Sweden avoiding lockdown

charlie14 · 10-04-2021 12:13pm

mcsean2163 wrote: »

Sorry, I generally skip your comments but did read this by mistake and feel obliged to reply.

The WHO estimate is from serological studies as in taking sampli to confirm covid19 antibodies and use that to find ifr. That's not modelling.

No need to apologise. It`s not as if I was losing any sleep over it.

If you actually take the time to examine the WHO IFR you will see it runs into the same problem as Tegnell`s predictions for herd immunity for Stockholm that a journalist pointed out to him at a press briefing.
More predicted infections than actual population, or long past the level for herd immunity yet still having large infection rates and fatalities.
If the WHO IFR of 0.23% was anyway accurate it would mean that for every fatality there have been 435 infected.

Czechia have had to date 27,617 fatalities. From the WHO IFR that means they have had over 12M infected. There population is 10.65M and last week had a further 27 thousand plus new infections and 743 fatalities.

Hungary, to date 22,966 fatalities. Using the WHO IFR that means 10M infected. Their population is 9.65M and last week they had 36 thousand plus new infections and 1,704 fatalities.

Italy to date 113,579 fatalities. According to the WHO IFR there have been 49.4M Italians infected. With a population of 60M if the the WHO IFR is correct that means they have over 80% of their population infected. Well beyond herd immunity level, yet last week they reported a further 107 thousand plus new infection and 3,251 fatalities with fatalities rising.

Basically the WHO IFR is a nonsense that similar to modelling figures just does not stand up to scrutiny.

CalamariFritti · 11-04-2021 12:56pm

The WHO IFR is a global IFR. Its obvious that some countries will be over and some countries will be under. I do not doubt your numbers but your conclusion is iffy. Just because there are some countries that are above doesnt invalidate anything. Add to that the fact that according to WHO guidelines covid deaths are consistently over reported.

charlie14 · 11-04-2021 3:20pm

CalamariFritti wrote: »

The WHO IFR is a global IFR. Its obvious that some countries will be over and some countries will be under. I do not doubt your numbers but your conclusion is iffy. Just because there are some countries that are above doesnt invalidate anything. Add to that the fact that according to WHO guidelines covid deaths are consistently over reported.

2 + 2 = 4 globally. If this IFR % had any worthwhile relevance then the same should be the case.
As it is it`s a mathematical nonsense that does not stand up to scrutiny.
If it is anything it is a dangerous mathematical nonsense where it`s only application has been, not just on this thread, but on others, used attempting to downplay the seriousness of this epidemic.

Other than a means of calculating when you have reached herd immunity level what applicable use has this WHO IFR ?
Just taking Italy as an example shows just how inaccurate it is. Using this IFR Italy have over 80% of their population infected, well within the herd immunity percentile, yet last week they had a further 107 thousand plus infections and 3,251 Covid deaths.

Bandying this IFR figure around is dangerous as it is a simple mathematical equation that anyone can do, and leave people with the assumption their country has reached herd immunity resulting in a false sense of security that will achieve nothing other than lead to further infections and deaths.

Unfortunately where the WHO is concerned I`m not overly surprised with them coming up with this piece of nonsense. During this pandemic they have often acted more like an opposition political party than a global health authority, attempting to be all things to everyone.
Promoting Johan Giesecke to vice chair of the WHO Strategic and Technical Advisory Group on Infection Disease, a body that advises the WHO Director General on pandemic response being a particular case in point.
Especially when this promotion was in September 2020. A month after FOI e-mails made it clear his involvement (or more likely imo the main mover) in the Swedish herd immunity strategy, which well before September was crystal clear from Sweden`s own data had failed.

PintOfView · 11-04-2021 3:34pm

charlie14 wrote: »

2 + 2 = 4 globally. If this IFR % had any worthwhile relevance then the same should be the case.
As it is it`s a mathematical nonsense that does not stand up to scrutiny.
If it is anything it is a dangerous mathematical nonsense where it`s only application has been, not just on this thread, but on others, used attempting to downplay the seriousness of this epidemic.

Other than a means of calculating when you have reached herd immunity level what applicable use has this WHO IFR ?
Just taking Italy as an example shows just how inaccurate it is. Using this IFR Italy have over 80% of their population infected, well within the herd immunity percentile, yet last week they had a further 107 thousand plus infections and 3,251 Covid deaths.

Bandying this IFR figure around is dangerous as it is a simple mathematical equation that anyone can do, and leave people with the assumption their country has reached herd immunity resulting in a false sense of security that will achieve nothing other than lead to further infections and deaths.

Unfortunately where the WHO is concerned I`m not overly surprised with them coming up with this piece of nonsense. During this pandemic they have often acted more like an opposition political party than a global health authority, attempting to be all things to everyone.
Promoting Johan Giesecke to vice chair of the WHO Strategic and Technical Advisory Group on Infection Disease, a body that advises the WHO Director General on pandemic response being a particular case in point.
Especially when this promotion was in September 2020. A month after FOI e-mails made it clear his involvement (or more likely imo the main mover) in the Swedish herd immunity strategy, which well before September was crystal clear from Sweden`s own data had failed.

So how are Sweden doing today?
And are restaurants and pubs in Stockholm packed, as a poster has claimed?

charlie14 · 11-04-2021 4:04pm

PintOfView wrote: »

So how are Sweden doing today?
And are restaurants and pubs in Stockholm packed, as a poster has claimed?

I cannot see what relevance that has to my post, but as to how Sweden is doing today I have no idea. They only post their stats on Tuesday`s, Wednesday`s, Thursday`s and Friday`s.

PintOfView · 11-04-2021 4:31pm

charlie14 wrote: »

I cannot see what relevance that has to my post, but as to how Sweden is doing today I have no idea. They only post their stats on Tuesday`s, Wednesday`s, Thursday`s and Friday`s.

Sorry, yes, it wasn't directly related to your post.

Just that another poster says they were in Stockholm in late March, and the pubs and restaurants were packed!
Was just wondering if anyone in the Sweden covid thread had more info on what's happening generally there?

CalamariFritti · 11-04-2021 5:13pm

charlie14 wrote: »

2 + 2 = 4 globally. If this IFR % had any worthwhile relevance then the same should be the case.
As it is it`s a mathematical nonsense that does not stand up to scrutiny.
If it is anything it is a dangerous mathematical nonsense where it`s only application has been, not just on this thread, but on others, used attempting to downplay the seriousness of this epidemic.

Other than a means of calculating when you have reached herd immunity level what applicable use has this WHO IFR ?
Just taking Italy as an example shows just how inaccurate it is. Using this IFR Italy have over 80% of their population infected, well within the herd immunity percentile, yet last week they had a further 107 thousand plus infections and 3,251 Covid deaths.

Bandying this IFR figure around is dangerous as it is a simple mathematical equation that anyone can do, and leave people with the assumption their country has reached herd immunity resulting in a false sense of security that will achieve nothing other than lead to further infections and deaths.

Unfortunately where the WHO is concerned I`m not overly surprised with them coming up with this piece of nonsense. During this pandemic they have often acted more like an opposition political party than a global health authority, attempting to be all things to everyone.
Promoting Johan Giesecke to vice chair of the WHO Strategic and Technical Advisory Group on Infection Disease, a body that advises the WHO Director General on pandemic response being a particular case in point.
Especially when this promotion was in September 2020. A month after FOI e-mails made it clear his involvement (or more likely imo the main mover) in the Swedish herd immunity strategy, which well before September was crystal clear from Sweden`s own data had failed.

I am not claiming that the IFR means 'herd immunity', but it is obvious that 2+2=4 is an unrealistic simplification. No country is like the other with regards to demographics, development level, climate and a myriad of other factors. Are you suggesting India or Ireland should have the same IFR as Italy or Brazil? That does not seem plausible.

The only thing that is impossible to deny is that our so-called IFR isn't worth a thing since we have no idea how many infections we have. In fact we dont even know what our CFR is since we're calling every infection a case which it isn't. I'm inclined to think that we deliberately fogged up those things out of fear the numbers we would come back with would see covid laughed out the door.

I am amazed where you take the confidence from to call it 'nonsense'. I am also struggling with your assessment of calling Swedens policy failed. You dont even make an attempt of explaining your reasoning except for the very weak assumption that all countries should have the same IFR. I am inclined to think that alone disqualifies your opinion.

mcsean2163 · 11-04-2021 6:18pm

CalamariFritti wrote: »

I am not claiming that the IFR means 'herd immunity', but it is obvious that 2+2=4 is an unrealistic simplification. No country is like the other with regards to demographics, development level, climate and a myriad of other factors. Are you suggesting India or Ireland should have the same IFR as Italy or Brazil? That does not seem plausible.

The only thing that is impossible to deny is that our so-called IFR isn't worth a thing since we have no idea how many infections we have. In fact we dont even know what our CFR is since we're calling every infection a case which it isn't. I'm inclined to think that we deliberately fogged up those things out of fear the numbers we would come back with would see covid laughed out the door.

I am amazed where you take the confidence from to call it 'nonsense'. I am also struggling with your assessment of calling Swedens policy failed. You dont even make an attempt of explaining your reasoning except for the very weak assumption that all countries should have the same IFR. I am inclined to think that alone disqualifies your opinion.

I'm sorry, it's best not to refer to the discredited WHO, who are more like an oppositional party, anymore.

Charlie14 is the best authority to which we should defer. No doubt, Biden, Boris and Merkel are feverishly trying to contact the oracle of boards.ie right now and best not to distract him with logic.

charlie14 · 11-04-2021 7:31pm

CalamariFritti wrote: »

I am not claiming that the IFR means 'herd immunity', but it is obvious that 2+2=4 is an unrealistic simplification. No country is like the other with regards to demographics, development level, climate and a myriad of other factors. Are you suggesting India or Ireland should have the same IFR as Italy or Brazil? That does not seem plausible.

The only thing that is impossible to deny is that our so-called IFR isn't worth a thing since we have no idea how many infections we have. In fact we dont even know what our CFR is since we're calling every infection a case which it isn't. I'm inclined to think that we deliberately fogged up those things out of fear the numbers we would come back with would see covid laughed out the door.

I am amazed where you take the confidence from to call it 'nonsense'. I am also struggling with your assessment of calling Swedens policy failed. You dont even make an attempt of explaining your reasoning except for the very weak assumption that all countries should have the same IFR. I am inclined to think that alone disqualifies your opinion.

Of course no country can be compared to another without it having many of the same similarities, but that hasn`t stopped some here from posting the WHO IFR as if it was a universal truth that should not be questioned. Mainly imo attempting to downplay the seriousness of this virus.

Nobody has any idea of how many infections they have. The only practical use of this WHO IFR is taking the number of fatalities, multiplying them by 435 and assuming that is your level of infection.
Not only is it incorrect, where it shows countries who have more infections than their actual populations, that are still experiencing infections and deaths, it is also been shown as incorrect for passing the herd immunity threshold which is not just dangerous but irresponsible from a body like the WHO.

The WHO IFR is expressed as a mathematical ratio. You do not need "confidence" to call it nonsense. Simply doing the maths shows that.
Of course Sweden`s original herd immunity failed strategy. Their own data shows that, and even Tegnell finally admitted that it was immoral. Why he didn`t see it as immoral when he was attempting it is anyone`s guess. The "we will have greater immunity for subsequent waves" has also been shown o have fallen flat on it`s face.

charlie14 · 11-04-2021 7:35pm

mcsean2163 wrote: »

I'm sorry, it's best not to refer to the discredited WHO, who are more like an oppositional party, anymore.

Charlie14 is the best authority to which we should defer. No doubt, Biden, Boris and Merkel are feverishly trying to contact the oracle of boards.ie right now and best not to distract him with logic.

If you cannot debate the points I have made in a civil manner, perhaps you should consider going back to your default position of ignoring uncomfortable verifiable facts.

99nsr125 · 11-04-2021 8:31pm

Medical Community: IFR is an important metric

Charlie: IFR is nonsense

Medical Community: Thank you Charlie we'll overturn all of our medical research ever

◔_◔

charlie14 · 11-04-2021 10:58pm

99nsr125 wrote: »

Medical Community: IFR is an important metric

Charlie: IFR is nonsense

Medical Community: Thank you Charlie we'll overturn all of our medical research ever

◔_◔

If you can roll back on the hyperbole, perhaps you could explain how and where you believe this WHO IFR figure is of any practical use for the medical community?
Or indeed anyone for that matter.

CalamariFritti · 11-04-2021 11:48pm

charlie14 wrote: »

Of course no country can be compared to another without it having many of the same similarities, but that hasn`t stopped some here from posting the WHO IFR as if it was a universal truth that should not be questioned. Mainly imo attempting to downplay the seriousness of this virus.

Nobody has any idea of how many infections they have. The only practical use of this WHO IFR is taking the number of fatalities, multiplying them by 435 and assuming that is your level of infection.
Not only is it incorrect, where it shows countries who have more infections than their actual populations, that are still experiencing infections and deaths, it is also been shown as incorrect for passing the herd immunity threshold which is not just dangerous but irresponsible from a body like the WHO.

The WHO IFR is expressed as a mathematical ratio. You do not need "confidence" to call it nonsense. Simply doing the maths shows that.
Of course Sweden`s original herd immunity failed strategy. Their own data shows that, and even Tegnell finally admitted that it was immoral. Why he didn`t see it as immoral when he was attempting it is anyone`s guess. The "we will have greater immunity for subsequent waves" has also been shown o have fallen flat on it`s face.

You havent actually read WHO/Ioannidis have you? Rhetorical question, no need to answer. Your *435 nonsense says it all.

charlie14 · 12-04-2021 1:31am

CalamariFritti wrote: »

You havent actually read WHO/Ioannidis have you? Rhetorical question, no need to answer. Your *435 nonsense says it all.

Do you mean John P A`s opus that has more possible if`s and maybes than a John le Carrè novel?
I did and it`s as clear as mud on how this WHO IFR could in any way be quoted as a verifiable ratio of infections based on fatalities.

You do not appear to understand the mathematical principle of multipling fatalities by 435 to determine infections based on the WHO`s IFR of 0.23%
It`s not really that complicated. If you take this 0.23% IFR ratio of fatalities too infections that mcsean236 and others here in the past believe is accurate, (apparently according to mcsean236 it has been updated from 0.28% to 0.23%, which I can only assume was even more-so for the sake of accuracy) then multiplying fatalities by 435 will give you, close as makes no difference, the numbers supposedly infected.
Unfortunately, similar to all the modelling figures we have seen in relation to this pandemic it is a mathematical nonsense that does not stand up to scrutiny.

I have asked that of others without a reply, but perhaps you could have a shot at it.
Other than possibly determining when you have reached the level of herd immunity, what, if any, practical use is the IFR ?

biko · 13-04-2021 9:20am

https://sverigesradio.se/artikel/smittspridningen-i-hostas-underdrevs-av-fhm
MSM brings up that Tegnell underplayed the seriousness last autumn.

In September, the spread of infection began to increase in Sweden after the low levels of the summer, at the same time as several studies showed that we followed the recommendations less and less.

The Swedish Public Health Agency presented a more positive picture of the development than was actually the case, something that critics believe may have contributed to increased spread of infection.

“A fairly stable level in most places but a small increase. Not at all as dramatic as you see in many other European countries. But it is slowly but surely going in the wrong direction. ”
State epidemiologist Anders Tegnell described the spread of the infection at a press conference on 24 September. However, the spread of infection did not increase “slowly but surely” or “carefully.” In one week, the number of cases had increased by 35 percent, according to the Public Health Agency's own statistics on confirmed infections.

humberklog · 13-04-2021 12:43pm

Not sure if I've linked this right but there's a chart showing Sweden as the highest infection rate in Europe for the last 7 days (as of 11th of this month.)

Bit cynical · 13-04-2021 4:32pm

humberklog wrote: »

Not sure if I've linked this right but there's a chart showing Sweden as the highest infection rate in Europe for the last 7 days (as of 11th of this month.)

Although, of course, a lot of factors have to be taken into consideration when interpreting case numbers.

The interesting thing is that the countries sadly doing worst at the moment in terms of current rates of deaths (Hungary, Bulgaria, Slovakia, Poland etc) are also those that had a very low initial outbreak in the first half of 2020.

Sweden, on the other hand has currently a very low rate of death with only a few countries in the EU with lower daily deaths.

This suggests that Sweden's balanced approach of sustainable measures has been vindicated.

biko · 13-04-2021 4:43pm

humberklog wrote: »

Not sure if I've linked this right but there's a chart showing Sweden as the highest infection rate in Europe for the last 7 days (as of 11th of this month.)

You can if you like use an image host, like https://postimages.org/
Upload it there, choose 640x480 as size.
Then copy the direct link and paste into your post like so

[noparse]

[/noparse]

It will display like so

humberklog · 13-04-2021 4:47pm

Bit cynical wrote: »

This suggests that Sweden's balanced approach of sustainable measures has been vindicated.

Probably a bit early to call it at that Bit Cynical?

I popped that chart up as it'll be interesting to see the mortality rate to follow. It'd be fantastic if their deaths remained low(ish).*

But I'd still be just watching the game for now rather than calling a result.

*By "low(ish)" I'm only referring to the last 4 months and measuring it against the worst performing EU countries in relation to Deaths in that same time.

Bit cynical · 13-04-2021 5:01pm

humberklog wrote: »

Probably a bit early to call it at that Bit Cynical?

I popped that chart up as it'll be interesting to see the mortality rate to follow. It'd be fantastic if their deaths remained low(ish).*

But I'd still be just watching the game for now rather than calling a result.

*By "low(ish)" I'm only referring to the last 4 months and measuring it against the worst performing EU countries in relation to Deaths in that same time.

Sweden are doing a bit more than bettering the worst performing EU countries though. Cumulatively, over the course of the pandemic, they have had fewer deaths per capita than the EU generally and, when age is taken into consideration, they are doing better than Ireland despite looser restrictions.

I don't expect too much to change except that their position relative to the EU as a whole will improve as that is the direction in which things are going. I don't expect their high rate of infections will translate into deaths (at least not to the extent some are expecting) as they've built up quite a lot of immunity in the population and warmer weather is appearing which further mitigates against deaths.

13-04-2021 6:03pm

Bit cynical wrote: »

Sweden are doing a bit more than bettering the worst performing EU countries though. Cumulatively, over the course of the pandemic, they have had fewer deaths per capita than the EU generally and, when age is taken into consideration, they are doing better than Ireland despite looser restrictions.

I don't expect too much to change except that their position relative to the EU as a whole will improve as that is the direction in which things are going. I don't expect their high rate of infections will translate into deaths (at least not to the extent some are expecting) as they've built up quite a lot of immunity in the population and warmer weather is appearing which further mitigates against deaths.

You're right, and they haven't destroyed their society and economy either (although it has been hit somewhat because of external factors).

biko · 13-04-2021 6:12pm

I hope it was worth the dead.
Their neighbour Norway is in lockdown but managing their economy well.

We won't really know until it's over and then some years.

13-04-2021 6:17pm

biko wrote: »

I hope it was worth the dead.
Their neighbour Norway is in lockdown but managing their economy well.

We won't really know until it's over and then some years.

But Sweden is very different from its neighbours in terms of population makeup and density. It was also hit harder and earlier than its neighbours. And there was the tragedy of the nursing homes as well.

Sweden is more comparable with countries in Western Europe.

biko · 13-04-2021 6:24pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Sweden is more comparable with countries in Western Europe.

Dr Fauci in US disagrees with this statement.

But I am not going to let Senator Paul get away with saying things that are cherry-picked data.
And he compared us to Sweden, and said, “Sweden let everybody get infected and they have much lower death rate than us.”

And I say, “Sir, with all due respect, you’re comparing apples and oranges, you should not be comparing Sweden with the United States, you should be comparing Sweden with demographically similar populations, like the Scandinavian countries such as Norway and Denmark.”

And Sweden has done much less well, particularly regarding deaths, compared to the other countries.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/10/why-anthony-fauci-happy-being-skunk-coronavirus-task-force

charlie14 · 13-04-2021 8:27pm

Deleted User wrote: »

But Sweden is very different from its neighbours in terms of population makeup and density. It was also hit harder and earlier than its neighbours. And there was the tragedy of the nursing homes as well.

Sweden is more comparable with countries in Western Europe.

The group most at risk from this virus are those the in aged 65 and over group.
Their is not great difference in population make up of this age group between Sweden and it`s neighbours that explains the large difference in deaths due to Covid-19.
% of population aged 65 and over. Sweden 20.1%, Denmark 19%, Finland 22.6%, Norway 17.5%.

All four also had their first Covid death within a 10 days of each other.
Sweden 11th March, Norway 12th March, Denmark 14th March, Finland 21st March.

charlie14 · 13-04-2021 9:31pm

Bit cynical wrote: »

Sweden are doing a bit more than bettering the worst performing EU countries though. Cumulatively, over the course of the pandemic, they have had fewer deaths per capita than the EU generally and, when age is taken into consideration, they are doing better than Ireland despite looser restrictions.

I don't expect too much to change except that their position relative to the EU as a whole will improve as that is the direction in which things are going. I don't expect their high rate of infections will translate into deaths (at least not to the extent some are expecting) as they've built up quite a lot of immunity in the population and warmer weather is appearing which further mitigates against deaths.

I don`t see where Sweden are doing better than Ireland. Per capita their Covid deaths are 43% higher.
If you are claiming they are doing better than Ireland because of the percentage difference in those aged 65 and over, then there may have been a case for that if the same comparison was true for Sweden`s neighbours, but it is not.

I`m not sure all this talk from Tegnell and others from their PHA on increased levels of immunity level during the first wave as a distraction from the failed herd immunity strategy has been anything other than detrimental.
You would imagine that high levels of immunity would result in lower levels of infections. Similar to what we see in the UK and Israel due to vaccination.
Instead Sweden has the highest rolling 7 day average new cases in Europe at 625, (Ireland has 81), and 391 people in ICU. Back to the ICU level of January.

From what I can see, all this talk of high levels of immunity has achieved is higher levels of transmission due to people ignoring restrictions/recommendations, and believing it.

biko · 14-04-2021 12:08pm

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/apr/13/sweden-has-highest-new-covid-cases-per-person-in-europe

Figure of 625 new infections per 1m people is many times larger than Nordic neighbours

Sweden has reported Europe’s highest number of new coronavirus infections per head over the past week and has more patients in intensive care than at any time since the pandemic’s first wave.

greyday · 14-04-2021 12:45pm

Has Tegnell ever been asked by his colleagues to account for his position in advocating the spread of new variants?
At this stage, we should all be able to agree that Sweden is not very interested in stopping the spread of infection other than among the vulnerable population, this position however is known to increase the chances of a variant emerging within that population!
Surely he should be asked to explain why he would advocate for restrictions which thus far have proven to plateau at very high levels of infections before rising again?

jaykay74 · 14-04-2021 1:43pm

PintOfView wrote: »

Sorry, yes, it wasn't directly related to your post.

Just that another poster says they were in Stockholm in late March, and the pubs and restaurants were packed!
Was just wondering if anyone in the Sweden covid thread had more info on what's happening generally there?

Not from my experience. I was out for an Indian and a few pints after work last week in Stockholm and it was quiet enough both in the restaurant and the pub. Closed by 8.30pm

14-04-2021 2:13pm

jaykay74 wrote: »

Not from my experience. I was out for an Indian and a few pints after work last week in Stockholm and it was quiet enough both in the restaurant and the pub. Closed by 8.30pm

I noticed something similar around Hornstull, where I was. There were restaurants that were quiet, but then there were other restaurants, and cafés, that were full. Particularly around the metro station. And Espresso House always seemed to be full. It was often impossible to find a seat.

Sweden avoiding lockdown

Comments