Sweden avoiding lockdown

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Cupatae wrote: »

As long as it takes, we have committed to it now.. to stop half way would be far far worse.

There comes a point where, if a plan clearly doesn't work, you don't keep doing it.

Cupatae

Breezin wrote: »

So we wait for a vaccine?

No try to get the numbers down so the spread is manageable, then open the country back up in phases, adjust accordingly.

Cupatae

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

There comes a point where, if a plan clearly doesn't work, you don't keep doing it.

But it is working, alot of the things implemented are working as intended, our healthcare hasnt been overrun thats a massive win.

Breezin

Cupatae wrote: »

No try to get the numbers down so the spread is manageable, then open the country back up in phases, adjust accordingly.

Which assumes that the virus will go away. It won't, until there's a vaccine. This is not sustainable.

tobefrank321

Economically Sweden's problems will come from a collapse in demand for its manufactured products such as Volvo cars and trucks. IKEA might also struggle as it supports a large number of suppliers and workers. Then their tourism and hospitality industry will suffer.

In the short term, Sweden appear to be doing well, but there's nothing to say they won't have the same problems as everyone else.

They don't have the massive oil money of Norway who probably have enough resources to ride this one out.

Breezin

wakka12 wrote: »

Sweden will very quickly outstrip our death rate. They are consistently reporting up to and over 100 deaths on week days with no peak in sight. Ireland's deaths are trending steeply downwards. Sweden will end up with far higher deaths very soon, without a doubt.

But, there lies the question of whether they will simply have a higher death rate in the short term, front loading their deaths, while we may end up with the same number at the end of the pandemic after several waves. Ireland may not suffer any further waves however, they could be suppressed. And seeing as Swedish economy is not doing nay better than Europe, then it would undoubtedly turn out that their policy is the inferior one.

They go up and down. We go up and down. The statistics are hugely variable, as has been pointed out by hard lockdowners.

We are more or less in the same territory, with a vastly more draconian policy.

charlie14

Ginger n Lemon wrote: »

I believe we should combine phase 4 & 5 together. I believe we should open businesses based on capacity not sector. I believe we should start educating the public of an idea that we may just get coronavirus regardless what restrictions or lifting of restrictions we implement, and if they have chest pain or some other health issue they should go to GP/hospital ASAP and not be scared of covid. (this will save lives, not sitting at home)

And most importantly, given that this is a new disease and that our governments experience with pandemics is zero, we should look at other countries with similar size to us and population density and follow them if what they are doing is working.

Currently we just sit at home and got to wait until 20th of July to get a haircut. But at the same time Denmark has had barbers opened since 21st of April, so we have 2 weeks worth of facts and data. Has Denmark seen 10 000 + get infected over the last 2 weeks ? no. Has Denmark seen 1000 + deaths over the last 2 weeks? no. And there are 10 + countries like Denmark. This is factual data btw, not estimates or models.

I asked you where you believed we should go from here but apparently it`s straight too combining phase 4 and 5. Quite a leap!
Nobody has been advised to sit at home with chest pains or any other health issues. They have been advised to contact their doctor.


Like your New Zealand example,the population of Denmark is not roaming free, and I doubt any of them would have died for lack of a haircut.


It has been said here that comparisons should only be made like for like.
Our populations are roughly the same, but when it comes to a level of lifting restrictions we are nowhere near Denmark.
Over the past 2 weeks their average new cases have been 150. Deaths 9
Ireland over the same period. Average new cases 420. Deaths 30.


Denmark, similar to New Zealand have warned that should those figures start to rise they will revert to lockdown.

Cupatae

Breezin wrote: »

Which assumes that the virus will go away. It won't, until there's a vaccine. This is not sustainable.

It isnt a clear cut win, it doesnt have to go away it has to be managed till we get a vaccine, the goal is control of it right now and try maintain that till a vaccine is available .

What do you suggest we do?

charlie14

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

There comes a point where, if a plan clearly doesn't work, you don't keep doing it.

You have a better one ?

Hmmzis

Breezin wrote: »

Which assumes that the virus will go away. It won't, until there's a vaccine. This is not sustainable.

The virus cannot survive (for long) outside of a human host. If the reproduction value is kept under 1 (that infamous R0), then it will eventually go away.
The difficult bit is going to be establishing the correct measures that keep it that way and balancing that against daily life and economic activity. People throughout history have lived with far worse diseases around by finding ways how to control their spread. This is exactly what the vast majority of countries in the world are trying to do now, including us.

PhoenixParker

Breezin wrote: »

Which assumes that the virus will go away. It won't, until there's a vaccine. This is not sustainable.

Theres also improvements in treatments. If we can keep more people out of ICU this does become a nasty flu season.

Then we've also had time to prep for those who do end up in ICU with better treatments for them, better trained staff, PPE availability, more ventilators etc.

tobefrank321

Sweden are not taking a strict lockdown approach but its a myth to suggest they are doing no restrictions either.

In fact many in the Swedish government dislike the term herd immunity to describe their approach.

They have many restrictions designed to slow the virus spread down. Unrestricted herd spread as was encouraged in the UK is a bad approach, something they are keen to avoid. Most Swedes may eventually be infected but at a slow rate and at a manageable level.

One thing in the Swedes favour are their natural social distancing and one member households. Also apart from Stockholm its not that densely populated.

On the other side, a lot of migrants work in nursing homes and there appears to be issues around the language barrier and understanding the need for social distancing.

There's definitely lessons to be learned from Sweden for countries like Ireland where containment seems to be no longer possible.

Breezin

Cupatae wrote: »

It isnt a clear cut win, it doesnt have to go away it has to be managed till we get a vaccine, the goal is control of it right now and try maintain that till a vaccine is available .

What do you suggest we do?

I would have thought that was obvious, given the thread title.

On the basis that they are doing just as well as us, with very much less cost, we look at Sweden's smart lockdown and apply it instead of our dumb, near-total lockdown.

Cupatae

Breezin wrote: »

I would have thought that was obvious, given the thread title.

On the basis that they are doing just as well as us, with very much less cost, we look at Sweden's smart lockdown and apply it instead of our dumb, near-total lockdown.

Its good that you are so sure that we are so dumb for our lock down, silly us! and the rest of the world for that matter in lockdown! but outside of the obvious differences in both countries

Here https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-sweden-no-lockdown-anders-tegnell-not-convinced-right-call-2020-5?r=US&IR=T

Theirs your heroes stating that they arent even sure its the right call, but its a good job you know better eh!

wakka12

Breezin wrote: »

I would have thought that was obvious, given the thread title.

On the basis that they are doing just as well as us, with very much less cost, we look at Sweden's smart lockdown and apply it instead of our dumb, near-total lockdown.

And how do you know we wouldnt turn out in a situation more like Brazil which also has no lockdown?

Japan also had no lockdown, ICU are apparently becoming overrun, Russia was late to lockdown, medical services on verge of collapse, neither did Indonesia, excess mortality in the country thousands above average. THen closer to home, is it a conincidence that UK last country in Europe to lockdown now has the highest death rate on the continent?

WAYY more examples of non locked which ended in disaster than how Sweden did (which also has a high death rate). Sweden is not doing that badly because it has responsible citizens who effectively implemented social distancing and hygiene practices, not because there is no total lockdown

Sweden's economy is in the toilet too. Instead of paying workers of closed businesses as we are doing they have people out working in businesses which are not making any money because people are social distancing and remaining at home as much as possible.

charlie14

Cupatae wrote: »

Its good that you are so sure that we are so dumb for our lock down, silly us! and the rest of the world for that matter in lockdown! but outside of the obvious differences in both countries

Here https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-sweden-no-lockdown-anders-tegnell-not-convinced-right-call-2020-5?r=US&IR=T

Theirs your heroes stating that they arent even sure its the right call, but its a good job you know better eh!

I wonder if Tegnell`s strategy on achieving population immunity, (call it what you wish, but in essence, even though they may be downplaying it now, that is what the strategy was/is), rather than like others too control the spread until a vaccine is available was influenced by his 2009 swine flu experience.
In 2009 Sweden vaccinated 5 million against swine flu. Tegnell got a fair bit of criticism within Sweden when it caused around 500 of those to suffer from narcolepsy

Ginger n Lemon

wakka12 wrote: »

And how do you know we wouldnt turn out in a situation more like Brazil which also has no lockdown?

Japan also had no lockdown, ICU are apparently becoming overrun, Russia was late to lockdown, medical services on verge of collapse, neither did Indonesia, excess mortality in the country thousands above average. THen closer to home, is it a conincidence that UK last country in Europe to lockdown now has the highest death rate on the continent?

WAYY more examples of non locked which ended in disaster than how Sweden did (which also has a high death rate). Sweden is not doing that badly because it has responsible citizens who effectively implemented social distancing and hygiene practices, not because there is no total lockdown

Sweden's economy is in the toilet too. Instead of paying workers of closed businesses as we are doing they have people out working in businesses which are not making any money because people are social distancing and remaining at home as much as possible.

Can we please stop using the words high death rate?

German virologist: Covid-19 is less deadly than feared

Quote:
a representative sample population within Germany was tested and examined in great detail to determine what percentage had already been infected with Covid-19.

The headline result is that 15% of that population was infected, which implies an Infection Fatality Rate of 0.36%. This would put him somewhat in the middle of the previous experts we have spoken to. Professor Streeck was keen to point out, however, that he still believes this is a conservative estimate, and thinks it may be closer to 0.24-0.26% and may come down further still as we know more. He published the higher number to err on the side of caution: “it is more important to have the most conservative estimate and see the virus as more dangerous than it is,” he said.

Flu season in US in 2018 had 0.14% mortality. Not a single person lost their job that winter from US government directions. Something is going on.

wakka12

Ginger n Lemon wrote: »

Can we please stop using the words high death rate?

German virologist: Covid-19 is less deadly than feared

Quote:
a representative sample population within Germany was tested and examined in great detail to determine what percentage had already been infected with Covid-19.

The headline result is that 15% of that population was infected, which implies an Infection Fatality Rate of 0.36%. This would put him somewhat in the middle of the previous experts we have spoken to. Professor Streeck was keen to point out, however, that he still believes this is a conservative estimate, and thinks it may be closer to 0.24-0.26% and may come down further still as we know more. He published the higher number to err on the side of caution: “it is more important to have the most conservative estimate and see the virus as more dangerous than it is,” he said.

Flu season in US in 2018 had 0.14% mortality. Not a single person lost their job that winter from US government directions. Something is going on.

Was there an antibody tests done or what?Why didn't they release any details at all on how many were sampled, who they were, what number were positive, and any of the many other important details. 'Examined in great detail' is an extradorindarily vague statement in this context

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Cupatae wrote: »

But it is working, alot of the things implemented are working as intended, our healthcare hasnt been overrun thats a massive win.

charlie14 wrote: »

You have a better one ?

Oh, I'm not saying it was the wrong plan - I'm saying IF it was the wrong one or isn't working, then don't keep doing it.

Breezin wrote: »

They go up and down. We go up and down. The statistics are hugely variable, as has been pointed out by hard lockdowners.

We are more or less in the same territory, with a vastly more draconian policy.

Ours is generally lower though, bar that oe spike which I think was done to misreporting in previous days than ansything else.

Breezin

wakka12 wrote: »

Was there an antibody tests done or what?Why did'nt they release any details at all on how many were sample , who they were, what number were positive, and any of the many other important details. 'Examined in great detail' is an extradorindarily vague statement in this context

Well, you can choose to believe such scientific studies or not. I suppose if it doesn't suit, you won't. Heaven forfend that we might find out hardline policy has been unnecessary.

wakka12

Breezin wrote: »

Well, you can choose to believe such scientific studies or not. I suppose if it doesn't suit, you won't. Heaven forfend that we might find out hardline policy has been unnecessary.

I have no opinion on it. I am simply questioning it. Youre going to blindly accept the results of that study when absolutely no statistics accompany it?
I would very much question why a 'represenatative' antibody study that proves the virus is potentiall that mild is not widely publicised news, given how widely talked about the results of the New York antibody tests were. On google the only results I can find is that website which Ginger Lemon posted, zero other hits or related content to back up or verify it

Ginger n Lemon

wakka12 wrote: »

I have no opinion on it. I am simply questioning it. Youre going to blindly accept the results of that study when absolutely no statistics accompany it?
I would very much question why a 'represenatative' antibody study that proves the virus is potentiall that mild is not widely publicised news, given how widely talked about the results of the New York antibody tests were. On google the only results I can find is that website which Ginger Lemon posted, zero other hits or related content to back up or verify it

Why dont you have an opinion on it?

Do you have an opinion on New York antibody tests and mortality rate published there? Can we hear that please?

You cant say "Sweden (which also has a high death rate)." without quantifying what is a high death rate. Is 0.1% a high death rate? 0.3%?

I will give you the German study in a very quick fashion if I know you are not looking for it to say "oh, its not entire Germany population of 83 million that has been tested, its a sample" argument. The study is solid, peer reviewed, published.

None of that 65,000 Swine flu deaths in UK from Imperial college models.

ceadaoin.

wakka12 wrote: »

Was there an antibody tests done or what?Why didn't they release any details at all on how many were sampled, who they were, what number were positive, and any of the many other important details. 'Examined in great detail' is an extradorindarily vague statement in this context

They did release those details -919 people from 405 households were sampled. More details here

https://www.ukbonn.de/C12582D3002FD21D/vwLookupDownloads/Streeck_et_al_Infection_fatality_rate_of_SARS_CoV_2_infection2.pdf/%24FILE/Streeck_et_al_Infection_fatality_rate_of_SARS_CoV_2_infection2.pdf

Mike3287

biko wrote: »

As long as Sweden are not the worst in Europe I have a feeling they will call their strategy a success, and not even pretend to notice that their numbers are twice as bad as their Nordic neighbours, combined..

I really hope for their old folks' sake their gamble pays off.

They can have that feeling

A success is NZ or Sweden, all or nothing

We left it too late to lockdown, it had been spreading too long by the time we did anything, the UK for sure shouldn't have bothered with large scaledown, it was too far gone there.

wakka12

Ginger n Lemon wrote: »

Why dont you have an opinion on it?

Do you have an opinion on New York antibody tests and mortality rate published there? Can we hear that please?

You cant say "Sweden (which also has a high death rate)." without quantifying what is a high death rate. Is 0.1% a high death rate? 0.3%?

I will give you the German study in a very quick fashion if I know you are not looking for it to say "oh, its not entire Germany population of 83 million that has been tested, its a sample" argument. The study is solid, peer reviewed, published.

None of that 65,000 Swine flu deaths in UK from Imperial college models.

I am indifferent, it is what it is. I think the NY test is reliable because there was two rounds done and it was a large sample which covered a large geographic area .
Sorry , I meant high number of deaths in Sweden rather than death rate

Thanks Ceadoin for posting that. That is interesting then. I wonder why the result is so different to the one done in New York then.

Bit cynical

PhoenixParker wrote: »

Theyve had 1604 admitted to intensive care, 30-40 in the last day.
Ireland has had 364 with numbers in single digits most days in the last 2 weeks.

That's not tallying with Sweden's death rate or their outlook for me.

This suggests to me that they are dealing with higher rates of infection in their population but keeping deaths down through the use of medical care.

PhoenixParker

Bit cynical wrote: »

This suggests to me that they are dealing with higher rates of infection in their population but keeping deaths down through the use of medical care.

Surely then these same people wouldn't be ending up in ICU either?

dubrov

Mike3287 wrote: »

They can have that feeling

A success is NZ or Sweden, all or nothing

We left it too late to lockdown, it had been spreading too long by the time we did anything, the UK for sure shouldn't have bothered with large scaledown, it was too far gone there.

I don't think it is as simple as that. NZ will have to open their borders at some point. If the virus is just as viable there as Italy, it will eventually get through the whole population.

Looking at the numbers, there appears to be a closer correlation between deaths and climate than deaths and lockdown severity.

tobefrank321

dubrov wrote: »

I don't think it is as simple as that. NZ will have to open their borders at some point. If the virus is just as viable there as Italy, it will eventually get through the whole population.

Looking at the numbers, there appears to be a closer correlation between deaths and climate than deaths and lockdown severity.

They are already opening up to Australia. Can see a huge tourist boom both ways this summer. I think NZ will do just fine. They are nowhere near the open economy of western European nations such as Ireland. They can still export their sheep and so on.

charlie14

Ginger n Lemon wrote: »

Can we please stop using the words high death rate?

German virologist: Covid-19 is less deadly than feared

Quote:
a representative sample population within Germany was tested and examined in great detail to determine what percentage had already been infected with Covid-19.

The headline result is that 15% of that population was infected, which implies an Infection Fatality Rate of 0.36%. This would put him somewhat in the middle of the previous experts we have spoken to. Professor Streeck was keen to point out, however, that he still believes this is a conservative estimate, and thinks it may be closer to 0.24-0.26% and may come down further still as we know more. He published the higher number to err on the side of caution: “it is more important to have the most conservative estimate and see the virus as more dangerous than it is,” he said.

Flu season in US in 2018 had 0.14% mortality. Not a single person lost their job that winter from US government directions. Something is going on.

In December 2018 a NORC poll found that 43% of the U.S population would not avail of the flu vaccine. This was a year where there had been no mutation of the virus from the previous year. Not a great stretch to surmise that was what was going on with the mortality rate.


You do realize if that Fatality Rate of 0.36% is correct, and we let this virus run rampant through the population, that would equates to 18,000 deaths with no evidence of those that didn`t succumb being immune should there be another wave.


So far you have been through Sweden, New Zealand, Denmark, Germany and the U.S. and other than Ireland combining stage 4 and 5 of the easing of restriction with neither why and when, I have no idea what strategy you believe we should be following.