Sweden avoiding lockdown

sydthebeat

tobefrank321 wrote: »

Nice editing out of the part where Johanna Sandvall, the board's crisis chief, said they had no plans to send any.

You also edited out the standard agreement in scandinavia for ICU cross border support - Sweden routinely takes in icu patients from its neighbours.

You also stated 82% of ICU beds are full - you make no mention of how many are covid patients.

And you make little mention of Swedens ability to increase icu to 1100.

And you didnt bother bolding the part where Sandvall said military personal are trained in icu and can be despatched easily.

Omissions and misrepresentations all round then.

Welcome to the hard lockdown club, you're in good company. The truth is generally optional.

???? what the hell are you on about???

i posted THE WHOLE ARTICLE !

i didnt edit out, misrepresent, mention, state or omit anything at all.

i posted the whole bloody article as it appears in the telegraph.

greyday

tobefrank321 wrote: »

Come on lads, all of these posts are too easily discredited. Ye'll have to try a bit harder.

As I don't generally post here at weekends (I'm a bit like the Swedish results that way) we'll resume this next week.

You are delusional, seek help.

Stormyteacup

I understand why those not in favour of Sweden’s strategy insist on comparing them to their nearest neighbours, but some consideration needs to be given as to why their neighbours have performed so well.

With hindsight it looks like (along with various restriction measures) tight border controls, and keeping Covid to a minimum in nursing homes, made for a very tame first wave.

Sweden proceeded on the theory that if no vaccine was on the horizon then they were flattening the curve, and they believed their neighbours would suffer similar casualties eventually.

If the World had known a vaccine would be here in early 21 then management of the outbreak would have been handled very differently. Sweden have adjusted their strategy in light of data emerged. They won’t be worst performers and at the very least it can put paid to the notion that tens of thousands of lives have been saved by our leaders decisions.

Ginger n Lemon

sydthebeat wrote: »

???? what the hell are you on about???

i posted THE WHOLE ARTICLE !

i didnt edit out, misrepresent, mention, state or omit anything at all.

i posted the whole bloody article as it appears in the telegraph.

I think morale of the story here is Telegraph publishes absolute tripe and you should stop paying attention to them.

Its a bit like Irish Times. If you read either, you ll think covid is deadlier than ebola.

sydthebeat

Ginger n Lemon wrote: »

I think morale of the story here is Telegraph publishes absolute tripe and you should stop paying attention to them.

Its a bit like Irish Times. If you read either, you ll think covid is deadlier than ebola.

so we're at the "shoot the messenger" stage of delusion with you..... :rolleyes:

everything in that article is factual

however you and frank do not like it because it proves the guff you have been coming out with to be the rubbish it is.

Ginger n Lemon

sydthebeat wrote: »

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/12/11/sweden-may-have-send-coronavirus-patients-finland-infections/

Sweden may have to send coronavirus patients to Finland as infections spiral

The warning from a senior doctor comes as ICU beds in Stockholm reach 99 per cent capacity


Sweden may be forced to seek emergency help from Finland, Norway, or Denmark, as its hospitals struggle to cope with the number of coronavirus patients, a senior doctor has warned.

Sweden's National Board of Health and Welfare earlier this week contacted health authorities in other Nordic countries to start discussions over how they could best relieve Sweden of some of its load under the Nordic Public Health Preparedness agreement.

sydthebeat wrote: »

so we're at the "shoot the messenger" stage of delusion with you..... :rolleyes:

everything in that article is factual

however you and frank do not like it because it proves the guff you have been coming out with to be the rubbish it is.

:rolleyes:

greyday

Stormyteacup wrote: »

I understand why those not in favour of Sweden’s strategy insist on comparing them to their nearest neighbours, but some consideration needs to be given as to why their neighbours have performed so well.

With hindsight it looks like (along with various restriction measures) tight border controls, and keeping Covid to a minimum in nursing homes, made for a very tame first wave.

Sweden proceeded on the theory that if no vaccine was on the horizon then they were flattening the curve, and they believed their neighbours would suffer similar casualties eventually.

If the World had known a vaccine would be here in early 21 then management of the outbreak would have been handled very differently. Sweden have adjusted their strategy in light of data emerged. They won’t be worst performers and at the very least it can put paid to the notion that tens of thousands of lives have been saved by our leaders decisions.

Swedens admirers were very eager to compare them to Ireland during the first wave, they don't want to do anything of the sort when comparing Sweden against Ireland for the last month or two, strange...... Sweden could have saved about 4K lives by now if they had followed their nearest neighbours, the figures from their neighbours back it up, if they were best in class among the Nordic neighbours they could have saved more.
The architect of all this has now been sidelined by the Swedish Government, it doesn't take a genius to read between the lines.

sydthebeat

Ginger n Lemon wrote: »

:rolleyes:

read the article

the doctor is actually named

Sten Rubertsson, a doctor working for the Swedish Board of Health and Welfare, said he expected Sweden's 21 regions to release a coordinated plan to increase the number of available intensive care places "within days", ahead of the coming Christmas peak.

"It's not going in a positive direction – it's actually escalating – and if we reach a situation where we cannot handle this ourselves, we will definitely ask our brother and sister countries for assistance," he told The Telegraph.

but hey... call it fake news if you like :rolleyes:

i put the whole article up so that interested people can see where sweden are at right now

greyday

sydthebeat wrote: »

read the article

the doctor is actually named

Sten Rubertsson, a doctor working for the Swedish Board of Health and Welfare, said he expected Sweden's 21 regions to release a coordinated plan to increase the number of available intensive care places "within days", ahead of the coming Christmas peak.

"It's not going in a positive direction – it's actually escalating – and if we reach a situation where we cannot handle this ourselves, we will definitely ask our brother and sister countries for assistance," he told The Telegraph.

but hey... call it fake news if you like :rolleyes:

i put the whole article up so that interested people can see where sweden are at right now

They don't want to believe, it seems Swedens supporters have become extremely delusional and are keen to ignore the current surge in deaths and infections, in fact Frank called Swedens level of infections now sustainable and he wasn't joking.

tobefrank321

tobefrank321 wrote: »

Yes I did. Its in a post from about a month ago in response to someone else.

If you'd read all my posts, you'd have seen it. I'm not going to repeat all my posts for you.

You did read all my posts?

Grand, so 3 times you've refused to provide a single example of my discrediting statements or lies - all while continuing to accuse myself and others of being misleading and lacking credibility.

greyday

Deleted User wrote: »

Grand, so 3 times you've refused to provide a single example of my discrediting statements or lies - all while continuing to accuse myself and others of being misleading and lacking credibility.

You could report him and have him issued with a warning as he has done to myself.

Ah I only drop in here to look at the holdouts and see what tortured lengths they're going to now to justify their long-standing opinion that the Swedish approach was objectively better. I don't care if he continues to call people liars and waffle on about credibility, I just enjoy a bit of schadenfreude when reading their posts.

Not at Sweden though, I haven't seen anyone taking joy or schadenfreude at the fact the Swedish strategy has failed, which is reassuring.

sheepysheep

Deleted User wrote: »

Ah I only drop in here to look at the holdouts and see what tortured lengths they're going to now to justify their long-standing opinion that the Swedish approach was objectively better. I don't care if he continues to call people liars and waffle on about credibility, I just enjoy a bit of schadenfreude when reading their posts.

Not at Sweden though, I haven't seen anyone taking joy or schadenfreude at the fact the Swedish strategy has failed, which is reassuring.

Enjoy your schadenfreude reading about the poor and the starving caused by lockdown.

Not Covid. Lockdown.

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

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.


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.

Stormyteacup

sheepysheep wrote: »

Enjoy your schadenfreude reading about the poor and the starving caused by lockdown.

Not Covid. Lockdown.

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

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.


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.

Simple as ‘that could be me’ = empathy. The threat is perceived as close to home, Covid could strike you down anytime - dead or with serious long-term complications. The likelihood of your children dying from starvation is nil.

Similarly there’s little empathy for those struggling financially or mentally or relying on a healthcare service/social assistance for something non-Covid related.

Thread has turned into ‘Swedish authorities are cold-hearted killers’. Sweden avoided lockdown for much of this pandemic and that has likely balanced long term consequences of lockdown that are still unknown. There’s much more nuance to it and I still believe there’s a long road to recovery that will tell a more complete tale.

sheepysheep

Stormyteacup wrote: »

Simple as ‘that could be me’ = empathy. The threat is perceived as close to home, Covid could strike you down anytime - dead or with serious long-term complications. The likelihood of your children dying from starvation is nil.

Similarly there’s little empathy for those struggling financially or mentally or relying on a healthcare service/social assistance for something non-Covid related.

Thread has turned into ‘Swedish authorities are cold-hearted killers’. Sweden avoided lockdown for much of this pandemic and that has likely balanced long term consequences of lockdown that are still unknown. There’s much more nuance to it and I still believe there’s a long road to recovery that will tell a more complete tale.

Yes. The rather simplistic, My Country 40 Deaths/million, Your Country 42 Deaths/Million, I win, you lose, Ireland are great, Sweden are grannykillers, has really dominated this thread.

TonyMaloney

sheepysheep wrote: »

Yes. The rather simplistic, My Country 40 Deaths/million, Your Country 42 Deaths/Million, I win, you lose, Ireland are great, Sweden are grannykillers, has really dominated this thread.

because you two geniuses keep talking about it

greyday

It seems you two think we should sacrifice our elderly and vulnerable to save people in other Countries, how about we start with sacrificing you two as a show of solidarity with our elderly?

sheepysheep

TonyMaloney wrote: »

because you two geniuses keep talking about it

No comment on the consequences of lock down so.

That simple act by the British chancellor will cost 100,000lives, but you're only concern is to make derogatory statements.

sheepysheep

greyday wrote: »

It seems you two think we should sacrifice our elderly and vulnerable to save people in other Countries, how about we start with sacrificing you two as a show of solidarity with our elderly?

Why wouldn't anyone who claims to be concerned about elderly and vulnerable at least trouble themselves to consider the implications of their decisions, especially if the collateral damage is the lives of children.

But sure, stick to your silly day to day statistics and conspiracy theories.

charlie14

sheepysheep wrote: »

Enjoy your schadenfreude reading about the poor and the starving caused by lockdown.

Not Covid. Lockdown.

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

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.


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.

You do realise don`t you that you are talking about a British Conservative government that managed to get itself elected by using the same jingoism as Trump`s MAGA ?
Do you actually believe that the blind ultra nationalist supporters that elected them without a shred of economic evidence benefit for leaving their largest export market actually give a damn about foreign aid. ?



It`s Tory governments doing what Tory governments do.
Pleasing their hard right wing base and the sheep that are happy to follow who read their read-tops and mutter " Bloody Johnny foreigner, why should we give him our sterling"

So for me at least, spare me the mock tears on your opposition to lockdown strategy based on a British government that could care less if Ireland starved to death tomorrow.

Their present Secretary of State for the Home Department and who prior to that was, (laughably seeing the department you quote), Secretary of State for International Development, suggest that starving Ireland into submission on Brexit was the way to go.

greyday

sheepysheep wrote: »

Why wouldn't anyone who claims to be concerned about elderly and vulnerable at least trouble themselves to consider the implications of their decisions, especially if the collateral damage is the lives of children.

But sure, stick to your silly day to day statistics and conspiracy theories.

Why? Possibly because you look after your own first and not locking down is a death sentence to the old and vulnerable, there are over 50K dead in the UK from the virus and you would like multiples of that to keep people alive in other Countries where their life expectancy is shocking and their lives in general are full of suffering.

greyday

greyday wrote: »

Why? Possibly because you look after your own first and not locking down is a death sentence to the old and vulnerable, there are over 50K dead in the UK from the virus and you would like multiples of that to keep people alive in other Countries where their life expectancy is shocking and their lives in general are full of suffering.

It takes a special kind of person to pontificate about their desire to protect 85+ year olds who are in poor health while at the same time admitting you couldn’t give a toss about kids starving to death.

Their countries are full of suffering so what do we do?

F*ck it, let them starve. At least it’s not us.

A disgraceful attitude that sums up most of the pro restrictions crowd I’ve spoken to. I’m working from home and still getting a full salary so screw anyone that’s lost their job/business or that needs our help such as starving children.

charlie14

Deleted User wrote: »

It takes a special kind of person to pontificate about their desire to protect 85+ year olds who are in poor health while at the same time admitting you couldn’t give a toss about kids starving to death.

Their countries are full of suffering so what do we do?

F*ck it, let them starve. At least it’s not us.

A disgraceful attitude that sums up most of the pro restrictions crowd I’ve spoken to. I’m working from home and still getting a full salary so screw anyone that’s lost their job/business or that needs our help such as starving children.

Am I missing something here, or have I stumbled into a Twilight Zone version of Boards.ie .


Are we really talking about a hard right Tory government proposal to suspend international aid, using lockdown as an excuse, that recently doled out billions to Northern Ireland unionist to buy their vote on Brexit, on a thread titled Sweden avoiding lockdown, with Irish posters where Ireland has not even suggested doing the same ?

sheepysheep

charlie14 wrote: »

You do realise don`t you that you are talking about a British Conservative government that managed to get itself elected by using the same jingoism as Trump`s MAGA ?
Do you actually believe that the blind ultra nationalist supporters that elected them without a shred of economic evidence benefit for leaving their largest export market actually give a damn about foreign aid. ?



It`s Tory governments doing what Tory governments do.
Pleasing their hard right wing base and the sheep that are happy to follow who read their read-tops and mutter " Bloody Johnny foreigner, why should we give him our sterling"

So for me at least, spare me the mock tears on your opposition to lockdown strategy based on a British government that could care less if Ireland starved to death tomorrow.

Their present Secretary of State for the Home Department and who prior to that was, (laughably seeing the department you quote), Secretary of State for International Development, suggest that starving Ireland into submission on Brexit was the way to go.

What's remarkable about this post is that the only person yelling 'Jonnny Foreigner' is you.

You're anti-British bigotry is as obvious as you clear disdain for the Swedes whom you continuously disparage as immoral, callous, cold-hearted eugenicists.

The assumptions you make about the average Tory voting British citizen exist in your mind only and reveals plenty about you.

The British, even after their reduction, will still make a greater contribution to Third world aid than we do.

You've had numerous chances to address the consequences of lock-down now, but at each occasion you can't get beyond your own petty historical grievances.

When asked to reflect on the starvation of children, you choose to rail about the Tories. Congratulations. Says it all.

charlie14

sheepysheep wrote: »

What's remarkable about this post is that the only person yelling 'Jonnny Foreigner' is you.

You're anti-British bigotry is as obvious as you clear disdain for the Swedes whom you continuously disparage as immoral, callous, cold-hearted eugenicists.

The assumptions you make about the average Tory voting British citizen exist in your mind only and reveals plenty about you.

The British, even after their reduction, will still make a greater contribution to Third world aid than we do.

You've had numerous chances to address the consequences of lock-down now, but at each occasion you can't get beyond your own petty historical grievances.

When asked to reflect on the starvation of children, you choose to rail about the Tories. Congratulations. Says it all.

Get over yourself.

This Tory government got themselves elected using the same playbook of Little England Johnny foreigner as Trump`s MAGA, so spare me the old "who will think of the childer" routine.



If you feel so passionate about the amount Ireland gives in foreign aid, then get on to the Irish government, rather than attempting to use it here on a thread about the one country in Europe who were of your belief on lockdown, but like every other country are now using it.


I have absolutely no disdain for the Swedish nation. I have for the small number within their Public Health Authority who used the nation in a failed experiment on herd immunity that cost lives, which even the architect finally had to admit was immoral.

TonyMaloney

sheepysheep wrote: »

What's remarkable about this post is that the only person yelling 'Jonnny Foreigner' is you.

You're anti-British bigotry is as obvious as you clear disdain for the Swedes whom you continuously disparage as immoral, callous, cold-hearted eugenicists.

The assumptions you make about the average Tory voting British citizen exist in your mind only and reveals plenty about you.

The British, even after their reduction, will still make a greater contribution to Third world aid than we do.

You've had numerous chances to address the consequences of lock-down now, but at each occasion you can't get beyond your own petty historical grievances.

When asked to reflect on the starvation of children, you choose to rail about the Tories. Congratulations. Says it all.

Wow.

Thank god for the ignore function.

sheepysheep

charlie14 wrote: »

Get over yourself.

This Tory government got themselves elected using the same playbook of Little England Johnny foreigner as Trump`s MAGA, so spare me the old "who will think of the childer" routine.



If you feel so passionate about the amount Ireland gives in foreign aid, then get on to the Irish government, rather than attempting to use it here on a thread about the one country in Europe who were of your belief on lockdown, but like every other country are now using it.


I have absolutely no disdain for the Swedish nation. I have for the small number within their Public Health Authority who used the nation in a failed experiment on herd immunity that cost lives, which even the architect finally had to admit was immoral.

Again, no reflection on the consequences of lockdown as a strategy.

If you're going to advocate a strategy you have to be prepared to take ownership of the consequences of it, whether that be suicides, cancers, or worse.

Again, the fact that you can only address this issue by making derogatory remarks like above says everything about you. You can allege conspiracy theories about Swedish officials manipulating figures all day, but no a solitary sentence about impending disaster caused by the strategy you endorse.

These are real people dying because the world chose lockdown as an overarching strategy rather than as a tactic along with hygiene and social distancing.

Lockdown as a strategy has failed miserably all over the world form USA to Peru to Argentina, France, Spain etc.

It is a strategy which will eventually cause far more deaths than it saves. The fact that children dying is an unfortunate debating statistic for you is your problem.

If am octogenarian dies in Sweden you're poor auld heart is broken. 100,000 kids in Africa not so much.

The Swedes chose a set of tactics that have yielded pretty much the exact same results as most of Europe. Nothing wrong with that.

If you think it's all the Tories fault, try this.

https://www.concern.net/donate/hunger-pandemic-appeal

kippy

sheepysheep wrote: »

Again, no reflection on the consequences of lockdown as a strategy.

If you're going to advocate a strategy you have to be prepared to take ownership of the consequences of it, whether that be suicides, cancers, or worse.

Again, the fact that you can only address this issue by making derogatory remarks like above says everything about you. You can allege conspiracy theories about Swedish officials manipulating figures all day, but no a solitary sentence about impending disaster caused by the strategy you endorse.

These are real people dying because the world chose lockdown as an overarching strategy rather than as a tactic along with hygiene and social distancing.

Lockdown as a strategy has failed miserably all over the world form USA to Peru to Argentina, France, Spain etc.

It is a strategy which will eventually cause far more deaths than it saves. The fact that children dying is an unfortunate debating statistic for you is your problem.

If am octogenarian dies in Sweden you're poor auld heart is broken. 100,000 kids in Africa not so much.

The Swedes chose a set of tactics that have yielded pretty much the exact same results as most of Europe. Nothing wrong with that.

If you think it's all the Tories fault, try this.

https://www.concern.net/donate/hunger-pandemic-appeal

How have these restrictions failed globally?
Can you blanket that statement any further than you have?

bb1234567

Total deaths in Sweden have increased a lot lately, it was looking to be just a bit higher than a normal year a few weeks ago but now looks like it will be significantly higher than all other years of the last decade. Looks like Sweden will end the year with at least 95,000 deaths vs 10 year average of 90,500.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/525353/sweden-number-of-deaths/

About a 5% increase on normal year, it's quite a jump but to be fair it's a lot better than for example the UK or Spain which will see deaths in 2020 at least 12-15% higher than the last ten year average.

charlie14

sheepysheep wrote: »

Again, no reflection on the consequences of lockdown as a strategy.

If you're going to advocate a strategy you have to be prepared to take ownership of the consequences of it, whether that be suicides, cancers, or worse.

Again, the fact that you can only address this issue by making derogatory remarks like above says everything about you. You can allege conspiracy theories about Swedish officials manipulating figures all day, but no a solitary sentence about impending disaster caused by the strategy you endorse.

These are real people dying because the world chose lockdown as an overarching strategy rather than as a tactic along with hygiene and social distancing.

Lockdown as a strategy has failed miserably all over the world form USA to Peru to Argentina, France, Spain etc.

It is a strategy which will eventually cause far more deaths than it saves. The fact that children dying is an unfortunate debating statistic for you is your problem.

If am octogenarian dies in Sweden you're poor auld heart is broken. 100,000 kids in Africa not so much.

The Swedes chose a set of tactics that have yielded pretty much the exact same results as most of Europe. Nothing wrong with that.

If you think it's all the Tories fault, try this.

https://www.concern.net/donate/hunger-pandemic-appeal

You appear to have some idea that posters who were opposed to Sweden`s lockdown strategy should now defend lockdown when the last hold-out in Europe is now using lockdown.


That on its own was bizarre enough, without you throwing in a proposal by the British governments Department for International Development where the prior holder of the portfolio, Priti Patel, believed Ireland should be starved into submission as a legitimate argument against lockdown.