Sweden avoiding lockdown

joeguevara

Spiderman0081 wrote: »

Sorry can’t post url so here’s the copied article dated 13 April on RTÉ.

“The Minister for Health has said Ireland's approach to tackling Covid-19 is the "right strategy" that is "going to save lives".

Simon Harris said it is important for the Irish people, who are hurting and who are making sacrifices, to know this.

Minister Harris cited modelling done by Professor Philip Nolan, which projected that this coming Sunday alone, there would have been 120,000 new cases of the virus, if no restrictive measures had been introduced.

If just partial mitigation had been done, by the end of May, the modelling suggested we would see around 70,000 new cases on one day.”

Luckily we didn’t do partial mitigation then.

Spiderman0081

joeguevara wrote: »

Luckily we didn’t do partial mitigation then.

I’ll presume and hope that you are being sarcastic :-)

joeguevara

Spiderman0081 wrote: »

I’ll presume and hope that you are being sarcastic :-)

What do you think we did?

Arghus

Spiderman0081 wrote: »

I live in Stockholm. Have done with 10 years now and have never felt so lucky to live here as I do now.
This February you could not convince me otherwise that Sweden’s strategy would be nothing other than a complete disaster. I was quietly terrified to be honest that they we’re not following the lockdown strategies of our European neighbors.
I even bought yeast, powdered mash and tinned mushrooms for Christ’s sake.
But then I started to read, and listen. Not to Anders Tegnell or the hysteria on RTÉ. I started going through the data. So much data.
The fact of the matter is that this virus is a real danger for the elderly, especially with underlying conditions.
But, the stress that a lockdown can cause on a family is obvious. I have a large family with lots of sisters, brothers and cousins. I have seen the change in their way of thinking, the worry they have and most unfortunately the acceptance they have of what the government in Ireland has directed of them.
Closing schools for the young, in my opinion is one of the most harmful things you can do to a country. Even with all the death that has been caused by this virus. I say that having two young children of my own who go to school in Stockholm, where the virus is widespread.

An unfortunate but very important point to make is that many of the people who work in Sweden’s care homes are immigrants with different cultures to that of the Swedish and who have often a poor grasp of the Swedish language. Unlike the Swedes, they like to hang out with family and friends on a regular basis.
These workers unfortunately did not understand early on the importance of social distancing when they returned home from work. When they returned to work they were never tested for the virus thanks to the slow response from the government. This was a recipe for disaster, both for the people they cared for at work and their elderly family members at home.
Anders Tegnell, FHM and the Swedish government have admitted time and time again that they did not protect their elderly. They are aware of this fact.

My boss has had covid, my friends wife has had covid, 3 of my girlfriends colleagues at work have had covid.
None of them, including myself want a lockdown like Ireland. Not even before they found out they had covid.
Someone posted earlier that 0,8% of people who have contracted the virus in Sweden, aged 0-70 have died.
In Stockholm, 0.1% of people aged 0-69 have died. This is a fact.
I think wearing a mask out in the open is ridiculous. I think wearing a mask on a crowded bus makes sense. I think trying to cancel the Croaigh Patrick climb because of this virus is borderline insanity.
When you walk the streets of Stockholm, there are elderly everywhere. Buying flowers or just sitting in the park. I have often asked them if they are concerned about catching the virus. Nearly every one of them said yes. But not not one of those people I asked, wanted to be stuck at home, alone, worrying about dying from a virus.
This is what Tegnell, Johan Giesecke and the Swedish government have talked about. There is a delicate line between caring for the health of the people and dictating to someone what is best for their own good.
We may compare numbers all day but it won’t help change anyone’s mind who thought not going for a walk on an empty beach was a bad idea because Irish politicians said so.
The long term effects of closing a country down are yet to be seen but we can all take a wild guess that’s it’s not going to be good. Not to mention the unimaginable debt Ireland recently signed up to in the recent covid eu deal. People actually don’t or want to grasp the debt trap that is.
Sweden have always said that they hope their strategy will work out in the long run but they have never to my knowledge said that they know for a fact what is the right thing to do. They are reacting to the facts, not the hysteria.
They admit they let down the elderly. The number of cases is still very high but mainly among young people. Testing is widespread. Grandparents who are willing to take the risk of seeing their grandchildren are allowed do so. People go to work. Every second table at McDonald’s is closed off. Their are signs everywhere about keeping your distance. Everybody is washing their hands.
No matter what happens in Ireland, the government will take credit only for the positives and admit none of the negatives. I hope more and more people realize this. If the virus magically disappears it’s because everyone listened to the advice. If the cases increase, it’s because people aren’t doing what their told.
I hope to god no healthy person on here is actually considering taking a vaccine if it ever appears. I have had covid. I may get it again. The science is still out on that. But I honestly can’t think of any horrible situation that would make me resort to sticking that needle in my arm.
Just to remind everyone reading this of the scare mongering that was forced upon the Irish people, I will link an article. Now try to work out, in relation to population how many cases their should have been on one day in Sweden because of no lockdowns on the mentioned days.
What a joke.

Interesting post. You seem very against the idea of a vaccine, why is that?

Bit cynical

john4321 wrote: »

I tried to disprove your statement last night which you made without caveats using numbers that Ireland and Sweden have as you said "a similar death rate"

Thanks to the poster who put the graph together to explain it even better why that statement was incorrect.

In fairness, I think he tried to make the point several times that the death rate was similar when age was taken into account, e.g. the proportion over 65 in each country. This is what prompted me to investigate further which confirmed the point I believed he was making.

I agree with your other point:

The points brought up about age profile of death are interesting\concerning\disappointing and should be discussed and my main hope from this is that every country learns how to handle the scenario better.

nw1dqsv7amx026

Spiderman0081 wrote: »

I live in Stockholm. Have done with 10 years now and have never felt so lucky.
.....

I hope to god no healthy person on here is actually considering taking a vaccine if it ever appears.

Excellent post until you mentioned vaccines. Because doing so allows the people who don't want to hear you, discount your post to focus only on that.

I don't want to sidetrack from your main message but I'd suggest the following regarding vaccines.

I'm not anti vaccine, my children have had all their vaccines. As part of my travel I was vaccinated with probably every vaccine available from rabbies to yellow fever.

However I would be slow to take a new vaccine. Take the case of pandemrix which was developed for swine flu but caused Narcolepsy.

But there is a separate thread for vaccines.

Boggles

Spiderman0081 wrote: »

I hope to god no healthy person on here is actually considering taking a vaccine if it ever appears.

Oh dear, you almost you had me.

nw1dqsv7amx026

Boggles wrote: »

Oh dear, you almost you had me.

Like I said above. Lucky for you that you were able to seize on one line to discount a huge post.
So after data analytics and a post from Sweden, your mind is still closed.
What will it take to change your viewpoint?

Spiderman0081

Arghus wrote: »

Interesting post. You seem very against the idea of a vaccine, why is that?

Mainly because they are trying to rush the results. Look at the side effects of the swine flu vaccine for example, which was also rushed.
If you have no underlying conditions, you only need to be as worried as you are about a regular flu season. But because of the emphasis put on hygiene, you can start worrying less about that also.
The elderly are effected by this virus but what it would cost monetarily to protect the elderly and those with underlying conditions would be a drop in the ocean compared to what a lockdown will cost, monetarily and on peoples health.
But the push by the majority of media outlets to scare even the young and healthy, is what is truly upsetting.
This is another reason why everyone should be second guessing their motives and also weighing the negatives of a rushed vaccine before even considering taking a chance on it.
A vaccine should never be taken lightly but there are talks already of a legal basis in Ireland for making the vaccine mandatory for covid. Taking people’s rights away during the lockdown was a piece of cake in Ireland it appears.
The Irish government has got all their eggs in one political basket when it comes to their covid strategy and they will do anything to dig themselves out of the hole they have put themselves in. As will many other countries. But at what cost? A rushed vaccine. No thanks.

Boggles

Jessica Swift Bearded wrote: »

Like I said above. Lucky for you that you were able to seize on one line to discount a huge post.
So after data analytics and a post from Sweden, your mind is still closed.
What will it take to change your viewpoint?

My mind is well and truly open.

I just don't tolerate or engage with people who are anti science.

It is a general rule that has served me quite well.

But hey knock yourself out.

nw1dqsv7amx026

Boggles wrote: »

My mind is well and truly open.

I just don't tolerate or engage with people who are anti science.

It is a general rule that has served me quite well.

But hey knock yourself out.

Anti science? Where?

I have a Masters degree in science!

nw1dqsv7amx026

Boggles wrote: »

My mind is well and truly open.

I just don't tolerate or engage with people who are anti science.

It is a general rule that has served me quite well.

But hey knock yourself out.

And since you're so keen on the science, have a read of this and tell me if you think it read science or politics?

https://www.narcolepsy.org.uk/resources/pandemrix-narcolepsy

During the Swine Flu epidemic of 2009/10 the vaccine Pandemrix was given to six million people in the UK, to high-risk groups, including children, with asthma, diabetes and heart disease. The vaccine had been approved by the European Medicines Agency for use across the EU, despite minimal clinical trials. The manufacturer, GlaxoSmithKline, was given an indemnity by the UK government. Some 850,000 vaccinations were given to children aged between 6 months and 16 years.

Pandemrix caused narcolepsy
The UK Health Protection Agency (now Public Health England) undertook a major study of 4- to 18-year-olds and found that around one in every 55,000 jabs led to narcolepsy.

nw1dqsv7amx026

Boggles wrote: »

My mind is well and truly open.

I just don't tolerate or engage with people who are anti science.

It is a general rule that has served me quite well.

But hey knock yourself out.

And since you're so keen on the science, have a read of this and tell me if you think it was science or politics?

https://www.narcolepsy.org.uk/resources/pandemrix-narcolepsy

During the Swine Flu epidemic of 2009/10 the vaccine Pandemrix was given to six million people in the UK, to high-risk groups, including children, with asthma, diabetes and heart disease. The vaccine had been approved by the European Medicines Agency for use across the EU, despite minimal clinical trials. The manufacturer, GlaxoSmithKline, was given an indemnity by the UK government. Some 850,000 vaccinations were given to children aged between 6 months and 16 years.

Pandemrix caused narcolepsy
The UK Health Protection Agency (now Public Health England) undertook a major study of 4- to 18-year-olds and found that around one in every 55,000 jabs led to narcolepsy.

Bit cynical

Jessica Swift Bearded wrote: »

Anti science? Where?

I have a Masters degree in science!

Agree. I think there's been a lot of fear surrounding the pandemic and politicians and the public have been only too willing to latch on to any expert if it is what they want to hear. Case in point would be the Imperial College model which turned out to be grossly wrong when researchers adapted it to Sweden. Yet it suited the politicians agenda. They could then point out how many lives were "saved" by imposing lockdown even though the science behind the figure was very dodgy.

It is great being pro-science but having concerns about the quality or accuracy of a scientific pronouncement does not make you "anti-science".

Boggles

Jessica Swift Bearded wrote: »

And since you're so keen on the science, have a read of this and tell me if you think it was science or politics?

I have read it and many more like it.

What's your point?

charlie14

tobefrank321 wrote: »

The Swedes at least have been transparent about a worst case scenario. No other country seems to have produced a worst case scenario for a second wave, unless you can find it for me?

The point of outlining a worst case scenario is to implement measures and advice to ensure it doesn't happen.

Its a myth as you well know that the Swedes have no restrictions, although generally they rely on advice and guidance than strict rules.

Here is that advice:

https://www.thelocal.se/20200228/coronavirus-the-everyday-precautions-to-take-if-youre-in-sweden

There was talk about lockdown fatigue in some countries and when best to implement a lockdown. It may have played a part in delays in the UK and possibly Ireland to a lesser extent. However we definitely saw at the end of lockdowns in Ireland, UK and US and other countries significant fatigue and a desire to get back to normality. There were protests in countries like France against it as well as the US. You only have to look back on this forum at the fatigue towards the end and the unwillingness ever to go into lockdown again.

Its always better to get people's buy in and co-operation than force them to do something as they will rebel against the latter.

I would be of the opinion that worst case scenario figures for deaths in a second wave are like modelling numbers. Nobody really has a clue. I would suspect that the Sweden number has as much do do with someone asking a question at this on-going inquiry into Sweden`s handling of Covid-19 and the figure is as much off the top of someones head as anything else.


It is much better to get people to willingly act responsibly than use lockdown, but that was not what happened in Ireland which lead to lockdown here in the first place.

FintanMcluskey

charlie14 wrote: »

I would suspect that the Sweden number has as much do do with someone asking a question at this on-going inquiry into Sweden`s handling of Covid-19

I hope the inquiry into Irelands handling of Covid is just as invasive

charlie14

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

I hope the inquiry into Irelands handling of Covid is just as invasive

If there is one it will be a much shorter affair I imagine. Especially if HIQA are correct. It will show just how effective lockdown was.

FintanMcluskey

charlie14 wrote: »

If there is one it will be a much shorter affair I imagine. Especially if HIQA are correct. It will show just how effective lockdown was.

Will you read the last 2 pages here. Specifically posts by the poster called bit cynical.

The statistics dont back up the effectiveness of a lockdown

charlie14

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

Will you read the last 2 pages here. Specifically posts by the poster called bit cynical.

The statistics dont back up the effectiveness of a lockdown

Look up the statistics for the Nordic countries and then tell me which is the outlier when it comes to confirmed cases and deaths. Sweden who did not use lockdown or any of the three others who did.
Not that it may give you a better understanding as from engaging with you on another thread you do not appear to know the difference between limited restrictions and a full lockdown.

FintanMcluskey

charlie14 wrote: »

Look up the statistics for the Nordic countries and then tell me which is the outlier when it comes to confirmed cases and deaths. Sweden who did not use lockdown or any of the three others who did.
Not that it may give you a better understanding as from engaging with you on another thread you do not appear to know the difference between limited restrictions and a full lockdown.

You we referring to the fact Irelands inquest would be short lived, which I believe was based upon your own inability to understand the figures.

Ill summarise for you, if you are over 65 you have the same chance of dying of Covid in Ireland or Sweden. Ireland has not protected its citizens any better.

So to address your initial point which I assume you based on your own limited understanding, the inquest for Ireland will need to be as invasive as Sweden.

nw1dqsv7amx026

Boggles wrote: »

I have read it and many more like it.

What's your point?

My point is that there will be huge political, financial and social pressure to create and deliver a vaccine.
So, being slow or reluctant to take this vaccine is neither foolish nor anti science.
I'm happy to be last in the queue to take it.

Could also be that the vulnerable are not able to take this vaccine.

tobefrank321

Jessica Swift Bearded wrote: »

My point is that there will be huge political, financial and social pressure to create and deliver a vaccine.
So, being slow or reluctant to take this vaccine is neither foolish nor anti science.
I'm happy to be last in the queue to take it.

Could also be that the vulnerable are not able to take this vaccine.

I'm as pro vaccine and science as the next person but as you say there's no guarantee this will work for those with a weak immune system unless someone can prove otherwise. That may mean the healthy will have to be vaccinated to protect the vulnerable. Fair enough if that's the case but trying a new vaccine on children who could end up with a lifetime of problems when covid might give them no issues is ethically questionable.

nw1dqsv7amx026

tobefrank321 wrote: »

I'm as pro vaccine and science as the next person but as you say there's no guarantee this will work for those with a weak immune system unless someone can prove otherwise. That may mean the healthy will have to be vaccinated to protect the vulnerable. Fair enough if that's the case but trying a new vaccine on children who could end up with a lifetime of problems when covid might give them no issues is ethically questionable.

I hope a vaccine works though and we see the back of this virus.

They've already decided that the rights of the young should be curtailed to protect the vulnerable.

FintanMcluskey

Jessica Swift Bearded wrote: »

They've already decided that the rights of the young should be curtailed to protect the vulnerable.

Unfortunately that is the case.

Boggles

Jessica Swift Bearded wrote: »

I'm happy to be last in the queue to take it.

Could also be that the vulnerable are not able to take this vaccine.

Indeed, more of a reason for the likes of us to take it so.

One thing I won't be doing is hoping to God no one takes it, as the poster I was replying to suggested.

nw1dqsv7amx026

Boggles wrote: »

Indeed, more of a reason for the likes of us to take it so.

One thing I won't be doing is hoping to God no one takes it, as the poster I was replying to suggested.

The problem with all this talk about vaccines is that you then focused solely on vaccines and ignored the rest of his post. I really wish he hadn't mentioned vaccines.

This thread is about Sweden and he is living in Sweden.
What do you think of his first hand experience from Sweden?

Consider the likelihood that it's not possible to deliver a vaccine to the Irish population until the end of 2021. For supply issues at the very least.

The vulnerable will continue to catch the virus and some will die or they will have to live a restricted life.
Meanwhile, perhaps Sweden will have immunity naturally, deaths will reduce and the vulnerable can resume a normal enjoyable life.

And before you say that there's no guarantee of immunity, consider how vaccines work.

Or is the answer that we flip between the various stages of lock down for the next few years and let the young take the tab.

Boggles

Jessica Swift Bearded wrote: »

The problem with all this talk about vaccines is that you then focused solely on vaccines and ignored the rest of his post. I really wish he hadn't mentioned vaccines.

This thread is about Sweden and he is living in Sweden.
What do you think of his first hand experience from Sweden?

Is he? You sure?

Anyway I have to email back this Nigerian Prince he says he is going to give me 600 million, imagine that.

nw1dqsv7amx026

Boggles wrote: »

Is he? You sure?

Anyway I have to email back this Nigerian Prince he says he is going to give me 600 million, imagine that.

Is it pointless me engaging with you?

Ok, let's assume he's lying.

What about the scenario I described. Any chance you could address that?

Spiderman0081

Boggles wrote: »

Indeed, more of a reason for the likes of us to take it so.

One thing I won't be doing is hoping to God no one takes it, as the poster I was replying to suggested.

No “healthy” people. That’s very important. I am in no way anti vaccine but am worried for any healthy person who is willing to take a chance on a new vaccine which is being hurried for many of the wrong reasons. I say that coming from a standpoint of caring. Nothing more, or less.