Sweden avoiding lockdown

wakka12

IAMAMORON wrote: »

Do you have a link?

They were only reporting 11,000 yesterday. If they are reporting 11,500 new cases that means their infections doubled in a day?

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
Just worldometers. It is a very big increase, perhaps its a mistake

Country only has a pop of 17m, if it is correct number it is probably the biggest daily increase in cases per capita in the world

Mic 1972

Sweden is rising fast in daily increases

Danzy

IAMAMORON wrote: »

Do you have a link?

They were only reporting 11,000 yesterday. If they are reporting 11,500 new cases that means their infections doubled in a day?

Looks like they had very little testing prior now,

IAMAMORON

wakka12 wrote: »

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
Just worldometers. It is a very big increase, perhaps its a mistake

Country only has a pop of 17m, if it is correct number it is probably the biggest daily increase in cases per capita in the world

Maybe not? There is an epicentre there.

I would hope for their sake that it is a statistical spike ( late testing etc), because they are in trouble otherwise, big time.

IAMAMORON

Mic 1972 wrote: »

Sweden is rising fast in daily increases

How fast exactly?

coastwatch

coastwatch wrote: »

I think the point biko is making is that Sweden's confirmed case numbers are a gross under estimate.

They know that. Their whole strategy is based on it. The only reason to quote this "fatality rate" statistic is for dramatic purposes.

Been explained to that particular poster multiple times too.

markjbloggs

Roger_007 wrote: »

The Swedish government has always maintained that the measures they took were on medical and scientific advice. The Swedish CMO was interviewed on TV last night and he defended their strategy mainly on the grounds that it would be sustainable for as long as necessary while other countries adopted a strategy which is not sustainable either in human or economic terms.
As time passes it looks increasingly like the Swedes took a wise well-considered decision while most others just panicked.

AND ignored WHO guidelines AND pressure from neighboring countries. Now that took a lot of political courage.

sydthebeat

Mic 1972 wrote: »

Sweden is rising fast in daily increases

no its not:

see attached for deaths per day

Mic 1972

sydthebeat wrote: »

no its not:

see attached for deaths per day

new cases are on the rise, that's what i meant

wakka12

IAMAMORON wrote: »

Maybe not? There is an epicentre there.

I would hope for their sake that it is a statistical spike ( late testing etc), because they are in trouble otherwise, big time.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-52324218
They already are, it looks like it may be one of the worst affected countries in the world. There are uncollected bodies lying on the streets. It looks like the situation in Italy except with one of the worst healthcare systems in the world

sydthebeat

Deleted User wrote: »

They know that. Their whole strategy is based on it. The only reason to quote this "fatality rate" statistic is for dramatic purposes.

Been explained to that particular poster multiple times too.

to be fair to biko, hes not presenting it as the "fatality rate" ... but rather the 'deaths per confirmed cases' rate

sydthebeat

Mic 1972 wrote: »

new cases are on the rise, that's what i meant

not necessarily true either... numbers are steady since early april

trying to trend the "new cases" can be an erroneous pursuit anyway as its completely dependent on the number of tests carried out.

Sweden are very deliberately only testing those which are 'high probables'

dubrov

sydthebeat wrote: »

to be fair to biko, hes not presenting it as the "fatality rate" ... but rather the 'deaths per confirmed cases' rate

But that is a pointless statistic without knowing numbers being tested and the criteria.
If Sweden stopped testing tomorrow, that number would escalate quickly even though deaths per day might drop a lot

sydthebeat

dubrov wrote: »

But that is a pointless statistic without knowing numbers being tested and the criteria.
If Sweden stopped testing tomorrow, that number would escalate quickly even though deaths per day might drop a lot

yeah its a pointless statistic

im not going to argue against that

IAMAMORON

wakka12 wrote: »

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-52324218
They already are, it looks like it may be one of the worst affected countries in the world. There are uncollected bodies lying on the streets. It looks like the situation in Italy except with one of the worst healthcare systems in the world

Yes it looks bad, I had been following the story there. I read this quote from the article.

"Across Latin America, Covid-19 has been dubbed a rich person's disease. A virus introduced to the region by affluent parts of society who had been travelling abroad."

It is shocking how much crap and mistruth gets spread around.

The fact is that Ecuador is a developing country with a lot of poverty. They simply have not got the infrastructure to deal with this. It is sad.

plodder

IAMAMORON wrote: »

Given India's population of 1 billion people is it not fair to say that it's death toll of 723 is miniscule? I respect that your colleague probably knows more about how "fast " it is spreading though. Where is the epicentre in India?

I'll ask him on Monday, but really he was just being sceptical about the 'warm weather killing it off' theory. There are so many confounding variables at this point. Is it heat per-se or sunlight? Is the reported low level of the disease in warm Asian countries more to do with poor reporting or some real effect? It will take time to disentangle it all.

charlie14

Roger_007 wrote: »

The Swedish government has always maintained that the measures they took were on medical and scientific advice. The Swedish CMO was interviewed on TV last night and he defended their strategy mainly on the grounds that it would be sustainable for as long as necessary while other countries adopted a strategy which is not sustainable either in human or economic terms.
As time passes it looks increasingly like the Swedes took a wise well-considered decision while most others just panicked.

Much of Sweden`s strategy is based on herd immunity.
Like much else with this virus, it is not a given that herd immunity is effective, or even how effective, against future infection. If it is, it seems to be generally accepted that for it to work a 60-70% infection of the population would be necessary.
There is no evidence to date that Sweden has reach those kind of numbers.
A few days ago the Sweden Health Agency withdrew a report from the previous day that one third of the residents of Stockholm would be infected by May 1st. as well as a preliminary report that at least 11 out of a 100 Stockholm blood donors had developed antibodies.

jimmycrackcorm

Roger_007 wrote: »

The Swedish government has always maintained that the measures they took were on medical and scientific advice. The Swedish CMO was interviewed on TV last night and he defended their strategy mainly on the grounds that it would be sustainable for as long as necessary while other countries adopted a strategy which is not sustainable either in human or economic terms.
As time passes it looks increasingly like the Swedes took a wise well-considered decision while most others just panicked.

Their deaths per million/pop are almost double the sum of their Scandanavian neighbours put together. I think their deaths are only going to go in one direction, while the neighbours go the other way.

Bit cynical

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Their deaths per million/pop are almost double the sum of their Scandanavian neighbours put together. I think their deaths are only going to go in one direction, while the neighbours go the other way.

Their deaths seem to have leveled off however with the current level of restrictions.

thebaz

sydthebeat wrote: »

to be fair to biko, hes not presenting it as the "fatality rate" ... but rather the 'deaths per confirmed cases' rate

Ther have been other people outside here, who have found that the coverage here can be over-dramatic - and instilling extra fear in an already anxious public, that why I called out the statistic, when most Professionals seam to think the mortality figure will be well under 1%.

charlie14

thebaz wrote: »

Ther have been other people outside here, who have found that the coverage here can be over-dramatic - and instilling extra fear in an already anxious public, that why I called out the statistic, when most Professionals seam to think the mortality figure will be well under 1%.

There are two ways of looking at those percentages in fairness.
While the overall mortality figures may actually be around 1%, the higher percentage figure of deaths to confirmed case will be more likely to give people pause for thought when it comes to social distancing.

thebaz

charlie14 wrote: »

There are two ways of looking at those percentages in fairness.
While the overall mortality figures may actually be around 1%, the higher percentage figure of deaths to confirmed case will be more likely to give people pause for thought when it comes to social distancing.

I'd like to hear the realistic figure potrayed , ther were a few on other threads brandishing mortality rates of 21% - Some people are actually over-fearfull of Covid, and worrying themselves sick with fear - Thats not good - the reality is that it is mainly dangerous to elderly people and those with underyling conditions - if you are young, fit and healthy it is not a death sentence -Protect the vulnerable and the rest of us should practice social distancing / boost our immune system by staying healthy and protect our lungs. Over fear will cause much damage too, leading to panic attacks and anxiety disorders.

charlie14

thebaz wrote: »

I'd like to hear the realistic figure potrayed , ther were a few on other threads brandishing mortality rates of 21% - Some people are actually over-fearfull of Covid, and worrying themselves sick with fear - Thats not good - the reality is that it is mainly dangerous to elderly people and those with underyling conditions - if you are young, fit and healthy it is not a death sentence -Protect the vulnerable and the rest of us should practice social distancing / boost our immune system by staying healthy and protect our lungs. Over fear will cause much damage too, leading to panic attacks and anxiety disorders.

But what are the realistic figures ?
1% may or may not be the realistic figure for the overall population, but it is not the realistic figure for those that this virus is mainly dangerous too, the elderly and those with underlying conditions.
Some here are complaining about the 12% mortality rate of confirmed case in Sweden not being realistic are correct in the context of the overall population, but as these confirmed cases are not all elderly or have underlying conditions, then does it not follow for those that were the percentage was actually higher than 12% ?


As I said earlier, while that figure is not the overall mortality rate, it is no great harm in that it will make those that are the really vulnerable be extra careful when it comes to social distancing for their own sake, and those that are not in that group more careful for the sake of others.

maninasia

Att vara en hest wrote: »

Ireland and many other countries have been on pretty hardcore lockdown for a long time now, yet they are still raking in large numbers of new cases and deaths every day - does the lockdown really work? Is it hurting more than helping?

Reposting chart from a few pages back:


Sweden peaked in terms of deaths/day on the 8th of April assuming that downward trend continues.


If in the end Sweden ends up with 300 or 400 more deaths than a comparable country, but where the other country went full lockdown and effectively infringed on its citizens' right to freedom of movement and also caused massive economic havoc... Which country really failed?

Yes, each death is more than just a number... But painting the scene for an economic recession and laying the groundwork for a police state does not exactly sound good in the long term either. If the numbers hold up and it's mostly people with several underlying conditions of old age which passes from the disease - at what cost can society protect these groups? It's a hard question but it must be asked.

You can't compare countries directly, and you can't assume that the lockdown isn't working because numbers haven't dramatically come down yet. Ireland has a lot of people crammed into houses together. I think that could be a big difference with Sweden.

maninasia

charlie14 wrote: »

Much of Sweden`s strategy is based on herd immunity.
Like much else with this virus, it is not a given that herd immunity is effective, or even how effective, against future infection. If it is, it seems to be generally accepted that for it to work a 60-70% infection of the population would be necessary.
There is no evidence to date that Sweden has reach those kind of numbers.
A few days ago the Sweden Health Agency withdrew a report from the previous day that one third of the residents of Stockholm would be infected by May 1st. as well as a preliminary report that at least 11 out of a 100 Stockholm blood donors had developed antibodies.

Let Sweden do an experiment for the world. If it works we can apply the lessons, if it doesn't, they killed off a bunch of their own citizens for no reason.

thebaz

charlie14 wrote: »

But what are the realistic figures ?
1% may or may not be the realistic figure for the overall population, but it is not the realistic figure for those that this virus is mainly dangerous too, the elderly and those with underlying conditions.
Some here are complaining about the 12% mortality rate of confirmed case in Sweden not being realistic are correct in the context of the overall population, but as these confirmed cases are not all elderly or have underlying conditions, then does it not follow for those that were the percentage was actually higher than 12% ?


As I said earlier, while that figure is not the overall mortality rate, it is no great harm in that it will make those that are the really vulnerable be extra careful when it comes to social distancing for their own sake, and those that are not in that group more careful for the sake of others.

So you think realistic figure will be around 12% ???

Adults, and even the underage should be told the realistic figures , why create unnecessary fear in many, who are already under big anxiety - this forum can be a bit like that -

dubrov

So what are the theories for the death rate dropping in Sweden (and elsewhere)?

1) Herd immunity
2) Most people have already been exposed and many that are vulnerable have died already
3) Sweden's implementation of social distancing is effective is slowing the spread of the disease
4) Something else

In the absence of a vaccine in the next 3 months which is very unlikey, 1-3 above would all suggest we should be adopting the Swedish approach asap.

is_that_so

dubrov wrote: »

So what are the theories for the death rate dropping in Sweden (and elsewhere)?

1) Herd immunity
2) Most people have already been exposed and many that are vulnerable have died already
3) Sweden's implementation of social distancing is effective is slowing the spread of the disease
4) Something else

In the absence of a vaccine in the next 3 months which is very unlikely, 1-3 above would all suggest we should be adopting the Swedish approach asap.

Some suggestions given

Low average population density
Natural cultural distancing anyway
High proportion of one-person households.

dubrov

is_that_so wrote: »

Some suggestions given

Low average population density
Natural cultural distancing anyway
High proportion of one-person households.

All the above could possibly dampen the growth rate but even then as long as ICUs aren't overwhelmed dampening the growth rate seems pointless.

New York is the opposite of the above and has a high death rate but even there the rate of deaths are dropping.

charlie14

thebaz wrote: »

So you think realistic figure will be around 12% ???

Adults, and even the underage should be told the realistic figures , why create unnecessary fear in many, who are already under big anxiety - this forum can be a bit like that -

Where did you get that from ?
I did not say 12% would be the overall population mortality rate.


If you believe that adults, and even the underage, should be told the mathematical probability mortality figures, then I have no problem with that But it`s not as simple as believing that you can just give a statistic for two groups and that the statistic for either fits all within their group.