of such achievements of China, the successes and actions of the governments of other countries look very dim. Apparently, this circumstance, as well as the inability to implement such strategies to combat the coronavirus, explains the low media interest in China’s experience.

In the countries of “developed democracies” amid a pandemic, for some reason they forgot that the most important human right is the right to life, and not the right to feast during the plague. As a result, with the ability (demonstrated in the first phase) to take effective measures to counter the spread of the epidemic. The inconsistency of the authorities, their flirting with “fighters” for human rights, the inability to protect the lives of people without significant economic losses. Not to mention the inability to bring to the consciousness of citizens the basic norms of behavior in the face of global dangers, leads to the need to resort to an inherently immoral compromise between the number of victims of the coronavirus and the damage to the economy.

In the diagrams in Fig. 1, this fact demonstrated by Germany, Israel, Italy, France, and South Korea. Israel and South Korea are especially feverish (see Fig. 1.2 and Fig. 1.6), which is a direct consequence of the ability of these countries to effectively resist the spread of coronavirus and the inability to conduct this fight decisively and consistently.

The United States, show the shocking scale of the epidemic and its victims (Fig. 1.6), apparently went the farthest in the “development” of democracy and demonstrates a complete inability to subordinate the private interests of its citizens to the collective, public. For 8 years of active US participation in the Vietnam War, the country lost about 58 thousand people. In less than a year of the coronavirus epidemic, the number of deaths in the country exceeded 285 thousand. In addition, hopes in the fight against coronavirus are associated not with the rational organization of resistance to the virus, like China and some other countries (this stage of the US fight has already failed), but with vaccines and vaccination of the population.

Economically, socially and politically immature countries, including Ukraine, demonstrate their inability to resist the coronavirus in all directions. The number of coronavirus victims in Ukraine equaled the number of ATO victims and continues to grow rapidly. In terms of the number of new infected, the country is regularly included in the top 10 countries in the world. According to media reports, only for PCR tests in private clinics, citizens of Ukraine spent more than UAH 3 billion from their own pockets. The level of personal expenses of citizens for treatment for COVID-19 is also well known. At the same time, the government is looking for (and has not yet found) funds to compensate for losses to citizens, including entrepreneurs, from quarantine measures. In such conditions, the prospects for vaccination of the population, their timing and the distribution of the financial burden between the state and citizens remain unclear.

The diagram in Fig. 2 shows the level of progress in the development of the epidemic over the period since the previous monitor (from November 17 to December 4, 2020).

Countries that know how to subordinate the spread of the epidemic to their will (for example, Germany and Italy) achieve this mainly by reducing the number of new infections, as it should be, if you set the task of combating coronavirus.

In Ukraine and Russia, this indicator is growing due to an increase in the number of recovered, i.e. due to mechanical growth, due to an increase in the number of infected people, including patients with a mild course of the disease. This has nothing to do with the achievements of medicine in the fight against coronavirus disease, as well as with real progress in the development of the epidemic.

In those countries (South Korea, Japan) in which the pressure on the coronavirus is weakening, there is a regression (Fig. 2).

In general, the COVID-19 pandemic demonstrates that humanity has serious problems in solving the global problems facing it, the inability of the majority of citizens to subordinate personal interests to public interests, as well as the inability of the governments of many world countries to mobilize their citizens and institutions to solve such problems.

Publications on case fatality rates and progress indicator:


Sources of statistical data:

Our materials also:

Accuracy of our forecasts: (Germany) (Spain) (Italy) (USA) (Ukraine) (France) (South Korea)



IMPEER of the NAS of Ukraine

Official page of the state scientific institution Institute of Market Problems and Economic-Ecological Research of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine