Sweden avoiding lockdown

charlie14

SeaBreezes wrote: »

That's so depressing.

What do you think about the T-cell immunity being suggested charlie? Would that help build herd immunity do you think?

I maybe grasping at straws, but would be wonderful to see a ray of light ..

I don`t know much about T-cells, but from what little I have seen when it comes to Covid-19, nobody really appears to.
I read some U.S.A. research article far as I remember some time ago that had not been peer reviewed where people who were on ventilators (after 10 days I think) showed the presence of T-cells.
Again, far as I recall, they also found coronavirus T-cells in others who never had Covid-19. They put that down to other coronaviruses, mainly the flu virus.
They did speculate that T-cells could be important in alerting the body`s immune system to fight a Covid-19 infection, but they could also perhaps just identify the infection as flu and not alert the immune system fast enough.They appeared to believe that the real value of their research into T-cells was in the area of producing a vaccine.
Things could have change since as that was some time ago, but best I recall that was their findings.

charlie14

cnocbui wrote: »

This is so funny and deadly accurate:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/07/11/second-wave-covid-swedish-approach-will-have-right-along/?WT.mc_id=e_DM1265932&WT.tsrc=email&etype=Edi_Edi_New_Reg&utmsource=email&utm_medium=Edi_Edi_New_Reg20200713&utm_campaign=DM1265932

Does the Author hang out on this thread?

If he does then he is a fan of the Swedish strategy.


Why would you not compare countries on a like for like basis rather than countries that have little or nothing in common

bb1234567

cnocbui wrote: »

It's probably this one:

But if there are potentially a large cohort of infected who don't develop detectable antibodies , then why would we be seeing any areas of the world where the vast majority of people have developed antibodies and then in others areas such as Sweden apparently many or perhaps most of the infected don't develop antibodies ?

In some poor black and Latino neighbourhoods in Brooklyn , 80% of people had antibodies. If a large percent of people may have immunity without developing antibodies as theorised in the study, then why would there be antibody levels this high in some locations, or any locations.

cnocbui

charlie14 wrote: »

If he does then he is a fan of the Swedish strategy.


Why would you not compare countries on a like for like basis rather than countries that have little or nothing in common

Because it's a virus; it doesn't care whether your language is riddled with umlauts or you know a lot of people called Sven or Gianna; if you drive a Volvo as opposed to a Alfa or a Citroen. It likely doesn't care if you like pickled herring or bacon carbonara. This insistence on only comparing Sweden to immediate neighbours is an artificial device based on an unproven hypothesis that the virus gives a sh** about the non biological differences you insist matter.

There is ample evidence the virus doesn't care; it's run rampant everywhere, ignoring all climate, geographic, cultural, language and sartorial differences.

cnocbui

bb1234567 wrote: »

But if there are potentially a large cohort of infected who don't develop detectable antibodies , then why would we be seeing any areas of the world where the vast majority of people have developed antibodies and then in others areas such as Sweden apparently many or perhaps most of the infected don't develop antibodies ?

In some poor black and Latino neighbourhoods in Brooklyn , 80% of people had antibodies. If a large percent of people may have immunity without developing antibodies as theorised in the study, then why would there be antibody levels this high in some locations, or any locations.

I don't know

charlie14

cnocbui wrote: »

Because it's a virus; it doesn't care whether your language is riddled with umlauts or you know a lot of people called Sven or Gianna; if you drive a Volvo as opposed to a Alfa or a Citroen. It likely doesn't care if you like pickled herring or bacon carbonara. This insistence on only comparing Sweden to immediate neighbours is an artificial device based on an unproven hypothesis that the virus gives a sh** about the non biological differences you insist matter.

There is ample evidence the virus doesn't care; it's run rampant everywhere, ignoring all climate, geographic, cultural, language and sartorial differences.

Rubbish.
Demographics alone make a massive difference in the spread of an infectious disease.
Or do you somehow believe that a country with a high number of single person households will have the same spread of infections as one with multi-generation households living in close proximity

cnocbui

charlie14 wrote: »

Rubbish.
Demographics alone make a massive difference in the spread of an infectious disease.
Or do you somehow believe that a country with a high number of single person households will have the same spread of infections as one with multi-generation households living in close proximity

Are Italy and the UK geographically adjacent with the same demographics? Their Covid-19 stats are so similar you would think that were the case, based on your assertion. France and Belgium are geographically next to each other and demographically... so much for that theory.

charlie14

cnocbui wrote: »

Are Italy and the UK geographically adjacent with the same demographics? Their Covid-19 stats are so similar you would think that were the case, based on your assertion. France and Belgium are geographically next to each other and demographically... so much for that theory.

Demographics also takes into account area and population.
France is by area over 21 times larger than Belgium yet has only 6 times the population. Belgium also over-counted Covid-19 deaths.


UK simply played around with the Swedish strategy for too long before locking down. Italy initially made a shambles of their lockdown as well.

JimmyVik

charlie14 wrote: »

If he does then he is a fan of the Swedish strategy.

Why would you not compare countries on a like for like basis rather than countries that have little or nothing in common

Heard some doctor from the UK on PAt Kenny.
Kenny asked him why the UK has so many deaths per pop than other european countries. They doctor started reeling off stats comparing uk to Belgium. Didnt mention any other countries.

JimmyVik

charlie14 wrote: »

Demographics also takes into account area and population.
France is by area over 21 times larger than Belgium yet has only 6 times the population. Belgium also over-counted Covid-19 deaths.

UK simply played around with the Swedish strategy for too long before locking down. Italy initially made a shambles of their lockdown as well.

The virus was well planted in Italy before they even realized it. They were far too late for their lockdown to have been as effective as in other countries. But it did help when it was introduced. Days matter when it comes to reacting to the virus. It was largely as a result of Italys troubles that other countries reacted as fast as they did too.

MOH

charlie14 wrote: »

Demographics also takes into account area and population.

But Sweden has twice the population of Norway. Why not compare Norway with somewhere with similar population, like, say, Ireland?

charlie14

MOH wrote: »

But Sweden has twice the population of Norway. Why not compare Norway with somewhere with similar population, like, say, Ireland?

What would be the point though ?
Other than the same population there is nothing we have in common with Norway.
Does it not make more sense to compare countries that have many similarities?


The four Nordic countries of Denmark, Norway, Sweden and Finland for example.
Not only do they have much historically in common, collectively their governments and policies have so much in common that it is known as the Nordic Model.
A middle ground between marxism and capitalism with high living standards and low income disparity. Along with free education, free health care and other benefits such as guaranteed pensions the Nordic Model is regarded by many as a role model for economic opportunity and equality.



When comparing countries on a like for like basis, you would be hard pushed to find another four neighbouring countries with so much in common imo.

cnocbui

cnocbui wrote: »

Because it's a virus; it doesn't care whether your language is riddled with umlauts or you know a lot of people called Sven or Gianna; if you drive a Volvo as opposed to a Alfa or a Citroen. It likely doesn't care if you like pickled herring or bacon carbonara. This insistence on only comparing Sweden to immediate neighbours is an artificial device based on an unproven hypothesis that the virus gives a sh** about the non biological differences you insist matter.

There is ample evidence the virus doesn't care; it's run rampant everywhere, ignoring all climate, geographic, cultural, language and sartorial differences.

So let's be clear on the level of your ignorance:


You don't believe travel patterns to and from the centre of an epidemic are relevant to the spread of a virus

You don't believe healthcare models are relevant to the spread of a virus

You don't believe socio-cultural factors are relevant to the spread of a virus (everything from being a culture that kisses cheeks upon greeting, to being a culture where sitting beside a stranger is considered rude)

You don't believe demographics are relevant to the spread of a virus (e.g. age distribution, average household size, population density, prevalence of risk factors such as diabetes and obesity etc)

You don't believe geographic factors are relevant to the spread of a virus (climate, distance between cities etc)

Among other things you clearly don't believe are relevant.


Instead, you think when experts talk about comparing like-for-like, you believe they're talking the kinds of cars people drive and the food they eat.


Sweden-defenders really are something else. Are they at the level of anti-vaxxers and 5g conspiracy theorists at this stage? It feels like they are given the lack of any sort of attempt at even pseudo-intellectualism or rationalism in their arguments.

Donald Trump

cnocbui wrote: »

This is so funny and deadly accurate:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/07/11/second-wave-covid-swedish-approach-will-have-right-along/?WT.mc_id=e_DM1265932&WT.tsrc=email&etype=Edi_Edi_New_Reg&utmsource=email&utm_medium=Edi_Edi_New_Reg20200713&utm_campaign=DM1265932

Does the Author hang out on this thread?

Same author has an article saying how smoking protects you from corona.......................

cnocbui

Deleted User wrote: »

So let's be clear on the level of your ignorance:


You don't believe travel patterns to and from the centre of an epidemic are relevant to the spread of a virus

You don't believe healthcare models are relevant to the spread of a virus

You don't believe socio-cultural factors are relevant to the spread of a virus (everything from being a culture that kisses cheeks upon greeting, to being a culture where sitting beside a stranger is considered rude)

You don't believe demographics are relevant to the spread of a virus (e.g. age distribution, average household size, population density, prevalence of risk factors such as diabetes and obesity etc)

You don't believe geographic factors are relevant to the spread of a virus (climate, distance between cities etc)

Among other things you clearly don't believe are relevant.


Instead, you think when experts talk about comparing like-for-like, you believe they're talking the kinds of cars people drive and the food they eat.


Sweden-defenders really are something else. Are they at the level of anti-vaxxers and 5g conspiracy theorists at this stage? It feels like they are given the lack of any sort of attempt at even pseudo-intellectualism or rationalism in their arguments.

You can't take a hint.

cnocbui

Donald Trump wrote: »

Same author has an article saying how smoking protects you from corona.......................

I would instinctively consider such a claim as ludicrous, but oddly, there does appear to be some research that is mildly supportive of the idea:

Although our study found that COPD and smoking populations were less likely to be infected with SARS‐CoV‐2

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/all.14238

Interestingly, while two of the studies found no relationship and Study 2 found a positive correlation between smoking and ACE2 expression, there are rat-model studies published in 2015 (5) and 2017 (6) that actually found the opposite. That is, in rats exposed to cigarette smoke they saw ACE2 expression was lower than in rats not exposed to cigarettesmoke.

https://theamericansun.com/2020/03/17/sars2-receptors-treatment-and-re-infection/

A lower expression of ACE2 receptors might logically suggest a lower susceptibility to SARS-2 infection.

Perhaps further research will shed more light.

joeysoap

The same paper thinks Brexit is great. As Popeye say ‘you pays your money....’
I’m just glad not to be Swedish. ( I’m 70)

JimmyVik

joeysoap wrote: »

The same paper thinks Brexit is great. As Popeye say ‘you pays your money....’
I’m just glad not to be Swedish. ( I’m 70)

According to some here you are expendable

cnocbui

JimmyVik wrote: »

According to some here you are expendable

Nonsense, only the future lives of the young are expendable.

biko

76492 official cases
5572 officially dead
7.3% of known cases have passed

Numbers from FHMs own tracking page
https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/09f821667ce64bf7be6f9f87457ed9aa

timmy_mallet

joeysoap wrote: »

The same paper thinks Brexit is great. As Popeye say ‘you pays your money....’
I’m just glad not to be Swedish. ( I’m 70)

I mean, if a 70 yr old was worried about COVID-19 and living in Sweden, there are many ways they could effectively avoid contracting the virus. It's not a death sentence.

timmy_mallet

biko wrote: »

76492 official cases
5572 officially dead
7.3% of known cases have passed

Numbers from FHMs own tracking page
https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/09f821667ce64bf7be6f9f87457ed9aa

Which is give or take 14x the mortality rate experienced elsewhere. Assuming Swedeners are as healthy as most of the rest of the world, that would suggest over 1 million cases. Well on their way to to herd immunity while the rest of us explode from parenting+homeschooling/lack of social interaction/wearing masks playing football(!)

greyday

timmy_mallet wrote: »

Which is give or take 14x the mortality rate experienced elsewhere. Assuming Swedeners are as healthy as most of the rest of the world, that would suggest over 1 million cases. Well on their way to to herd immunity while the rest of us explode from parenting+homeschooling/lack of social interaction/wearing masks playing football(!)

10% of total population infected is well on their way to herd immunity?????

timmy_mallet

greyday wrote: »

10% of total population infected is well on their way to herd immunity?????

10x, if not more than ours!

tobefrank321

greyday wrote: »

10% of total population infected is well on their way to herd immunity?????

Oddly enough, if its the right 10%, some scientists say yes.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8518493/Covid-19-herd-immunity-develop-20-study-claims.html

Researchers now say it could work to some extent if only one or two out of 10 people have been infected naturally and become immune to the disease.
They said higher estimates worked on the basis that immunity is given to everyone by a vaccine, but in reality the people who first get infected are likely to continue to be the ones most at risk, so if they develop immunity, the less-at-risk will also benefit.

The theory is that the most socially active ie those with lots of daily social contacts and the potential to be superspreaders would do less damage if they were all immune.

If all nursing home staff or those in contact with nursing homes were immune, regardless how immunity is acquired, this would make a huge difference to reducing nursing home infections. The same for anyone in contact with vulnerable groups.

So yes 10% if they were the right 10% could make a huge difference. It doesn't matter if that 10% are vaccinated or acquire it some other way.

We need to get creative in protecting vulnerable groups.
Moderna said they are at least 1 year away from rollout because they want to wait a year to see side effects from their vaccine trials. The same will likely apply to other vaccines.
Extreme lockdowns only work in the short term as we've seen in various parts of the world. And economically are not sustainable. Good in theory, not sustainable long term in the real world.

greyday

timmy_mallet wrote: »

10x, if not more than ours!

It can take over 60% infection to achieve herd immunity, it may take 80%, Sweden are no where near that level and most likely will not get there before any immunity infection confers wears off.
Sweden are at or under 20% if we go by what the experts say.......like the rest of the world they will be waiting on a vaccine to gain herd immunity.

cnocbui

greyday wrote: »

It can take over 60% infection to achieve herd immunity, it may take 80%, Sweden are no where near that level and most likely will not get there before any immunity infection confers wears off.
Sweden are at or under 20% if we go by what the experts say.......like the rest of the world they will be waiting on a vaccine to gain herd immunity.

And it might take 43%. Given a Swedish ambassador claimed Stockholm had reached 30% infected back in May, they may well have reached 43% by now.:

June 26, 2020 -- Herd immunity might be achieved when only 43% of a population becomes immune to the coronavirus.

Herd immunity might be achieved when only 43% of a population becomes immune to the coronavirus, mathematicians from the University of Nottingham and University of Stockholm wrote in an article in Science.

That’s “substantially less than the classical herd immunity level of 60% obtained through homogeneous immunization of the population,” they wrote.

The researchers define herd immunity as the point at which immunity in the population reaches a level that spread of the disease declines, even after preventive measures have been relaxed. But if you don’t have herd immunity and preventive measures are eased, a second wave of infection may occur, they said.

The authors calculated herd immunity by factoring in different age groups and social activity levels in a population and how that affected a person’s susceptibility to the virus. The average person would transmit the virus to 2.5 people.

"By taking this new mathematical approach to estimating the level for herd immunity to be achieved we found it could potentially be reduced to 43% and that this reduction is mainly due to activity level rather than age structure,” one of the authors, Frank Ball from the University of Nottingham, said in a news release from the university.

https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20200626/herd-immunity-threshold-could-be-as-low-as-43-percent

greyday

cnocbui wrote: »

And it might take 43%. Given a Swedish ambassador claimed Stockholm had reached 30% infected back in May, they may well have reached 43% by now.:

https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20200626/herd-immunity-threshold-could-be-as-low-as-43-percent

Claimed being the operative word......
If they are telling the truth about their R0 number, then they are no where near 30% not to mind 43%.

biko

Number of coronavirus (COVID-19) deaths in Sweden in 2020, by age groups

I assume this is similar for most countries

For some reason there are no numbers for 10-20, I hope this means no deaths in this age bracket.



https://www.statista.com/statistics/1107913/number-of-coronavirus-deaths-in-sweden-by-age-groups/

charlie14

cnocbui wrote: »

And it might take 43%. Given a Swedish ambassador claimed Stockholm had reached 30% infected back in May, they may well have reached 43% by now.:

https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20200626/herd-immunity-threshold-could-be-as-low-as-43-percent

Your memory seems to be slipping.
In April Karin Ulrika Olofsdotter Swedish ambassador to the U.S.A. lost the run of herself and fell for all the Swedish Public Health Agency hype on herd immunity claiming Stockholm would reach 30% immunity by May.
Antibody test results showed just 7.3%.

The claim of 30% was nonsense then and your 43% is nonsense now.
4 weeks ago antibody test results from 50,000 samples showed just 14% for Stockholm and only 6.1% nationally.