Sweden avoiding lockdown

snowcat

brokekeyboard wrote: »

The proof is not all around me. They are just projected fears magnified through a certain lens.

A convincing proof please?

We will have to wait for excess deaths going forward to see. Convincing proof will follow in time. I expect a large rise in excess deaths in 2021/22 and 2020 to remain static or slightly above long term trend.

snowcat

brokekeyboard wrote: »

So no proof then, just a supposed fear that we have to wait and see.

You might well be right but I don't think we have crossed any threshold of harm or anywhere close to it.

Yes but there is no proof either that the billions we lost on lockdowns have worked. The nuclear option of a level 5 has failed and we have no where to go now. Yes we have to wait and see

snowcat

brokekeyboard wrote: »

There is some proof. Relative number of cases and deaths to places with less effective means of control.

Can you quote those? We had one of the worst fatality rates in the world with one of the longest lockdowns in the world initially. We lost a lot of the vulnerable in the first wave and hence have been relatively ok in the second wave.

snowcat

brokekeyboard wrote: »

What happened since is extremely informative, check it out. I am open to your point about the cure causing more harm but it is not believable mathematically from anything I have seen.

Im an engineer and I would believe it.

snowcat

brokekeyboard wrote: »

Well go check out the data and we can talk more.

Believe you me i've checked out the data since day one. There is a lot here we do not know about and a lot we have to learn. I see Luke O' Neill today quoting a mask survey and admitting that the way masks are worn influences hugely their effectiveness. They are basically not effective if not worn correctly. N95 masks are great but the homemade ones can be worse than nothing.

mcsean2163

snowcat wrote: »

Believe you me i've checked out the data since day one. There is a lot here we do not know about and a lot we have to learn. I see Luke O' Neill today quoting a mask survey and admitting that the way masks are worn influences hugely their effectiveness. They are basically not effective if not worn correctly. N95 masks are great but the homemade ones can be worse than nothing.

If that's the case you're surely aware that Belgium is in a bad way in the second wave too

Charles Babbage

snowcat wrote: »

https://www.rte.ie/news/health/2020/1126/1180717-cancer-figures/

The folly of lockdowns costing billions and indirectly killing many multiples of the people lost to Covid will be with us for years.

And those cancer deaths will be Lung Cervical Brest Testicular Skin cancers. People that would have been in their 20's-50's. Not people in their 80's and 90's in nursing homes with dementia that had one or two years left at best.

Yet another disgraceful post. Any delays or shortfalls in regular health services are caused by Covid. Lockdowns reduce the amount of Covid and so are of benefit to people with other conditions.

mcsean2163

snowcat wrote: »

Believe you me i've checked out the data since day one. There is a lot here we do not know about and a lot we have to learn. I see Luke O' Neill today quoting a mask survey and admitting that the way masks are worn influences hugely their effectiveness. They are basically not effective if not worn correctly. N95 masks are great but the homemade ones can be worse than nothing.

Belgium

https://ig.ft.com/coronavirus-chart/?areas=cze&areas=irl&areas=svk&areas=bel&areasRegional=usny&areasRegional=usca&areasRegional=usfl&areasRegional=ustx&byDate=1&cumulative=0&logScale=0&per100K=1&values=deaths

charlie14

snowcat wrote: »

Can you quote those? We had one of the worst fatality rates in the world with one of the longest lockdowns in the world initially. We lost a lot of the vulnerable in the first wave and hence have been relatively ok in the second wave.

We do not have one of the worst fatality rates in the world. In relation to this thread, during the first wave our deaths to confirmed cases was half that of Sweden.
We did not lose a lot of the vulnerable in the first wave. The vulnerable in Ireland make up 25% -30% of the population. 700,000 of which are in the 65 years and over category.

bb1234567

snowcat wrote: »

Can you quote those? We had one of the worst fatality rates in the world with one of the longest lockdowns in the world initially. We lost a lot of the vulnerable in the first wave and hence have been relatively ok in the second wave.

And italy and Belgium who also lost a lot of vulnerable now has again the highest covid deaths in Europe so what explains this?

bb1234567

snowcat wrote: »

https://www.rte.ie/news/health/2020/1126/1180717-cancer-figures/

The folly of lockdowns costing billions and indirectly killing many multiples of the people lost to Covid will be with us for years.

And those cancer deaths will be Lung Cervical Brest Testicular Skin cancers. People that would have been in their 20's-50's. Not people in their 80's and 90's in nursing homes with dementia that had one or two years left at best.

Bit of balance needed. Cancer deaths will be younger on average than covid death but 53% of cancer deaths occur in the over 75 age group with highest incidence in those over 90. It's a completely valid issue without you sensationalising that the cancer deaths will all be college or young middle aged

Young people dying is just really rare in general. Some people seem to really cling desperately to the idea young people are dying in droves in order to dismiss any restriction but the reality is euromomo is showing exceptionally few people under 65 are dying in Europe compared to normal year, young excess death is through the floor

Meanwhile over 65 excess death is through the roof and 35000 people in Europe are dying of covid weekly. But yeh..you've other priorities, you're trying to distract from this actually occurring major cause of death to mythical suicide increases and poverty deaths which have not materialised and there are no evidence of. Cancer one is valid but what is the alternative, cancer treatment is delayed in every country due to covid

charlie14

snowcat wrote: »

The proof is all around you. Look at the decimated business. The intolerable debt burden. The link i posted to the massive increase in cancer that will result from this. Massive increases in mental health issues, suicide etc. For what? Even the worst affected countries in the world have all had similiar death rates. Maybe a factor of 2 or 3 difference. Once Covid gets into the elderly in nursing homes lockdowns are pointless. There is not many countries in the world even with lockdowns that have protected the elderly. 90% of deaths occur in nursing homes and hospitals. Locking down the healthy is pointless once the virus is in the vulnerable areas. Lockdowns work but not if the virus has gotten to the vulnerable first.

The bank bailout cost 46 Billion on which we were paying 5.5% interest. This year in April the NTMA raised 6 Billion at a rate of 0.242% and were offered 33 Billion at the same rate.

We are not among the highest death rates in the world. Our deaths to confirmed cases is 2.8% and for this second wave we have one of the lowest death rates in Europe.

Cancer screening was postponed here during the height of the first wave. Similar to every other country for obvious reasons. By August here breast cancer diagnosis was 98% of last year and lung cancer 95%.

There are 700,000 aged 65 and over in Ireland of which just 25,000 reside in nursing homes. The rest along with the 150,000 living with cancer and all the others that make up the 1.25 million in this country vulnerable to this virus live in the community.
Lockdown is not just to protect those in nursing homes.It is to protect all the vulnerable in our society.

zerosugarbuzz

brokekeyboard wrote: »

A nice clean refutation of all the most common and most stupid anti lockdown arguments in one post. Great work.

There is absolutely nothing preventing those of you who are pro lockdown remaining lockdown for as long as you want. But you need to stop insisting we all join you when we are simply not interested in doing so. Finally out politicians are waking up to the fact that Covid is not the killer disease it was made out to be for the vast majority of the population.

sheepysheep

zerosugarbuzz wrote: »

There is absolutely nothing preventing those of you who are pro lockdown remaining lockdown for as long as you want. But you need to stop insisting we all join you when we are simply not interested in doing so. Finally out politicians are waking up to the fact that Covid is not the killer disease it was made out to be for the vast majority of the population.

Sweden currently has a 7-day moving average of 41, from the website below. With a population of 10.1 Million that averages out to a 4.051 deaths/million increase every day at the moment. Comparing that to the current situation in the other European countries shows some surprising results. A full 27 are performing worse than Sweden at this moment in time. 2 more, Serbia and Slovakia will pass them within the next few days. The remaining twelve are performing as shown. I have ignored the 5 small states as they're just too small to have any meaningful calculation. All would be effectively 0. the results speak for themselves. Sweden performing much better than vast majority of European countries despite the portrayal here.

Daily deaths per day increase based on 7-day average.

Albania 5.07
Armenia 9.79
Austria 9.59
Belgium 15.77
Bosnia Herz 14.06
Bulgaria 17.34
Croatia 12.22
Czechia 11.95
France 8.02
Georgia 9.54
Greece 8.46
Hungary 10.88
Italy 11.37
Lithuania 5.55
Luxembourg 7.93
Malta 4.52
Moldova 4.96
Montenegro 9.55
North Macedonia 13.94
Poland 13.14
Portugal 7.16
Romania 8.28
Slovenia 19.32
Spain 6.37
Sweden 4.05
Switzerland 10.36
Ukraine 4.42
United Kingdom 6.83

Performing better.

Denmark .68
Belarus .73
Estonia 1.51
Cyprus .82
Finland .36
Germany 3.21
Iceland 0
Ireland .80
Latvia 3.74
Netherlands 3.38
Norway .36
Russia 3.14
Serbia 4.24
Slovakia 4.39

Ignored. Andorra Liechtenstein Monaco San Marino Vatican City. All 0.

https://www.covid19insweden.com/en/

sheepysheep

bb1234567 wrote: »

Bit of balance needed. Cancer deaths will be younger on average than covid death but 53% of cancer deaths occur in the over 75 age group with highest incidence in those over 90. It's a completely valid issue without you sensationalising that the cancer deaths will all be college or young middle aged

Young people dying is just really rare in general. Some people seem to really cling desperately to the idea young people are dying in droves in order to dismiss any restriction but the reality is euromomo is showing exceptionally few people under 65 are dying in Europe compared to normal year, young excess death is through the floor

Meanwhile over 65 excess death is through the roof and 35000 people in Europe are dying of covid weekly. But yeh..you've other priorities, you're trying to distract from this actually occurring major cause of death to mythical suicide increases and poverty deaths which have not materialised and there are no evidence of. Cancer one is valid but what is the alternative, cancer treatment is delayed in every country due to covid

For those who can't or won't or just plain refuse to accept the devestating cost of lockdown, a cash strapped UK has cut overseas aid by 5 billion.

https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2020/nov/25/uk-foreign-aid-budget-cut-chancellor-announces

Andrew Mitchell, a former Conservative international development secretary, said the aid cuts “will be the cause of 100,000 preventable deaths, mainly among children."

By way of comparison, Ireland spends $151 per capita or .94 billion in $

The granny destroying Swedes chime in at $701 per capita or 5.4 billion in $

Bearing in mind that if the 5 billion UK cuts equates to the above stated 100k deaths of mainly children, then Irelands 46 billion spend on lockdown over the next 2 years would equate to a saving of 900k childrens lives.

Why is saving children's lives from hunger, disease, malnutrition and starvation deemed less desireable than delaying deaths of people in their 80's who are dying of old age, lying in nursing home beds, bed-bound, minds gone from dementia, oblivious to their loved ones and surroundings? It is a complete inversion of the everyday moral code we all live by that children come first.

What did we get with our 46 billion spend? Basically nothing. If the pro-lock-down brigade take Sweden as the devil it is protrayed to be, with it's current Deaths/Million rate of 654 compared to Ireland 410, a difference of 244, then a Swedish equivalence here would be the that difference of 244/M * 5 million population giving 1050 saved lives, resulting in a staggering average of approx 37 million per claimed life saved, which in reality of course is actually a death delayed for a very short duration in most cases.

Charles Babbage

zerosugarbuzz wrote: »

There is absolutely nothing preventing those of you who are pro lockdown remaining lockdown for as long as you want. But you need to stop insisting we all join you when we are simply not interested in doing so. Finally out politicians are waking up to the fact that Covid is not the killer disease it was made out to be for the vast majority of the population.

You can do what you like so long as you do not threaten others, you don't have the right to threaten us with your behaviour any more than you have the right to drive home while pissed out of the head.

is_that_so

sheepysheep wrote: »

For those who can't or won't or just plain refuse to accept the devestating cost of lockdown, a cash strapped UK has cut overseas aid by 5 billion.

https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2020/nov/25/uk-foreign-aid-budget-cut-chancellor-announces

Andrew Mitchell, a former Conservative international development secretary, said the aid cuts “will be the cause of 100,000 preventable deaths, mainly among children."

By way of comparison, Ireland spends $151 per capita or .94 billion in $

The granny destroying Swedes chime in at $701 per capita or 5.4 billion in $

Bearing in mind that if the 5 billion UK cuts equates to the above stated 100k deaths of mainly children, then Irelands 46 billion spend on lockdown over the next 2 years would equate to a saving of 900k childrens lives.

Why is saving children's lives from hunger, disease, malnutrition and starvation deemed less desireable than delaying deaths of people in their 80's who are dying of old age, lying in nursing home beds, bed-bound, minds gone from dementia, oblivious to their loved ones and surroundings? It is a complete inversion of the everyday moral code we all live by that children come first.

What did we get with our 46 billion spend? Basically nothing. If the pro-lock-down brigade take Sweden as the devil it is protrayed to be, with it's current Deaths/Million rate of 654 compared to Ireland 410, a difference of 244, then a Swedish equivalence here would be the that difference of 244/M * 5 million population giving 1050 saved lives, resulting in a staggering average of approx 37 million per claimed life saved, which in reality of course is actually a death delayed for a very short duration in most cases.

This wasn't a bad post but you just had to get the starving babies in! IFR is also a bit of a red herring too. As we have seen here in our second surge, if you are alert to where fatalities can occur you can minimise them. They will still happen anyway. This was never about deaths but saving health systems from collapsing, something that quite a few locations came close to.

The economic side of things is also a distraction. Money is basically free at present but what it is being spent on is what might be called a universal wage. Growth and all the nice neat metrics of economies are on pause. Sweden adopted a strategy that seemed to suit them, the first time out. Even at home it is not universally supported. Now they have the same the same issues as the rest of Europe and have had to take measures.

Even so, it's just one strategy and as we are still learning there is no one method of dealing with this. Views of the Swedish approach can be extreme but what we've seen of it , there would not be too many countries to buy into it.

bb1234567

sheepysheep wrote: »

For those who can't or won't or just plain refuse to accept the devestating cost of lockdown, a cash strapped UK has cut overseas aid by 5 billion.

https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2020/nov/25/uk-foreign-aid-budget-cut-chancellor-announces

Andrew Mitchell, a former Conservative international development secretary, said the aid cuts “will be the cause of 100,000 preventable deaths, mainly among children."

By way of comparison, Ireland spends $151 per capita or .94 billion in $

The granny destroying Swedes chime in at $701 per capita or 5.4 billion in $

Bearing in mind that if the 5 billion UK cuts equates to the above stated 100k deaths of mainly children, then Irelands 46 billion spend on lockdown over the next 2 years would equate to a saving of 900k childrens lives.

Why is saving children's lives from hunger, disease, malnutrition and starvation deemed less desireable than delaying deaths of people in their 80's who are dying of old age, lying in nursing home beds, bed-bound, minds gone from dementia, oblivious to their loved ones and surroundings? It is a complete inversion of the everyday moral code we all live by that children come first.

What did we get with our 46 billion spend? Basically nothing. If the pro-lock-down brigade take Sweden as the devil it is protrayed to be, with it's current Deaths/Million rate of 654 compared to Ireland 410, a difference of 244, then a Swedish equivalence here would be the that difference of 244/M * 5 million population giving 1050 saved lives, resulting in a staggering average of approx 37 million per claimed life saved, which in reality of course is actually a death delayed for a very short duration in most cases.

When you break it down you could say vast amounts of public expenditure are an inversion of the moral code when it could be better spent on those in dire need of the money. Almost anything spent by the government over aid for people starving seems frivolous by comparison and yet spending has always remaind relatively small by comparison with the scale of the issue. I have no problem accepting the fact that the lockdown money wasn't well spent but trying to pit these moral choices against one another , spending it on elderly here and children abroad, doesn't seem like a fair argument as it was never such a black and white decision and in what reality was 46 billion of Irish money ever going to be put towards children starving abroad? It was never a choice or up for discussion and youre' acting like irish people consciously prioritised elderly people here dying over children abroad when they didn't.

Some of this may be considered a big mistake after the pandemic as mortality will likely boumce back to completely normality due to victim ages but I don't see how you could be so dismissive of European countries prioritizing suppressing a virus that is killing 35,000 people a week in the continent , even if the victims are very old it is causing a pronounced increased in excess mortality and large strain on healthcare resources and naturally this will be absolute government priority over children on another continent.

tobefrank321

Charles Babbage wrote: »

Yet another disgraceful post. Any delays or shortfalls in regular health services are caused by Covid. Lockdowns reduce the amount of Covid and so are of benefit to people with other conditions.

A lot of cancer screening can be done without in person appointments. Bowel cancer can be done via post!
And provided protocols are followed, there is no reason why other cancer screenings should be more dangerous than going to a GP or going to the shop.
But its also not just cancer screenings. A whole host of other illnesses.

A young person with an early cancer is unlikely to die from covid because even if infected, they will be recovered in two weeks. But their cancer will continue to progress.

So unfortunately yes not screening for cancers particularly in the young is dangerous. The suspension of cervical screening was particularly dangerous and unnessecary for reasons mentioned. But it happened in every country, including I believe Sweden.

tobefrank321

charlie14 wrote: »

We do not have one of the worst fatality rates in the world. In relation to this thread, during the first wave our deaths to confirmed cases was half that of Sweden.
We did not lose a lot of the vulnerable in the first wave. The vulnerable in Ireland make up 25% -30% of the population. 700,000 of which are in the 65 years and over category.

Including microstates, Ireland is 38th for deaths per million in the world, Sweden is 23rd (but more likely 24th because of Iran's under-reporting of deaths).

On current trends Slovenia are likely to jump ahead of Sweden sometime next week, Romania and Moldova in two weeks time, and Poland, Hungary, Bulgaria in about 3 weeks.

Poland posted 579 deaths today and Hungary 135 deaths (with a population smaller than Sweden's)

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

charlie14

tobefrank321 wrote: »

Including microstates, Ireland is 38th for deaths per million in the world, Sweden is 23rd (but more likely 24th because of Iran's under-reporting of deaths).

On current trends Slovenia are likely to jump ahead of Sweden sometime next week, Romania and Moldova in two weeks time, and Poland, Hungary, Bulgaria in about 3 weeks.

Poland posted 579 deaths today and Hungary 135 deaths (with a population smaller than Sweden's)

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

No need to go jumping around other countries that have little in common with Sweden making comparisons when you can do it with neighbouring countries that will have much more in common.

Of the three Nordic countries that used lockdown (Statista Coronavirus deaths per million of population as of 27th November) Finland is 79th, Denmark 66th and Norway 83rd. Sweden is 21st.

From today`s numbers and those of the past few days, Sweden`s numbers are not stabilising and their present restrictions are not having any noticeable effect.
According to Johan Carlson Director General of Sweden`s Public Health Authority based on modelling figures they are not even predicted to peak until 3 weeks from now.
Even that can be taken with a hefty pinch of salt when we know just how inaccurate modelling figures have been in the past.

greyday

59 Deaths today with close to 7K infections, deaths will be over 100 per day in a couple of weeks at this rate.

charlie14

sheepysheep wrote: »

For those who can't or won't or just plain refuse to accept the devestating cost of lockdown, a cash strapped UK has cut overseas aid by 5 billion.

https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2020/nov/25/uk-foreign-aid-budget-cut-chancellor-announces

Andrew Mitchell, a former Conservative international development secretary, said the aid cuts “will be the cause of 100,000 preventable deaths, mainly among children."

I`m not sure an economic argument based on a country that for no other reason than jingoism cut it`s ties with it`s largest trading partner is a great example.

bb1234567

bb1234567 wrote: »

I'm not certain but I think the map of Europe with the blue shades indicating level of excess deaths is retrospectively changed and revised even after the week is over.
I remember thinking last week that it was weird Belgium only had 'high excess' considering the huge death tolls and when I looked again this week it says Belgium had 'very high excess' during week 44/45

Slovenia too is reporting huge covid death toll and I was really surprised to see it said low excess deaths there last week , now it says very high excess deaths. For week 46 it now says no excess deaths Slovenia this week, I bet you next week it will have been changed to very high excess deaths yet again

Yeh just to go back to this, the excess deaths in Euromomo definitely cannot be taken for gospel at any given time. They are revised regularly, as I said a few days ago here Sloevnia for week 46 of the year has gone from what was categorised as 'low excess' a few days ago to 'extremely high excess' now, you would think the excess deaths are updated in one go but clearly they are incrementally added

https://www.euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps

However to relate it to current discussion Sweden's excess deaths remain apparently unchanged. This may be down to a lag, I don't know

zerosugarbuzz

Charles Babbage wrote: »

You can do what you like so long as you do not threaten others, you don't have the right to threaten us with your behaviour any more than you have the right to drive home while pissed out of the head.

I'm not threatening anyone with my behavior. Neither am I mandating what others do. No one is threatening me with their behavior either, no idea what your point is.

tobefrank321

charlie14 wrote: »

No need to go jumping around other countries that have little in common with Sweden making comparisons when you can do it with neighbouring countries that will have much more in common.

I'm sure one of these days you will tell us what the similarities are between for example Norway and Sweden. Apart from sharing a region I see more differences than similarities. Number of land borders, relative remoteness, population density particularly of their capital cities, population size, demographics and number of elderly, particularly very elderly, economy, types of industry, openness to the world, personality, etc etc - all appear different to me. I could and probably have listed off at least 10 significant differences between the countries, whereas you'd have us believe they are like identical twins!

charlie14

tobefrank321 wrote: »

I'm sure one of these days you will tell us what the similarities are between for example Norway and Sweden. Apart from sharing a region I see more differences than similarities. Number of land borders, relative remoteness, population density particularly of their capital cities, population size, demographics and number of elderly, particularly very elderly, economy, types of industry, openness to the world, personality, etc etc - all appear different to me. I could and probably have listed off at least 10 significant differences between the countries, whereas you'd have us believe they are like identical twins!

So the countries you listed. Slovenia, Moldova, Romania, Hungary and Bulgaria all have those 10 similarities with Sweden do they ?


The numbers of elderly that were being touted around here at one stage attempting to justify the death rate in Sweden when compared to it`s Scandinavian neighbours does not stack up either.

Sweden has 20% of it`s population aged 65 and over, Finland 22%, Norway 17.25% and Denmark 20%.

Bit cynical

bb1234567 wrote: »

Yeh just to go back to this, the excess deaths in Euromomo definitely cannot be taken for gospel at any given time. They are revised regularly, as I said a few days ago here Sloevnia for week 46 of the year has gone from what was categorised as 'low excess' a few days ago to 'extremely high excess' now, you would think the excess deaths are updated in one go but clearly they are incrementally added

https://www.euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps

However to relate it to current discussion Sweden's excess deaths remain apparently unchanged. This may be down to a lag, I don't know

Sweden is getting some of the rise in deaths other countries are getting, but it subdued and lagging considerably behind. I would not therefore expect to see an impact on excess deaths yet, and when it does impact it won't be as strong as Slovenia.

greyday

Bit cynical wrote: »

Sweden is getting some of the rise in deaths other countries are getting, but it subdued and lagging considerably behind. I would not therefore expect to see an impact on excess deaths yet, and when it does impact it won't be as strong as Slovenia.

Sweden will be over 100 daily deaths in next two weeks, they will do well to keep it under 200 after that going by their rate of infections.

Bit cynical

greyday wrote: »

Sweden will be over 100 daily deaths in next two weeks, they will do well to keep it under 200 after that going by their rate of infections.

I would expect deaths to rise a bit more than at present though perhaps not as much as people might imagine.