Sweden avoiding lockdown

mcsean2163

Bit cynical wrote: »

However, 10 (or 9.5) months is still a good portion of a year. Therefore if you are arguing that there have been a lot of excess deaths due to Covid-19, this should show up in the figures for 2020 when compared with other years.

You would have a valid argument if Covid had only been around for a very short time in 2020. You could then argue that it was not present long enough to have an impact on the figures for the year. However this is not the case.

Number of deaths per year has been increasing since 2010. That means each of the last 5 years would have significant increased excess deaths each year if methodology same as US.

https://www.indexmundi.com/g/g.aspx?c=ei&v=26

charlie14

Bit cynical wrote: »

However, 10 (or 9.5) months is still a good portion of a year. Therefore if you are arguing that there have been a lot of excess deaths due to Covid-19, this should show up in the figures for 2020 when compared with other years.

You would have a valid argument if Covid had only been around for a very short time in 2020. You could then argue that it was not present long enough to have an impact on the figures for the year. However this is not the case.

It already does show up clearly from the the 11th. week of the year in comparison to other year, but not before that because up until the 11th. week there were none.
That is the point I was making. If you are taking the year as being from 1st.Jan until Dec 31st. then on excess deaths due to Covid-19 you are really only looking at 9.5 months rather than 12.

I suppose knowing the average weekly deaths and the 2020 deaths for those weekly since the first Covid-19 death, it is easy enough to do the calculations end of 2020 anyway.

charlie14

Stormyteacup wrote: »

So we wait until March to compare 12 month excess deaths.

Why do I have a feeling that even if death figures for that period are average or below, there will be reasons to account for this - and none of them will be that a certain number of people are expected to die in any 12 month period.

Not at all.we already know what the average yearly deaths are, so on a like for like basis time-wise then we would know for sure one way or the other.

charlie14

mcsean2163 wrote: »

Number of deaths per year has been increasing since 2010. That means each of the last 5 years would have significant increased excess death rate if methodology same as US.

https://www.indexmundi.com/g/g.aspx?c=ei&v=26

Not really. Sweden had the lowest number of death in 2019 compared to the previous 10 years

Bit cynical

charlie14 wrote: »

Not really. Sweden had the lowest number of death in 2019 compared to the previous 10 years

This is why it makes sense to compare 2020 (the first year with significant Covid-19) with one of the earlier years.

charlie14

Bit cynical wrote: »

This is why it makes sense to compare 2020 (the first year with significant Covid-19) with one of the earlier years.

There isn`t a lot of difference when you take the weekly averages for 2015 - 2019, so doing a like for like basis for the weeks with Covid-19 for 2020 it would be simple enough in that regard.

Vieira82

tobefrank321 wrote: »

What facts and information? You're just posting unsubstantiated nonsense at this stage. And like I said you're utterly clueless about end of life care. You didn't even know morphine was common in end of life care in every country.

So after 19,000 deaths in care homes in Spain the government decided to take action. And you call this "caring"?

Laughable if it wasn't so serious.

Again with the lies

Please find me ONE WORD OF MINE where I said that I did not know Morphine is used Please show me where I said that.

And SECONDLY. You insist on wanting to compare countries OVERWHELMED with controling the virus and DISCOVERING what was hapenning in PRIVATE care homes.

With governments WILLINGLY IGNORING Care Homes and letting people die while resources are still available.

And I get a Yellow Card, while you constantly go around rambli

Mate... here's some facts for you...

https://english.elpais.com/spanish_news/2020-11-06/over-20000-people-died-of-coronavirus-in-spanish-care-homes-during-first-wave-government-report-says.html
https://english.elpais.com/society/2020-03-24/spanish-prosecutors-launch-investigation-after-bodies-found-inside-senior-homes.html
https://english.elpais.com/society/2020-03-20/coronavirus-crisis-in-madrids-senior-homes-if-he-gets-infected-no-one-will-do-anything-to-help-him.html

Oh yeah when did this happen? OH LOOK! When Spain had almost 10k cases a day and over 800 deaths daily....

Let's look at Ireland and Sweden on the same period shall we?

How many cases was the highest peak in Ireland on the 10th of April... oh look! 1500! How many deaths? Oh look! Again! 24th of April only time there was reported over 200 deaths where it was a clear adjustment.

And how much was the average on that? OH YEAH! Not even close to 100...

Let's look at Sweden's first wave now...

Oh look! (points at stats) Up until June 2020 highest number of daily cases was 1700 and highest daily deaths was 110 giver or take!

Source: https://gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html?fbclid=IwAR3U9uMTc0gse2DSwrUPiIJDKx7ZhuypRDentQKwg5R285ylls66z_ImPp8#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6

Oh! And I'll let you go ahead and do the mats on cases per million and deaths per million in those countries. So you can further prove yourself wrong.

So yeah PERFECT SENSE to compare an overwhelmed country to countries letting people dying on purpose, instead of giving them care! Absolute perfect sense...

Now go ahead report me again to the mods, because facts, and REAL information don't matter to you, only lies, and when you're properly put in your place you behave like a little offended snowflake and report it to the mods.

Hilarious

Now please, go ahead try again to attack me personally trying to put words in my keyboard that I never typed... because that's your only strategy left, obviously

suicide_circus

Bit cynical wrote: »

If that excess does not appear then we would have to look at the published Covid-19 deaths and ask how many of them genuinely had Covid-19 as the primary cause of deaths. Did they merely die with Covid-19 rather than of Covid-19 or did Covid-19 merely bring forward a death that would have occurred anyway?

This question will never be answered and as such we will never really know how bad this pandemic was. Utterly surreal situation. The way deaths/case have been recorded and reported has been a cock up of biblical proportions.

Vieira82

Bit cynical wrote: »

If that excess does not appear then we would have to look at the published Covid-19 deaths and ask how many of them genuinely had Covid-19 as the primary cause of deaths. Did they merely die with Covid-19 rather than of Covid-19 or did Covid-19 merely bring forward a death that would have occurred anyway?

...we would have to look at the published cancer deaths and ask how many of them genuinely had cancer as the primary cause of deaths. Did they merely die with cancer rather than of cancer or did cancer merely bring forward a death that would have occurred anyway?

...we would have to look at the published pneumonia deaths and ask how many of them genuinely had pneumonia as the primary cause of deaths. Did they merely die with pneumonia rather than of pneumonia or did pneumonia merely brought forward a death that would have occurred anyway?


...we would have to look at the published heart failure deaths and ask how many of them genuinely had heart failure as the primary cause of deaths. Did they merely die with heart failure rather than of heart failure or did heart failure merely bring forward a death that would have occurred anyway?

...we would have to look at the published car crash deaths and ask how many of them genuinely had a car crash as the primary cause of deaths. Did they merely die in a car crash rather than of a car crash or would the car crash merely bring forward a death that would have occurred anyway?

...we would have to look at the published homicide deaths and ask how many of them genuinely where a homicide as the primary cause of deaths. Did they merely die during a homicide rather than of a homicide or would the homicide merely bring forward a death that would have occurred anyway?

I rest my case...

ArthurDayne

Vieira82 wrote: »

...we would have to look at the published cancer deaths and ask how many of them genuinely had cancer as the primary cause of deaths. Did they merely die with cancer rather than of cancer or did cancer merely bring forward a death that would have occurred anyway?

...we would have to look at the published pneumonia deaths and ask how many of them genuinely had pneumonia as the primary cause of deaths. Did they merely die with pneumonia rather than of pneumonia or did pneumonia merely brought forward a death that would have occurred anyway?


...we would have to look at the published heart failure deaths and ask how many of them genuinely had heart failure as the primary cause of deaths. Did they merely die with heart failure rather than of heart failure or did heart failure merely bring forward a death that would have occurred anyway?

...we would have to look at the published car crash deaths and ask how many of them genuinely had a car crash as the primary cause of deaths. Did they merely die in a car crash rather than of a car crash or would the car crash merely bring forward a death that would have occurred anyway?

...we would have to look at the published homicide deaths and ask how many of them genuinely where a homicide as the primary cause of deaths. Did they merely die during a homicide rather than of a homicide or would the homicide merely bring forward a death that would have occurred anyway?

I rest my case...

The difference of course being that none of these afflictions or terrible actions are used as an excusatory rationale for the wholesale locking down of society, the suppression of civil liberties, the wreaking of long term socioeconomic damage and the exacerbation of poverty.

The scrutiny of causation in Covid cases is not as unreasonable as your comment seems to be implying — nor does it necessitate the practical absurdity you also seem to imply it would. This particular virus has been an instigator of changes to our way of life that will reverberate across generations, so it is perfectly fair and reasonable that it is subject to a particular higher level of scrutiny.

GG66

ArthurDayne wrote: »

The difference of course being that none of these afflictions or terrible actions are used as an excusatory rationale for the wholesale locking down of society, the suppression of civil liberties, the wreaking of long term socioeconomic damage and the exacerbation of poverty.

The difference is none of these are highly contagious.

ArthurDayne

GG66 wrote: »

The difference is none of these are highly contagious.

That’s not the point being made though.

Stormyteacup

GG66 wrote: »

The difference is none of these are highly contagious.

Another difference is that none of them are notifiable diseases.

So if any of those were a cause of death in 2019, you can reasonably take it as that was their main cause of death.

Dying with any of those things listed above from March 2020 might show an addition illness on their death cert, which would include them in Covid death stats.

Vieira82

ArthurDayne wrote: »

The difference of course being that none of these afflictions or terrible actions are used as an excusatory rationale for the wholesale locking down of society, the suppression of civil liberties, the wreaking of long term socioeconomic damage and the exacerbation of poverty.

The scrutiny of causation in Covid cases is not as unreasonable as your comment seems to be implying — nor does it necessitate the practical absurdity you also seem to imply it would. This particular virus has been an instigator of changes to our way of life that will reverberate across generations, so it is perfectly fair and reasonable that it is subject to a particular higher level of scrutiny.

The difference is 1.3 Million people dead, the majority of which in the supposed developed countries of "the west" and in comparison, using the same reporting methods, very few reported deaths in other regions of the globe with higher population density like Asia and fewer cases also showing clearly how it's done.

But because of blatant Euro-centric views (to not call it something worse), successful countries that are not in lockdown and successfully controlled the virus, are conveniently ignored in favor of the same, now old screams of "civil liberties" "long term socio-economic" impacts and the same form of non-sensical vocabulary... because all of Asia is clearly all degenerate commies that eat capitalists for breakfast

So I'll bet it's the same crowds that are against masks, against any safety precautions, are the same crowd that refuses to admit there's non-european countries with their economies running with minimum impact, and let me guess, it's the same crowd that will be against any kind of vaccines, and I bet these same crowds are of one particular political spectrum which wants freedom of civil rights, while locking down scores of vulnerable people for months on end (their civil liberties obviously don't matter to anything) and of course extremely egocentric "i and my money matter, I don't care if others die of it as long as I can buy a fourth house in West Cork"

Vieira82

Lastly... gotta love how this whole "mental health", "the economy", "civil liberties" question is 100% one sided... https://imgur.com/gallery/PWRJFpR

nofools

charlie14 wrote: »

Not much there other than your usual rambling nonsense. Your maths hasn`t improved since you were last on here either.

The first Covid-19 death in Sweden was in March. That is 8 months ago not 10.

If you are so confident on no excess deaths in a year (12 months in case you are not aware), due to Covid-19, then should the number not be that from March 2020 to March 2021 ?

The rest of your post is just noise attempting to ignore the numbers shouting "look over there"

They are casually ignoring the predictable difference to other accidents when an entire population change their habits.

Willful ignorance and acting like they just split the atom with their "analysis" of a single factor of a multivariate problem.

Rob A. Bank

The weapons grade bull$hit comments from Swedish authorities about their 'herd immunity' compared with the reality of the case numbers.

nofools

Vieira82 wrote: »

The difference is 1.3 Million people dead, the majority of which in the supposed developed countries of "the west" and in comparison, using the same reporting methods, very few reported deaths in other regions of the globe with higher population density like Asia and fewer cases also showing clearly how it's done.

But because of blatant Euro-centric views (to not call it something worse), successful countries that are not in lockdown and successfully controlled the virus, are conveniently ignored in favor of the same, now old screams of "civil liberties" "long term socio-economic" impacts and the same form of non-sensical vocabulary... because all of Asia is clearly all degenerate commies that eat capitalists for breakfast

So I'll bet it's the same crowds that are against masks, against any safety precautions, are the same crowd that refuses to admit there's non-european countries with their economies running with minimum impact, and let me guess, it's the same crowd that will be against any kind of vaccines, and I bet these same crowds are of one particular political spectrum which wants freedom of civil rights, while locking down scores of vulnerable people for months on end (their civil liberties obviously don't matter to anything) and of course extremely egocentric "i and my money matter, I don't care if others die of it as long as I can buy a fourth house in West Cork"

Good to have someone who can see the blatantly obvious.

biko

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/04/08/is-swedens-lax-approach-coronavirus-backfiring/

Prime Minister Stefan Löfven has urged Swedes to apply “common sense.” While this soft approach stunned the rest of Europe, Sweden maintained that it will turn out to be more effective.

For people suffering lockdowns across the world, Sweden’s approach might appear tempting to emulate. If Swedes can continue their daily lives and keep their economy going at no higher cost in terms of health, why not pursue the same strategy?

The public has been assured that Sweden will outperform other countries. Indeed, Sweden ranks among the lowest of 26 surveyed countries when it comes to fear of the coronavirus in a recent YouGov poll –– even though the country ranks fifth-highest in per capita deaths of the countries surveyed.

Time will tell, but we fear that Sweden has picked the worst possible time to experiment with national chauvinism.

ArthurDayne

Vieira82 wrote: »

The difference is 1.3 Million people dead, the majority of which in the supposed developed countries of "the west" and in comparison, using the same reporting methods, very few reported deaths in other regions of the globe with higher population density like Asia and fewer cases also showing clearly how it's done.

But because of blatant Euro-centric views (to not call it something worse), successful countries that are not in lockdown and successfully controlled the virus, are conveniently ignored in favor of the same, now old screams of "civil liberties" "long term socio-economic" impacts and the same form of non-sensical vocabulary... because all of Asia is clearly all degenerate commies that eat capitalists for breakfast

So I'll bet it's the same crowds that are against masks, against any safety precautions, are the same crowd that refuses to admit there's non-european countries with their economies running with minimum impact, and let me guess, it's the same crowd that will be against any kind of vaccines, and I bet these same crowds are of one particular political spectrum which wants freedom of civil rights, while locking down scores of vulnerable people for months on end (their civil liberties obviously don't matter to anything) and of course extremely egocentric "i and my money matter, I don't care if others die of it as long as I can buy a fourth house in West Cork"

A lot of words being shoved in mouths there and I’m really not sure how some of these points relate to what I said.

Firstly, some of the Asian countries have done well in suppressing the virus but the often-cited ones are countries who have learned from previous epidemic experiences and have developed means of response. In terms of their reporting, perhaps it is the exact same methodology or perhaps it is not, though I seem to recall you being the one peddling quasi-conspiracies about how countries tallied their numbers (i.e. Sweden). Regardless of that, yes, they have done well — but I don’t think we necessarily could have emulated them. Europe is a continental shelf where some half a billion people live in a largely “open border” gathering of countries. In terms of human movement, the EU operates more or less like one single country. This is very different from the likes of Taiwan and South Korea. A further observation to make is the difference in law. South Korea’s data protection laws for example, or rather the exemptions afforded under them, allow the State to harvest personal data for tracking purposes in a way which GDPR here would not.

These realities, combined with the fact that our preparedness for a pandemic was already lagging behind some of the Asian countries, means that we were starting off from a place where it would have been extremely difficult to emulate them. Nothing to do with being Eurocentric or Asians being commies or whatever you’re banging on about there.

As for your last point, it is utterly dismaying how wrong people are getting this. The people buying houses after this pandemic will be the people of the professional classes and anyone else who has had the luxury of being able to go about their work remotely and continue making a steady income. The very fact you are focusing on the wealthier end of society is a frankly horrifying glimpse into what has happened in our new ‘only-one-issue-matters’ society — we have seemingly forgotten the economically vulnerable of our country (from the utterly destitute to those whose livelihoods now teeter precariously on the edge of oblivion). But nah, it’s just all the w****rs wanting to buy houses that are whingeing, right?

nofools

biko wrote: »

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/04/08/is-swedens-lax-approach-coronavirus-backfiring/

"The public has been assured"

Mystic meg stuff

nofools

ArthurDayne wrote: »

A lot of words being shoved in mouths there and I’m really not sure how some of these points relate to what I said.

Firstly, some of the Asian countries have done well in suppressing the virus but the often-cited ones are countries who have learned from previous epidemic experiences and have developed means of response. In terms of their reporting, perhaps it is the exact same methodology or perhaps it is not, though I seem to recall you being the one peddling quasi-conspiracies about how countries tallied their numbers (i.e. Sweden). Regardless of that, yes, they have done well — but I don’t think we necessarily could have emulated them. Europe is a continental shelf where some half a billion people live in a largely “open border” gathering of countries. In terms of human movement, the EU operates more or less like one single country. This is very different from the likes of Taiwan and South Korea. A further observation to make is the difference in law. South Korea’s data protection laws for example, or rather the exemptions afforded under them, allow the State to harvest personal data for tracking purposes in a way which GDPR here would not.

These realities, combined with the fact that our preparedness for a pandemic was already lagging behind some of the Asian countries, means that we were starting off from a place where it would have been extremely difficult to emulate them. Nothing to do with being Eurocentric or Asians being commies or whatever you’re banging on about there.

As for your last point, it is utterly dismaying how wrong people are getting this. The people buying houses after this pandemic will be the people of the professional classes and anyone else who has had the luxury of being able to go about their work remotely and continue making a steady income. The very fact you are focusing on the wealthier end of society is a frankly horrifying glimpse into what has happened in our new ‘only-one-issue-matters’ society — we have seemingly forgotten the economically vulnerable of our country (from the utterly destitute to those whose livelihoods now teeter precariously on the edge of oblivion). But nah, it’s just all the w****rs wanting to buy houses that are whingeing, right?

What stops us learning from the experience of others?

j@utis

Vieira82 wrote: »

https://imgur.com/gallery/PWRJFpR

What happened to the patients on the trolley's in the corridors, up to covid times? Hospitals never had enough of beds before, and they still don't have enough of them, so what's new here?

ArthurDayne

nofools wrote: »

What stops us learning from the experience of others?

To be fair, there is absolutely nothing in my post that says we should not. I would fully expect that in the wake of this crisis we, and the wider EU, will work to improve our preparedness and our system for dealing with a future pandemic. I don’t see any reason why we should not look to Asia for inspiration and lessons on how we deal with things like this.

But we have to remember that there are certain things about our liberties that have downsides, and even with those downsides we may not be quick to give them up. A big challenge for us in Europe is our openness — I mean for the last few years with Brexit many here have argued passionately in favour of our free movement and our border policies, and rightly so in my opinion. But if this is the level of freedom we wish to have in Europe — we must also acknowledge that such freedom comes at a cost. If many on the Right had their way, and the open plain of the Schengen area was replaced by tightly monitored and controlled borders, we probably could have controlled the virus better. Taiwan and South Korea, by virtue of the first being an island and the second being attached to the Asian landmass by the tightest border on earth, have that “luxury“ automatically.

So that is just one question, among many other fundamental questions, that we would have to ask ourselves. To what extent should our commitment to an Open Europe be stymied by the fact that ramping up borders would make it easier to contain any future pandemic in the continent? If tightening up borders might save lives, should we abandon the somewhat borderless Europe that has been built? It is considerations like these that might make us realise that there are bigger pictures that extend beyond merely saving lives in an immediate sense.

There are also other questions, such as data harvesting which I refer to in my previous post, where again we would have to ask how much further we as a people are willing to go down the path of our personal lives being continuously tracked and with great detail.

nofools

ArthurDayne wrote: »

To be fair, there is absolutely nothing in my post that says we should not. I would fully expect that in the wake of this crisis we, and the wider EU, will work to improve our preparedness and our system for dealing with a future pandemic. I don’t see any reason why we should not look to Asia for inspiration and lessons on how we deal with things like this.

But we have to remember that there are certain things about our liberties that have downsides, and even with those downsides we may not be quick to give them up. A big challenge for us in Europe is our openness — I mean for the last few years with Brexit many here have argued passionately in favour of our free movement and our border policies, and rightly so in my opinion. But if this is the level of freedom we wish to have in Europe — we must also acknowledge that such freedom might comes at a cost. If many on the Right had their way, and the open plain of the Schengen area was replaced by tightly monitored and controlled borders, we probably could have controlled the virus better. Taiwan and South Korea, by virtue of the first being an island and the second being attached to the Asian landmass by the tightest border on earth, have that “luxury“ also automatically.

So that is just one question, among many other fundamental questions, that we would have to ask ourselves. To what extent should our commitment to an Open Europe be stymied by the fact that ramping up borders would do make it easier to contain any future pandemic in the continent?

There are also other questions, such as data harvesting which I refer to in my previous post, where again we would have to ask how much further we as a people are willing to go down the path of our personal lives being continuously tracked and with great detail.

Tldr

You seemed to be making a lot of excuses for how Asian countries were more prepared. I find them poor at this stage in the game.

9 months now to get our act together and we should be copying successful models line for line, word for word.

As WHO were getting into action in early Feb, we didn't even have temp scanning at Dublin airport. I have seen better controls for foot and mouth disease in the past.

Ironically we lost a huge amount of freedom trying to preserve it.

Vieira82

ArthurDayne wrote: »

To be fair, there is absolutely nothing in my post that says we should not. I would fully expect that in the wake of this crisis we, and the wider EU, will work to improve our preparedness and our system for dealing with a future pandemic. I don’t see any reason why we should not look to Asia for inspiration and lessons on how we deal with things like this.

But we have to remember that there are certain things about our liberties that have downsides, and even with those downsides we may not be quick to give them up. A big challenge for us in Europe is our openness — I mean for the last few years with Brexit many here have argued passionately in favour of our free movement and our border policies, and rightly so in my opinion. But if this is the level of freedom we wish to have in Europe — we must also acknowledge that such freedom comes at a cost. If many on the Right had their way, and the open plain of the Schengen area was replaced by tightly monitored and controlled borders, we probably could have controlled the virus better. Taiwan and South Korea, by virtue of the first being an island and the second being attached to the Asian landmass by the tightest border on earth, have that “luxury“ automatically.

So that is just one question, among many other fundamental questions, that we would have to ask ourselves. To what extent should our commitment to an Open Europe be stymied by the fact that ramping up borders would make it easier to contain any future pandemic in the continent? If tightening up borders might save lives, should we abandon the somewhat borderless Europe that has been built? It is considerations like these that might make us realise that there are bigger pictures that extend beyond merely saving lives in an immediate sense.

There are also other questions, such as data harvesting which I refer to in my previous post, where again we would have to ask how much further we as a people are willing to go down the path of our personal lives being continuously tracked and with great detail.

you do realize half of Europe is in lockdown atm to control the afluence into hospitals and is not a "oh well let's lockdown because we have so many other choices but we choose to lockdown"

Lockdowns are hapenning because this idea of re-openning the economy with half-arsed rules not enforced failed completely.

Not only that those same countries are failing it's people by not supporting them during lockdown...

perfect example right now in Portugal, reaching almost 100 dead a day.. they introduced a partial lockdown and there's protests on the streets because ppl are demanding grants for them to survive...

The gov decided to offer support based on the income businesses had THIS year... so basically you have probably your worst year in revenue and the support you get is based off of that..

People are loosing theit ways to survive this and govs, around Europe are not doing anything to support them in a concrete way...

This is the main issue and the main reason the whole of Europe failed completely in managing this. This way of doing this has led only for rumours and conspiracy theory youtubers to strive as people look for some reasoning to go through this.

And when you look back at this, go back to June to that EU meeting where Austria and Netherlands, the frugral countries directly accused Spain and Italy of having so many cases because they're southern europeans... so i'm even delighted those countries have had so many cases now in this wave...

Not gonna blame one single person that has become an euro-sceptic with this. Europe has failed as a project so far in the handling of this crysis and that itself is what will have consequences for our future...

ArthurDayne

nofools wrote: »

Tldr

You seemed to be making a lot of excuses for how Asian countries were more prepared. I find them poor at this stage in the game.

9 months now to get our act together and we should be copying successful models line for line, word for word.

As WHO were getting into action in early Feb, we didn't even have temp scanning at Dublin airport. I have seen better controls for foot and mouth disease in the past.

Ironically we lost a huge amount of freedom trying to preserve it.

You’re some craic you know that? You respond to a post of mine with a point that had nothing to do with what I said, then you respond to a second post saying TLDR. I dare say, my friend, I find myself less inclined to take seriously the policy suggestions of a person who seemingly can’t bring themselves to read 4 relatively small paragraphs. If that’s too much for you, then I think it’s perfectly reasonable for me to question how much actual serious reading you do elsewhere on this matter.

There were no “excuses” made for Asian countries’ preparedness. They had systems and lessons learned from SARs / Bird Flu / Swine Flu that we did not. This is a simple fact — not an excuse. The only people who can justifiably call this excuse-making are the people who have been warning for years about our lack of pandemic planning — and I dare say you are not one of them. The systems they had in place (and we can dress it up all we want, but hard borders or geographic isolation helps this process) allowed them to curb the spread of the virus before the fact. We are not in that position, the virus is already here and it has already spread into the community. We are now in an after the fact stage, and therefore trying to emulate the likes of Taiwan “line by line, word by word” is difficult even from the perspective of conceptuality.

nofools

ArthurDayne wrote: »

You’re some craic you know that? You respond to a post of mine with a point that had nothing to do with what I said, then you respond to a second post saying TLDR. I dare say, my friend, I find myself less inclined to take seriously the policy suggestions of a person who seemingly can’t bring themselves to read 4 relatively small paragraphs. If that’s too much for you, then I think it’s perfectly reasonable for me to question how much actual serious reading you do elsewhere on this matter.

There were no “excuses” made for Asian countries’ preparedness. They had systems and lessons learned from SARs / Bird Flu / Swine Flu that we did not. This is a simple fact — not an excuse. The systems they had in place (and we can dress it up all we want, but hard borders or geographic isolation helps this process) allowed them to curb the spread of the virus before the fact. We are not in that position, the virus is already here and it has already spread into the community. We are now in an after the fact stage, and therefore trying to emulate the likes of Taiwan “line by line, word by word” is difficult even from the perspective of conceptuality.

We had the opportunity to curb it too, the euro centric view is too weak and we tried to get away with it and totally failed. No offense intended with tldr, i agree with most of your point and i did read it back in full after.

nofools

Vieira82 wrote: »

Lockdowns are hapenning because this idea of re-openning the economy with half-arsed rules not enforced failed completely.

Exactly

mcsean2163

Vieira82 wrote: »

...we would have to look at the published cancer deaths and ask how many of them genuinely had cancer as the primary cause of deaths. Did they merely die with cancer rather than of cancer or did cancer merely bring forward a death that would have occurred anyway?

...we would have to look at the published pneumonia deaths and ask how many of them genuinely had pneumonia as the primary cause of deaths. Did they merely die with pneumonia rather than of pneumonia or did pneumonia merely brought forward a death that would have occurred anyway?


...we would have to look at the published heart failure deaths and ask how many of them genuinely had heart failure as the primary cause of deaths. Did they merely die with heart failure rather than of heart failure or did heart failure merely bring forward a death that would have occurred anyway?

...we would have to look at the published car crash deaths and ask how many of them genuinely had a car crash as the primary cause of deaths. Did they merely die in a car crash rather than of a car crash or would the car crash merely bring forward a death that would have occurred anyway?

...we would have to look at the published homicide deaths and ask how many of them genuinely where a homicide as the primary cause of deaths. Did they merely die during a homicide rather than of a homicide or would the homicide merely bring forward a death that would have occurred anyway?

I rest my case...

If someone is dying of cancer they don't get tested for pneumonia if they're asymptomatic. A friend of mine, his 82 yo man was tested in a nursing home. She had covid19 and had no symptoms, if she died of a heart attack she would have been a covid19 death.

I doubt that happened much at all in the first wave, who knows what's happening now...