Sweden avoiding lockdown

charlie14

is_that_so wrote: »

That's all too late for Trump anyway. He'll get very little bump from, at best, a vaccine available for a brief time before the election. Q1 2021 is a more realistic as the earliest starting point for vaccines.

On Trump. From your lips to God`s ears.


I would agree on Q1 2021, but if Trump supporters wish to test it out for everybody`s benefit before then, personally I would be happy enough to let them.

tobefrank321

Trump is on a win/win with a vaccine.

If they release it before the election he can claim credit. If they refuse to release it before the election, he can still claim credit for trying to release it and health authorities refusing. Most of the electorate are not sophisticated enough to see the reasons why it wouldn't be released.

Hard to believe tens of millions of Americans still believe Trump is an anti establishment man of the people who is fighting the big bad government which of course he's in control of. Its completely bizarre.

biko

84,985 known cases
5,835 officially dead
6.86% of known cases have passed

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

Bit cynical

Newsweek: Sweden's 'Herd Immunity' Mastermind Gets Promoted by WHO

Speaking about his new role at WHO in an interview with UnHerd, Giesecke said media coverage about Sweden's response to the pandemic has become more favorable since it took hold at the start of the year. "Back then they thought we were crazy," he is quoted as saying.

He told the website he does not think the appointment is a "political statement," but that they liked his experience. He also said it is too early to say whether Sweden was right in its coronavirus strategy: "You should wait one year or maybe five years before comparing strategies. We still have a long way to go in this pandemic."

It should be noted, however, that herd immunity was never an official strategy of Sweden.

TomSweeney

99nsr125 wrote: »

Right so be prepared for something that doesn't exist just in time for the election ? ? ? How very convenient

MOH wrote: »

Combined with stopping testing asymptomatic close contacts so they can announce a huge drop in people testing positive, all thanks to their "vaccine".

Almost like you hope there isn't a vaccine coming, why is this so political ?



Like the people losing their heads over the russian vaccine, surely they should be happy ?



It's almost like they are enjoying this sh1t...

99nsr125

TomSweeney wrote: »

Almost like you hope there isn't a vaccine coming, why is this so political ?



Like the people losing their heads over the russian vaccine, surely they should be happy ?



It's almost like they are enjoying this sh1t...

Of course I want there to be a vaccine but it is foolish to think it'll just magic up

We've had sars and mers already you'd think there would be a body of work on a viable vaccine for them to work with but none such vaccine arrived and sars was 15 years ago with mers almost 10 years ago. Swine flu inbetween and yet we're still without vaccines for all 3.

Getting an immune response is one thing, getting a strong **and** safe enough response is entirely different.

is_that_so

TomSweeney wrote: »

Almost like you hope there isn't a vaccine coming, why is this so political ?



Like the people losing their heads over the russian vaccine, surely they should be happy ?



It's almost like they are enjoying this sh1t...

The Russians made it political with the Sputnik reference. The Russians haven't even got to Phase 3, their testing was tiny and until a few days ago hadn't released any information about it. None of this is confidence inspiring.

coppergrass

The public health authority here (Folkhälsomyndigheten) released the results of study last week and some of the details are interesting:

* Out of 2,500 people randomly tested for the virus there were no positive results

* 7% of people donating blood had antibodies

* 12% of people checked for antibodies in Stockholm tested positive

You can find an article about it in Svenska Dagbladet in the article: corona-i-sverige--torsdagens-presskonferens. I can't include the full link because I don't have enough posts.

charlie14

99nsr125 wrote: »

Of course I want there to be a vaccine but it is foolish to think it'll just magic up

We've had sars and mers already you'd think there would be a body of work on a viable vaccine for them to work with but none such vaccine arrived and sars was 15 years ago with mers almost 10 years ago. Swine flu inbetween and yet we're still without vaccines for all 3.

Getting an immune response is one thing, getting a strong **and** safe enough response is entirely different.

SARS-CoV-1 first appeared in November 2002. Total infections were 8,000 with 700 deaths. Through the use of face masks, temperature scanners and quarantine it was brought under control and by May 2003 it had disappeared. July 2003 the WHO declared the threat over.

MERS first appeared in 2012 with humans being typically infected through contact with camels. Between 2012 and 2020 there have been around 2,500 infections and 900 deaths.


There are two vaccines available since 2009 for H!N1 (swine flu). Pandemix and Celvapan.

With SARS disappearing in such a short period of time and MERS being essentially regiona,l (there have only been 29 cases in USA and no deaths), due to the primary transfer being from camels.
With SARS disappearing and relatively low numbers of deaths due to MERS there wa no great incentive on pharma to invest heavily in vaccine research on either.
Covid-19 is totally different. There is a massive market for a vaccine, with the added incentive for parma of governments worldwide providing billions in funding towards research to find vaccines.

charlie14

coppergrass wrote: »

The public health authority here (Folkhälsomyndigheten) released the results of study last week and some of the details are interesting:

* Out of 2,500 people randomly tested for the virus there were no positive results

* 7% of people donating blood had antibodies

* 12% of people checked for antibodies in Stockholm tested positive

You can find an article about it in Svenska Dagbladet in the article: corona-i-sverige--torsdagens-presskonferens. I can't include the full link because I don't have enough posts.

Those Swedish antibody test results are in line with 60,000 test carried out by Spain who had lockdown a few months ago nationally and for Madrid.
Nowhere near herd immunity for either based on those results.

Bergamo in Italy,the epicenter of their infections, showed 56% with antibodies.

99nsr125

charlie14 wrote: »

SARS-CoV-1 first appeared in November 2002. Total infections were 8,000 with 700 deaths. Through the use of face masks, temperature scanners and quarantine it was brought under control and by May 2003 it had disappeared. July 2003 the WHO declared the threat over.

MERS first appeared in 2012 with humans being typically infected through contact with camels. Between 2012 and 2020 there have been around 2,500 infections and 900 deaths.


There are two vaccines available since 2009 for H!N1 (swine flu). Pandemix and Celvapan.

With SARS disappearing in such a short period of time and MERS being essentially regiona,l (there have only been 29 cases in USA and no deaths), due to the primary transfer being from camels.
With SARS disappearing and relatively low numbers of deaths due to MERS there wa no great incentive on pharma to invest heavily in vaccine research on either.
Covid-19 is totally different. There is a massive market for a vaccine, with the added incentive for parma of governments worldwide providing billions in funding towards research to find vaccines.

The two for swine flu are not used because of the narcolepsy side effects so it remains no vaccine for the 3

charlie14

99nsr125 wrote: »

The two for swine flu are not used because of the narcolepsy side effects so it remains no vaccine for the 3

Sweden administered over 5 million Pandemrix vaccines for swine flu.
To the best of my knowledge in Swede there are around 200 cases of narcolepsy allegedly due to Pandemrix.
That is 4 in 100,000 suffering a possible side effect to a vaccine. Sweden presently has 58 deaths per 100,000 due to Covid-19.

I am not aware of any narcolepsy problems related to the Celvapan vaccine, other than 1 possible case from over 130,000 Irish vaccinations.

I have already explained the reasons why there was no major effort to develop SARS or MERS vaccines, although the research into both has saved time in the development of a Covid-19 vaccine

tobefrank321

charlie14 wrote: »

Those Swedish antibody test results are in line with 60,000 test carried out by Spain who had lockdown a few months ago nationally and for Madrid.
Nowhere near herd immunity for either based on those results.

Bergamo in Italy,the epicenter of their infections, showed 56% with antibodies.

Herd immunity despite what you claim was always stated as a secondary aim.

Their primary aim was to live with the virus.

MOH

TomSweeney wrote: »

Almost like you hope there isn't a vaccine coming, why is this so political ?



Like the people losing their heads over the russian vaccine, surely they should be happy ?



It's almost like they are enjoying this sh1t...

WTF are you on about?

If you think a US announcement of a potential vaccine rollout out weeks before the election isn't political, you're insanely naive.

And how you get from that to people enjoying this crap is mind boggling.

GreeBo

GT89 wrote: »

The Irish need to take the same approach as Sweden and now. No more masks and reopen the pubs now it can be done tommorrow with the stroke of a pen.

I'm all for a conversation about opening things up, but why would you get rid of masks? What negative impact are they actually having?

pwurple

GreeBo wrote: »

I'm all for a conversation about opening things up, but why would you get rid of masks? What negative impact are they actually having?

Whether masks are around or not doesn't personally bother me, but there are clearly some negative impacts.

Litter. Around here is strewn with blue disposable masks. So much for single use plastic reduction.

Communication. I know a few hearing-impared people, they are finding it very difficult to communicate in shops, as they would have relied on lip reading to some extent, in combination with their hearing aids.

Consumerism. Did we really need another category of consumable stuff to be created, sold and sent to landfill? The fashion industry has grabbed this with both arms and created millions of designs for masks.

CalamariFritti

Masks are horrible because they make you feel like you're living in some sort of Chernobyl like dystopia. How do people not realise this? Its much more than a minor physical inconvenience. Not to mention the people who are supposed to wear them 8 hours a day.

If there was anything coherent to back up the claim that the have any tangible effect the way they are currently mandated I'd even get around to them in certain scenarios. But since there isn't I find the above way too much a detriment effect to how our society 'feels' for want of a better word.

Widdensushi

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10157742206446699&id=651546698

the incredible pudding

Widdensushi wrote: »

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10157742206446699&id=651546698

I like the bit about having to catch trout.

In all seriousness though, Sweden does not have the lowest case rate in Europe. That graph is using total figures added / reduced which is totally screwed due to the false positive f**k up from last week or so, rather than the actual data (which is around ~200 new cases each day on average for the last week.

GreeBo

pwurple wrote: »

Whether masks are around or not doesn't personally bother me, but there are clearly some negative impacts.

Litter. Around here is strewn with blue disposable masks. So much for single use plastic reduction.

Communication. I know a few hearing-impared people, they are finding it very difficult to communicate in shops, as they would have relied on lip reading to some extent, in combination with their hearing aids.

Consumerism. Did we really need another category of consumable stuff to be created, sold and sent to landfill? The fashion industry has grabbed this with both arms and created millions of designs for masks.

Sorry, but thats a big reach for me.

CalamariFritti wrote: »

Masks are horrible because they make you feel like you're living in some sort of Chernobyl like dystopia. How do people not realise this? Its much more than a minor physical inconvenience. Not to mention the people who are supposed to wear them 8 hours a day.

If there was anything coherent to back up the claim that the have any tangible effect the way they are currently mandated I'd even get around to them in certain scenarios. But since there isn't I find the above way too much a detriment effect to how our society 'feels' for want of a better word.

Dr's and nurses have been wearing masks all day for years.
To clarify your opinion, you dont think masks are helping in the prevention of the spread of COVID?

CalamariFritti

GreeBo wrote: »

Sorry, but thats a big reach for me.

Dr's and nurses have been wearing masks all day for years.
To clarify your opinion, you dont think masks are helping in the prevention of the spread of COVID?

Its quite a general question so I will say they may or may not.

I'm no anti-masker for the sake of being contrary. I looked at the so called evidence produced and while there are bits that are obviously true the way they are being connected and projected onto every day scenarios has bigger holes than a Swiss cheese. I think conjecture is the technical term.

I don't really want to rehash my reasoning yet one more time. If you want to know look through my post history please.

In short no I dont think wearing masks in shops and supermarkets in Ireland will make any tangible difference. It might if there was any indication that such places had infections while we were in there without masks but the only info we have on that says the opposite.

Edit: Also from observing people being at their faces all the time with those masks I dont think we can confidently say they aren't doing more damage than they are supposed to prevent.

Widdensushi

the incredible pudding wrote: »

I like the bit about having to catch trout.

In all seriousness though, Sweden does not have the lowest case rate in Europe. That graph is using total figures added / reduced which is totally screwed due to the false positive f**k up from last week or so, rather than the actual data (which is around ~200 new cases each day on average for the last week.

Sure I knew it didn't sound right but it shows how the swedes have been feeling some of the criticism and travel bans.

JDD

CalamariFritti wrote: »

Its quite a general question so I will say they may or may not.

I'm no anti-masker for the sake of being contrary. I looked at the so called evidence produced and while there are bits that are obviously true the way they are being connected and projected onto every day scenarios has bigger holes than a Swiss cheese. I think conjecture is the technical term.

I don't really want to rehash my reasoning yet one more time. If you want to know look through my post history please.

In short no I dont think wearing masks in shops and supermarkets in Ireland will make any tangible difference. It might if there was any indication that such places had infections while we were in there without masks but the only info we have on that says the opposite.

Edit: Also from observing people being at their faces all the time with those masks I dont think we can confidently say they aren't doing more damage than they are supposed to prevent.

Genuine question: I know you say that there is no evidence that there were outbreaks in supermarkets and shops in Ireland. But we were getting 700-900 cases a day back at the end of April. That was a full four weeks after the strict lockdown started. Two thirds of those infections were "community infections", meaning they had no idea where the positive person caught the virus.

Given literally the only indoor public spaces at that time was the supermarket, the takeaway and the off licence, I suspect a good proportion of those cases were caught at those shops. Clearly there was such widespread infections in the community at that time that it absolutely could have been person-to-person infection at the supermarket.

Clearly the infection level in the community is massively lower now than it was then. If the criteria for testing people was as wide in April as it is now, we'd have got thousands and thousands of new positive tests every day. So you've got a much lower chance now of catching it at the supermarket than you did in April.

But that's not because it can't be caught at the supermarket. It's because the level of transmission in the community has been supressed. Through, amongst other things, mask wearing.

CalamariFritti

Its not correct that those were the only places. A good third of the workforce was still carrying on as they were deemed essential workers. Public services, banks and other financial services, transport, health services, many other places. Our lockdown had many exemptions.

What I base it on is basically the non existing infection rates amongst supermarket staff for those months. Who were working around us stacking shelves, taking the goods we placed on the belts, our money, basically interacting with us more or less like before. All without masks. And they weren't just in there for 10 or 20 minutes. They were in there all day long exposed to all of us coming through.

The retailers published staff infection numbers for those months and while some may say you can't trust them they were in single figures and we don't even know whether those few got it in the shop or at home.

Its far from bullet proof evidence fair enough but I think if supermarkets were environments for dangerous cov2 concentrations it would have been on a different scale altogether.

Also while we had transmission it also came down to single figures in July all without masks. All going to supermarkets and later to other shops too.

Not claiming I know btw. How could I? Nobody else does. But looking at those facts things don't really add up with regards to masks is all I'm saying.

JDD

All fair points CalamariFritti. You could say that some of the low level of identified positive cases in supermarkets/shop staff during lockdown is due to the general younger age of the workers - but even still, there's definitely some middle aged and older managers in supermarkets and shops, and a disproportionate number of those workers should have been affected.

charlie14

tobefrank321 wrote: »

Herd immunity despite what you claim was always stated as a secondary aim.

Their primary aim was to live with the virus.

Difficult to know what the primary aim was.
It appears to vacillate on any given day from protecting the vulnerable, ensuring their health services were not overrun, protecting their economy, too living with the virus depending on who is making the claim.



Interesting to see you acknowledge that you now believe that for Sweden, if not the primary aim the secondary aim, was herd immunity rather than this fortunate coincidence some in authority there, (and echoed by some here), would like us to believe.

charlie14

tobefrank321 wrote: »

Trump is on a win/win with a vaccine.

If they release it before the election he can claim credit. If they refuse to release it before the election, he can still claim credit for trying to release it and health authorities refusing. Most of the electorate are not sophisticated enough to see the reasons why it wouldn't be released.

Hard to believe tens of millions of Americans still believe Trump is an anti establishment man of the people who is fighting the big bad government which of course he's in control of. Its completely bizarre.

It does not look as if it will even come to the health authorities being in a position to release a vaccine before the election.
Moderna have slowed their phase 3 tests due to their volunteer base not being representative, and Pfizer from their CEO`s statement have no intention of rushing their vaccine for authorisation.

charlie14

the incredible pudding wrote: »

I like the bit about having to catch trout.

In all seriousness though, Sweden does not have the lowest case rate in Europe. That graph is using total figures added / reduced which is totally screwed due to the false positive f**k up from last week or so, rather than the actual data (which is around ~200 new cases each day on average for the last week.

Sweden`s Public Health Agency director general Johan Carlson has recently stated that from last weeks 126,219 test, 1.2% were positive for Covid-19.
That would give a figure of just over 1,500 for the week. A daily average of around 200 for last week.

TRANQUILLO

https://principia-scientific.com/sweden-with-no-lockdown-or-masks-claims-covid-19-victory/?

Sweden claims covid victory the headline states.

Seems they have played a blinder .

the incredible pudding

TRANQUILLO wrote: »

https://principia-scientific.com/sweden-with-no-lockdown-or-masks-claims-covid-19-victory/?

Sweden claims covid victory the headline states.

Seems they have played a blinder .

Nah, lots of mess ups with the approach and it's too early to tell. Not as bad as some doomsayers here were stating but plenty of mistakes made. Things are looking much, much better here right now thankfully but it's still early days.


As an aside that site makes me totally nauseous with all the anti-vaccine nonsense and climate change denial bile, that's even discounting that the article is full of false information and false assumptions.