Sweden avoiding lockdown

cnocbui

Arghus wrote: »

It was stated again and again in the media, by the HSE, the DoH, the CMO, every doctor or specialist I heard mentioned it. Frequently repeated in the press briefings. Even the link you provided proves what I'm saying - it has the CMO saying it again.

The message was loud and clear. If you are trying to argue different you are mistaken.

I wouldn't know, my TV won't decode anything RTE or other Irish stations transmit.

SeaBreezes

cnocbui wrote: »

And just as easy to speculate lockdown caused a number of deaths, given some specialists pleading with the public to not ignore symptoms of stroke and heart attack, which likely was prompted by fewer such admissions presenting than normal.

You know Covid19 causes strokes/heart attacks with blood clotting, right?

cnocbui

SeaBreezes wrote: »

You know Covid19 causes strokes/heart attacks with blood clotting, right?

Take an aspirin. Nice deflection.

mcsean2163

VillageIdiot71 wrote: »

I expect you know that the important part of that, for me and for many, is "that value was never going to be reached".

We have poll-axed our societies. Truly, we've destroyed the World while pretending to save it.

That's an exaggeration. Public sector workers, multinational workers, etc. have been fine by and large. 😳

Breezin

mcsean2163 wrote: »

That's an exaggeration. Public sector workers, multinational workers, etc. have been fine by and large. ��

So far.

VillageIdiot71

charlie14 wrote: »

I really do not know what the significance the "Up to 85,000" is to you.

I think its because it was a fake figure, used to create public fear and acceptance.

charlie14 wrote: »

If it had been 80% lower at 17,000, do you believe we should not have had lockdown ?

You tell me. If it was "up to 2 people" do you believe we should not have had lockdown?

If someone said we can expect to have up to 150 road deaths every year for as long as we have road transport, would you ban private cars?

Arghus wrote: »

But they were told to not ignore symptoms of stroke and heart attack and to contact GPs or seek treatment, all the time, everyday. It was made abundantly clear. Nobody said these people should avoid hospitals if they needed treatment. You can't blame them if people chose not to heed their advice.

This is a very simplistic statement.

The fact of the matter is that the Government frightened old people in particular to stay at home. Having done that, it would obviously be hard to coax people out to be seen in hospital by folk in full PPE.

Can we please ground ourselves in life as it is lived.

charlie14

VillageIdiot71 wrote: »

I think its because it was a fake figure, used to create public fear and acceptance.You tell me. If it was "up to 2 people" do you believe we should not have had lockdown?

If someone said we can expect to have up to 150 road deaths every year for as long as we have road transport, would you ban private cars?This is a very simplistic statement.

The fact of the matter is that the Government frightened old people in particular to stay at home. Having done that, it would obviously be hard to coax people out to be seen in hospital by folk in full PPE.

Can we please ground ourselves in life as it is lived.

Then can we assume you believe the the Swedish modelling figures were also fake for immunity to create public acceptance of the strategy ?

I believe lockdown was the right thing to do regardless of what the modelling fiqure was.
You are opposed to lockdown so it is up to you to give what you believe the figure would have been without it.
That is how it works here.

Your car accidents analogy makes little sense considering all the road traffic restrictions that have been imposed over years to lower deaths.

From deaths, not just here but worldwide, we know that the aged are the most vulnerable to this virus. If you believe older people are that timid that the would need to be coaxed out if there was a serious medical emergency, it doesn`t appear you know many.
Anything that didn`t require an emergency response, being cognisant of the danger to themselves from this virus by visiting A&E, they would have contacted their G.P. as was advised.

VillageIdiot71

charlie14 wrote: »

I believe lockdown was the right thing to do regardless of what the modelling fiqure was.

Grand, and thanks for being so clear. It would be bonkers to shut down the world is the estimated mortality was less than three people, but at least we now understand that your view is that unrealistic.

charlie14 wrote: »

Your car accidents analogy makes little sense considering all the road traffic restrictions that have been imposed over years to lower deaths.

Makes lots of sense, as the approach didn't involve prohibition of any situation that might have any risk of a collision.

charlie14 wrote: »

If you believe older people are that timid that the would need to be coaxed out if there was a serious medical emergency, it doesn`t appear you know many.

? But we know hospital activity plummeted. You are arguing against reality.

charlie14

VillageIdiot71 wrote: »

Grand, and thanks for being so clear. It would be bonkers to shut down the world is the estimated mortality was less than three people, but at least we now understand that your view is that unrealistic.Makes lots of sense, as the approach didn't involve prohibition of any situation that might have any risk of a collision.? But we know hospital activity plummeted. You are arguing against reality.

I have been clear in my view. Unfortunately I cannot say the same for you.
Your posts are typical of many here who do not like lockdown.
Ranting and raving over modelling figures on death without lockdown being incorrect, but when asked what their figure for deaths would have been without it, nothing other than rambling evasion.

But then for you the modelling figures are not really a problem.
The`re just something you throw around because you personally do not like lockdown because it inconveniences you.
If it was just modelling figures, then why the evasion on Sweden`s immunity modelling figures being even further out than those of Imperial College on lockdown ?

Your analogy on cars made no sense before, nor does it now.
All the legal restrictions in relation to cars have been on the same lines as lockdown restrictions. Efforts to avoid making life endangering contacts.

We know hospital activity plummeted because the last place you want to be if you have any underlying condition is in contact with Covid-19 patients or staff caring for them.
Even with no lockdown Sweden recognised that.

The reality of your posts are that you do not like lockdown because it inconveniences you. Everything else is just noise.

VillageIdiot71

charlie14 wrote: »

The reality of your posts are that you do not like lockdown because it inconveniences you. Everything else is just noise.

How have I been inconvenienced? I'm working from home, on full pay, saving hours of commuting time.

The noise is the substantial case you can't answer. But then again, you've already stated your completely irrational position. You'd shut down the world if you thought even one person was at risk.

Bonkers. Go on talking to yourself.

charlie14

VillageIdiot71 wrote: »

How have I been inconvenienced? I'm working from home, on full pay, saving hours of commuting time.

The noise is the substantial case you can't answer. But then again, you've already stated your completely irrational position. You'd shut down the world if you thought even one person was at risk.

Bonkers. Go on talking to yourself.

I might as well have been talking to myself as attempting to have any meaningful interaction with you.

You have a problem with the modelling figures of deaths without a lockdown because "That value was never going to be achieved".
Yet when asked, with the benefit of hindsight, what you believe the figure would have been it`s been nothing other than bluster and evasion.

You say you believe that the modelling figure was fake news used to scare people into compliance, yet you have no problem with Sweden`s modelling figures on immunity levels.
Figures that were even further out than those of Imperial College and can equally be classified under your fake news as they were used to encourage people to believe in Sweden`s no lockdown strategy.

Ginger n Lemon

charlie14 wrote: »

Then can we assume you believe the the Swedish modelling figures were also fake for immunity to create public acceptance of the strategy ?

I believe lockdown was the right thing to do regardless of what the modelling fiqure was.
You are opposed to lockdown so it is up to you to give what you believe the figure would have been without it.
That is how it works here.

Your car accidents analogy makes little sense considering all the road traffic restrictions that have been imposed over years to lower deaths.

From deaths, not just here but worldwide, we know that the aged are the most vulnerable to this virus. If you believe older people are that timid that the would need to be coaxed out if there was a serious medical emergency, it doesn`t appear you know many.
Anything that didn`t require an emergency response, being cognisant of the danger to themselves from this virus by visiting A&E, they would have contacted their G.P. as was advised.

Damn, you really said that :eek:

That explains few things.

Charles I am back, did I miss much? I see that over 25% of Swedish deaths with covid are people older than 90 years of age, do you think there is some over-counting of deaths with covid going on there? HIQA came out last week and said that Ireland has seriously over-counted covid deaths...

Ginger n Lemon

Ginger n Lemon wrote: »

Damn, you really said that :eek:

That explains few things.

Charles I am back, did I miss much? I see that over 25% of Swedish deaths with covid are people older than 90 years of age, do you think there is some over-counting of deaths with covid going on there? HIQA came out last week and said that Ireland has seriously over-counted covid deaths...

It appears not given the excess deaths in Swedan at the end of May stood at 4,800 and the covid death rate stood at 4,600

tobefrank321

Excess deaths might turn out to be a more accurate measure of deaths than guessing at probable deaths from covid 19.

Because someone dies in a nursing home at around the same time as a covid19 outbreak, and with similar symptoms, its been put down to covid 19 in most cases, even when it mightn't be. Just because someone struggles to breathe doesn't automatically mean they have covid 19. That and the fact many were unfortunately near death in any case and would have died, covid 19 or not.

bb1234567

Deleted User wrote: »

It appears not given the excess deaths in Swedan at the end of May stood at 4,800 and the covid death rate stood at 4,600

Surprising it is that high given how old the deaths in Sweden have been!

charlie14

Ginger n Lemon wrote: »

Damn, you really said that :eek:

That explains few things.

Charles I am back, did I miss much? I see that over 25% of Swedish deaths with covid are people older than 90 years of age, do you think there is some over-counting of deaths with covid going on there? HIQA came out last week and said that Ireland has seriously over-counted covid deaths...

I have no idea what the faux surprise is about.
Your latest in attention seeking perhaps ?

The question was to another poster, who like yourself is a supporter of no lockdown.No reply so far, but as it seems to have interested you so much perhaps you would care to answer.
How many Covid-19 related deaths do you believe we would have had without a lockdown ?

Total deaths in Sweden last year 88,766. Average total deaths for the previous 10 years 90,655.
Total deaths this year as of 18th June 49,586.
Using the average 10 year total that would equate to around 52,500 deaths by the end of June.The 6 month average over those ten year 45,328.
For the first 6 months of this year Sweden`s excess deaths are over 7,000 higher than average. (8,000 higher than 2019)

With Sweden`s Covid-19 deaths until the end of June 5420, then it would suggest under-counting rather than over-counting by 1,500 - 2,500.

charlie14

Ginger n Lemon wrote: »

I see that over 25% of Swedish deaths with covid are people older than 90 years of age, do you think there is some over-counting of deaths with covid going on there? HIQA came out last week and said that Ireland has seriously over-counted covid deaths...

You posted this on another thread which I replied too.
You may have missed it. I said I didn`t agree with HIQA`s guesswork and why.


As you appear to believe HIQA are correct and we had 25% lower deaths, then comparing us to Sweden only emphasizes the effectiveness of using lockdown.
It would mean, relative to population size, Sweden`s deaths are over twice those of Ireland.

tobefrank321

Sweden will end up like Ireland at year end, with a front loading of deaths of those who were already very ill in the first 6 months of 2020.

That's what covid 19 mostly does, it kills a majority who would already have died this year. One estimate in the UK was 75%.

One of the reasons why Sweden's death rate will start to drop is not because of greater social distancing but largely because those in care homes who were going to die have already died while others have become immune.

cnocbui

tobefrank321 wrote: »

Sweden will end up like Ireland at year end, with a front loading of deaths of those who were already very ill in the first 6 months of 2020.

That's what covid 19 mostly does, it kills a majority who would already have died this year. One estimate in the UK was 75%.

One of the reasons why Sweden's death rate will start to drop is not because of greater social distancing but largely because those in care homes who were going to die have already died while others have become immune.

This will not go down well with the bleeding hearts, at all, at all, at all.

cnocbui

cnocbui wrote: »

This will not go down well with the bleeding hearts, at all, at all, at all.

By bleeding hearts, you mean "people who rely on objective facts and figures". Why do you call them bleeding hearts though, I don't see the connection other than that you seem to despise both?


"How dare someone care about human lives! More importantly, how dare someone actual look at facts, information, knowledge when I HAVE A COMPLETELY UNSUPPORTED OPINION"


Good job m8, well argued.

99nsr125

Exactly, the area under the curve remains the same whether condensed or stretched out over time

tobefrank321 wrote: »

Sweden will end up like Ireland at year end, with a front loading of deaths of those who were already very ill in the first 6 months of 2020.

That's what covid 19 mostly does, it kills a majority who would already have died this year. One estimate in the UK was 75%.

One of the reasons why Sweden's death rate will start to drop is not because of greater social distancing but largely because those in care homes who were going to die have already died while others have become immune.

charlie14

99nsr125 wrote: »

Exactly, the area under the curve remains the same whether condensed or stretched out over time

Some people seem to regard under the curve as some predetermined number that will die regardless of what action is taken.

Flattening the curve means slowing the spread of infections so medical services are not overrun as was the case in Italy.


The most common example of flattening the curve is the different approaches taken by St Louis and Philadelphia in 1918 during the Spanish Flu pandemic.
Philadelphia carried on much as normal while St Louis cancelled public gathering, closed schools, used quarantine and social distancing to limit the spread. Philadelphia had twice the death rate of St Louis.


What St Louis showed is that if you keep the number of infections down, you keep the death rate down. If in that you can prevent the vulnerable from becoming infected, then you reduce the rate further.

charlie14

tobefrank321 wrote: »

Sweden will end up like Ireland at year end, with a front loading of deaths of those who were already very ill in the first 6 months of 2020.

That's what covid 19 mostly does, it kills a majority who would already have died this year. One estimate in the UK was 75%.

One of the reasons why Sweden's death rate will start to drop is not because of greater social distancing but largely because those in care homes who were going to die have already died while others have become immune.

That was going well until the last paragraph.
In mid May when Sweden were recording weekly deaths of 300 - 350 Anders Tegnell said only around 30 of those deaths were in care homes
And where did this "others have become immune" come from ?
Surely we are not going back to that again after Sweden`s latest antibody testing showed just 6.1% nationally.

bb1234567

tobefrank321 wrote: »

Sweden will end up like Ireland at year end, with a front loading of deaths of those who were already very ill in the first 6 months of 2020.

That's what covid 19 mostly does, it kills a majority who would already have died this year. One estimate in the UK was 75%.

One of the reasons why Sweden's death rate will start to drop is not because of greater social distancing but largely because those in care homes who were going to die have already died while others have become immune.

Could you link to that estimate? I personally think this is not true, I think that in Europe the nursing home outbreaks greatly skewed average age of death because infections were so concentrated among that very elderly group. Not only are they at higher risk of death but also higher risk of catching it than people in the general popualtion as they reside in an enclosed care facility, similarly people in prisons are much more likely to catch in than the average person for the same reason.

While younger people arent as at much risk obviously , excess mortality among all age groups in Europe still massively increased during March and April, it was too killing young people who ordinarily wouldn't have died, although the total number of deaths under 65 was not very high because covid has just not been exposed to a great amount of the general community in most European countries. Only 1 in 20 or so Europeans have even been exposed to the virus.

In places where it is spreading uncontrollably- young people too are most definitely suffering from it.
Around 21,000 people in Brazil under 60 have died of covid
https://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2020/05/22/in-brazil-covid-19-hitting-young-people-harder.html

In Mexico and India I believe it's even higher, I remember reading 50% of the deaths in those countries are under 60, I'll try find the link.But that's over 30,000 more people in their 30's 40's and 50's who have died of covid.

In Indonesia hundreds of children have died of covid
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-indonesia-children/indonesias-hundreds-of-suspected-child-virus-deaths-highlight-danger-idUSKBN23I1D7

Peru, Ecuador and several other countries with very very young populatios too have tens of thousands of excess deaths. 6 weeks ago Peru and Ecuador each already had almost 20,000 more excess deaths than usual, I'm sure its far larger by now.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-53073046If it only killed elderly who would die this year, covid would simply not be causing such high excess death in the developing world

So it really seems like it's actually not as mild disease as originally thought . I think if it were to spread uncontrolled in Europe, many people who otherwise would not have died this year would die,and this would be further exaggerated by the hospitals overload

99nsr125

We don't have post or preventative treatment, it is our own antibodies that return us to health, so as demoralizing as it is the area under the curve remains the same regardless.

charlie14 wrote: »

Some people seem to regard under the curve as some predetermined number that will die regardless of what action is taken.

Flattening the curve means slowing the spread of infections so medical services are not overrun as was the case in Italy.


The most common example of flattening the curve is the different approaches taken by St Louis and Philadelphia in 1918 during the Spanish Flu pandemic.
Philadelphia carried on much as normal while St Louis cancelled public gathering, closed schools, used quarantine and social distancing to limit the spread. Philadelphia had twice the death rate of St Louis.


What St Louis showed is that if you keep the number of infections down, you keep the death rate down. If in that you can prevent the vulnerable from becoming infected, then you reduce the rate further.

greyday

99nsr125 wrote: »

We don't have post or preventative treatment, it is our own antibodies that return us to health, so as demoralizing as it is the area under the curve remains the same regardless.

If time can be stretched out to decades as with other viruses?

charlie14

99nsr125 wrote: »

We don't have post or preventative treatment, it is our own antibodies that return us to health, so as demoralizing as it is the area under the curve remains the same regardless.

Sweden had the idea that letting the virus spread would result in herd immunity. Their antibody tests have shown a national antibody level of 6.1%.
As Annika Linde the former Sweden state epidemiologist who initially supported the idea put it as regards herd immunity, "a dream with little basis in reality"
Even for the small percentage that have tested positive for antibodies, nobody knows what level of immunity they will provide or how long it will be effective.

The less people who get infected, the less die. It`s as simple as that, and that is what restrictions like lockdown do.
It is what resulted in less deaths in St Louis in 1918, in Sweden`s Nordic neighbours this year, and what Linde now says should have been done in Sweden.

tobefrank321

bb1234567 wrote: »

Could you link to that estimate? I personally think this is not true, I think that in Europe the nursing home outbreaks greatly skewed average age of death because infections were so concentrated among that very elderly group. Not only are they at higher risk of death but also higher risk of catching it than people in the general popualtion as they reside in an enclosed care facility, similarly people in prisons are much more likely to catch in than the average person for the same reason.

While younger people arent as at much risk obviously , excess mortality among all age groups in Europe still massively increased during March and April, it was too killing young people who ordinarily wouldn't have died, although the total number of deaths under 65 was not very high because covid has just not been exposed to a great amount of the general community in most European countries. Only 1 in 20 or so Europeans have even been exposed to the virus.

In places where it is spreading uncontrollably- young people too are most definitely suffering from it.
Around 21,000 people in Brazil under 60 have died of covid
https://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2020/05/22/in-brazil-covid-19-hitting-young-people-harder.html

In Mexico and India I believe it's even higher, I remember reading 50% of the deaths in those countries are under 60, I'll try find the link.But that's over 30,000 more people in their 30's 40's and 50's who have died of covid.

In Indonesia hundreds of children have died of covid
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-indonesia-children/indonesias-hundreds-of-suspected-child-virus-deaths-highlight-danger-idUSKBN23I1D7

Peru, Ecuador and several other countries with very very young populatios too have tens of thousands of excess deaths. 6 weeks ago Peru and Ecuador each already had almost 20,000 more excess deaths than usual, I'm sure its far larger by now.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-53073046If it only killed elderly who would die this year, covid would simply not be causing such high excess death in the developing world

So it really seems like it's actually not as mild disease as originally thought . I think if it were to spread uncontrolled in Europe, many people who otherwise would not have died this year would die,and this would be further exaggerated by the hospitals overload

Regards Ireland, sure its all here.

https://www.rte.ie/news/health/2020/0703/1151127-virus-report/

Excess deaths is a good metric at measuring the impact of covid 19 on a society.

However some people refuse to accept that you can have covid 19 and still die of other causes such as terminal cancer or a weak heart. They also refuse to believe that covid 19 brought forward dates of death by a few months or even weeks. Many who died from covid 19 were very frail and already close to death. Its important to remember that.

And so because we and other countries such as Italy, Spain and France had their peak in the first half of the year you will more than likely see excess deaths lower than normal in the last 6 months of the year. Unless of course increased cancer and other serious illnesses rise which they probably will.

cnocbui

People generally don't want to acknowledge anything that would reduce the level of drama, such as facing up to obvious realities.

No doubt we will see a rebuttal along the lines of Old Lives Matter.

charlie14

tobefrank321 wrote: »

Regards Ireland, sure its all here.

https://www.rte.ie/news/health/2020/0703/1151127-virus-report/

Excess deaths is a good metric at measuring the impact of covid 19 on a society.

However some people refuse to accept that you can have covid 19 and still die of other causes such as terminal cancer or a weak heart. They also refuse to believe that covid 19 brought for date of deaths by a few months or even weeks. Many who died from covid 19 were very frail and already close to death. Its important to remember that.

And so because we and other countries such as Italy, Spain and France had their peak in the first half of the year you will more than likely see excess deaths lower than normal in the last 6 months of the year. Unless of course increased cancer and other illness deaths rise which they probably will.

That HIQA report is speculation. They based it on data from RIP.ie but neglected to say that for the month of April research by the University of Maynooth and Limerick University using the same site showed that for April three counties worst effected by Covid-19, deaths were double with many others showing increases of 50% and more.
HIQA probably feel they need to take a cut at the HSE for laying blame on them for nursing home deaths.


I don`t get this weak heart or such should be regarded as the cause of death. If the death cert says Covid-19 then why is it not a Covid-19 death.
If somebody had high blood pressure and was swept out to sea and drown, the cause of death is not going to be recorded as due to high blood pressure.