Relaxation of Restrictions, Part IV - **Read OP for Mod Warnings**

FintanMcluskey

joeguevara wrote: »

You mean this https://www.thesun.ie/news/5693350/sweden-coronavirus-death-rate-worst-world-docs-warn-dont-dodge-lockdown/

Sweden currently has one of the worst death rates and as far as Im aware have stopped reporting. So why are you raising this as a good thing.

I thought what you were going to counter argue with was going to be something that posted Sweden as the number 1 global death rate per population over 65.

Instead what you have posted is some jibberish that shows Sweden still preforming better than many European countries that underwent a strict lockdown, while the article itself compares the whole of USA to Sweden instead of individual states to Sweden.

Those tabloids are brain food for brains that are best kept on a Covid diet

Arghus

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

Oh I understand only a Covid death is tragic to some.

Believe me I understand.

That's a completely made up assertion that you've created in your own head.

joeguevara

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

I thought what you were going to counter argue with was going to be something that posted Sweden as the number 1 global death rate per population over 65.

Instead what you have posted is some jibberish that shows Sweden still preforming better than many European countries that underwent a strict lockdown, while the article itself compares the whole of USA to Sweden instead of individual states to Sweden.

Those tabloids are brain food for brains that are best kept on a Covid diet

And I thought you were going to counter with the fact that although its economy imploded it wasn't as bad as some others. When you say performing better, they have one of the highest death rates at present, which is increasing, not allowed entry to its neighbours and its government are being investrigated for deaths of its citizens.

Captain_Crash

joeguevara wrote: »

its government are being investrigated for deaths of its citizens.

Less of the hyperbole, they aren't "being investigated", they themselves formed a commission to investigate their approach to the pandemic. Something I think every European country will be doing.

charlie14

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

I need evidence for the restrictions saving any lives, and so far I've yet to see any.

Sweden is still the vaccine for the hysterical nonsense that none of ye want to take

You do realise don`t you that Sweden`s herd immunity strategy has not worked out and their antibody tests show they are no nearer to achieving immunity than anyone else ?

Curious thing with Sweden`s numbers you may have missed.
They only record Covid-19 deaths for those that tested positive before they passed.
What is very curious is that for the first 6 months of this year their reported death from Covid-19 were 5,500. Yet compared to last year their excess deaths for the same period are 9,400.
Any ideas as to the cause of those almost 4,000 excess deaths ?

joeguevara

Captain_Crash wrote: »

Less of the hyperbole, they aren't "being investigated", they themselves formed a commission to investigate their approach to the pandemic. Something I think every European country will be doing.

When you have one of the worst death rates in the world, when you go against all expertise, and its not really getting better, what difference is 'being investigated' to 'commission to investigate' unless you think they are investigating themselves.

But I accept your point. I just don't think its appropriate to raise Sweden as the amazing success story that some posters do.

charlie14

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

I thought what you were going to counter argue with was going to be something that posted Sweden as the number 1 global death rate per population over 65.

Instead what you have posted is some jibberish that shows Sweden still preforming better than many European countries that underwent a strict lockdown, while the article itself compares the whole of USA to Sweden instead of individual states to Sweden.

Those tabloids are brain food for brains that are best kept on a Covid diet

They really didn`t.
Of 51 European countries they are neck and neck with Italy for 4th as having most deaths per capita.

joeguevara

charlie14 wrote: »

They really didn`t.
Of 51 European countries they are neck and neck with Italy for 4th as having most deaths per capita.

And looking like getting worse. They are becoming neck and neck with the US. And they are being seen like a hazardous waste problem by their Nordic neighbours.

MickeyLeari

Captain_Crash wrote: »

Less of the hyperbole, they aren't "being investigated", they themselves formed a commission to investigate their approach to the pandemic. Something I think every European country will be doing.

Indeed and when we do it we need to look at the following:

- number of missed cancer screenings
- The cost of the future lack of investment in the health sector.
- mental health issues including depression and suicide.
- reputational damage as a result of reversing 60 years of a small open economy industrial policy compared to a narrow minded fascist regime.

FintanMcluskey

charlie14 wrote: »

They really didn`t.
Of 51 European countries they are neck and neck with Italy for 4th as having most deaths per capita.

They really did.

The proposed functionality of the lockdown you are defending is the fact that without it we would see 100-200k excess deaths in Ireland without it.

The point is no evidence exist as to the protection lockdown offers nursing home citizen's. And Sweden is proof.

And they fact they are 4th with no restrictions is further proof.

They death rate is intrinsically linked to the population of citizen's in the over 65 age bracket.

If Sweden were 1st in the deaths per million they would need to have at least double the death rate to have any correlation between lockdown and death rate.

Interesting post I read on here recently thought that the virus death rate peaked and lowered significantly after 40 days or say. I found that interesting. What lowers the death rate is perhaps the fact that vulnerable citizens unfortunately died in the first few weeks and the healthier folk survived.

Lockdown didnt save lives, Covid just seem to kill the vulnerable at a faster rate than usual

FintanMcluskey

charlie14 wrote: »

You do realise don`t you that Sweden`s herd immunity strategy has not worked out and their antibody tests show they are no nearer to achieving immunity than anyone else ?

Curious thing with Sweden`s numbers you may have missed.
They only record Covid-19 deaths for those that tested positive before they passed.
What is very curious is that for the first 6 months of this year their reported death from Covid-19 were 5,500. Yet compared to last year their excess deaths for the same period are 9,400.
Any ideas as to the cause of those almost 4,000 excess deaths ?

Fron what I can gather the anti body testing is rather innaccurate and highly debated at present.

So now that Sweden have been rather successful in the approach to combat Covid, we can move on to conspiracy theories and cover ups?

completedit

Watched a documentary on the Black Death let night and how countries responded and recovered from it.

I think naturally with winter coming we should start to be cautious. I believe for morale purposes, things should have been eased over the he summer for a month or so to give people something to hold onto. I know most things are actually open but it's what it feels like to people. A lot of people are saying this is the worst part of the last 6 months. We are in limbo.

The winter is looming and I'm sure this is causing a lot of worry. If history is doomed to repeat itself, let's hope this virus doesn't mimic the Spanish Flu. However, it doesn't appear that the virus is like the one of 1918. Even today we are much better set up to deal with such an outbreak.

Arghus

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

Fron what I can gather the anti body testing is rather innaccurate and highly debated at present.

So now that Sweden have been rather successful in the approach to combat Covid, we can move on to conspiracy theories and cover ups?

There were restrictions in Sweden Fintan, it wasn't just business as usual. There were numerous measures they took that were in line with other countries.

They weren't as severe as others overall, but there were still many restrictions on everyday life. It's a total myth to claim that everyday life for Swedes was unaffected. It was.

Your "vaccine" being the Swedish approach is a vaccine that leaves thousands more dead. That is one crappy vaccine Fintan. And we all know Sweden is under reporting deaths. So the true costs of that vaccine are even worse. Sweden wasn't successful.

MickeyLeari

MickeyLeari wrote: »

Indeed and when we do it we need to look at the following:

- number of missed cancer screenings
- The cost of the future lack of investment in the health sector.
- mental health issues including depression and suicide.
- reputational damage as a result of reversing 60 years of a small open economy industrial policy compared to a narrow minded fascist regime.

People are not bothered to question those sort of things.

I personally want to know how we are suddenly able to pay a chunk of the population 350 a week over several months, offer financial support to businesses, order in lots of PPE, fund the schools with hundreds of millions and offer tax breaks for people to staycation. As well as apparently having lots of money to pump into restarting the economy. I want to know what the cost of that will be to me! I want to know what cuts will need to made for the coming years to pay the bill back.

I'd love to know how many will die from the months of no testing / screening and treatments. That will be swept under the carpet. Our CMO's are good at that I hear.

Covid seems to be the only thing that matters right now. And the experts know themselves that the deaths have been WAY overstated. And they know its practically harmless for people under 65.

With just 5 in ICU right now, I have no idea why they won't just open the country fully and advise cocooning for the elders.

FintanMcluskey

Arghus wrote: »

Your "vaccine" being the Swedish approach is a vaccine that leaves thousands more dead. That is one crappy vaccine Fintan. And we all know Sweden is under reporting deaths. So the true costs of that vaccine are even worse. Sweden wasn't successful.

How does it leave thousands more dead?

They are 4th overall in Europe?

How does that mean restrictions on citizen's are the only option?

Im struggling to understand your defense with no evidence?

If lockdowns save lives Sweden would be by far, and by a magnitude of 100k, the worst performing country in Europe, but there not. So now the argument has moved onto hyperbole.

I know whats wrong. Some posters were so hysterical early on, they cant admit they were wrong, such was there condemnation of other posters who questioned restriction.

completedit

Yeah it seems logical. But surely they're doing this for a reason. That's what I can't get my head around. I think if winter comes and goes without any scares, my belief is that 2021 with or without a vaccine will not be restrictive. I think they're in the dark pretty much and hoping that a vaccine will be announced. I think once the vaccine is announced things will ease up, even before it's rolled out.

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

People are not bothered to question those sort of things.

I personally want to know how we are suddenly able to pay a chunk of the population 350 a week over several months, offer financial support to businesses, order in lots of PPE, fund the schools with hundreds of millions and offer tax breaks for people to staycation. As well as apparently having lots of money to pump into restarting the economy. I want to know what the cost of that will be to me! I want to know what cuts will need to made for the coming years to pay the bill back.

I'd love to know how many will die from the months of no testing / screening and treatments. That will be swept under the carpet. Our CMO's are good at that I hear.

Covid seems to be the only thing that matters right now. And the experts know themselves that the deaths have been WAY overstated. And they know its practically harmless for people under 65.

With just 5 in ICU right now, I have no idea why they won't just open the country fully and advise cocooning for the elders.

Maybe because not everyone believes in locking away 20% of the population

Arghus

[Deleted User] wrote: »

People are not bothered to question those sort of things.

I personally want to know how we are suddenly able to pay a chunk of the population 350 a week over several months, offer financial support to businesses, order in lots of PPE, fund the schools with hundreds of millions and offer tax breaks for people to staycation. As well as apparently having lots of money to pump into restarting the economy. I want to know what the cost of that will be to me! I want to know what cuts will need to made for the coming years to pay the bill back.

I'd love to know how many will die from the months of no testing / screening and treatments. That will be swept under the carpet. Our CMO's are good at that I hear.

Covid seems to be the only thing that matters right now. And the experts know themselves that the deaths have been WAY overstated. And they know its practically harmless for people under 65.

With just 5 in ICU right now, I have no idea why they won't just open the country fully and advise cocooning for the elders.

It's killed over a 100 people under the age of 65 - but practically harmless.

FintanMcluskey

Deleted User wrote: »

Maybe because not everyone believes in locking away 20% of the population

Bizzare.

So the answer is lockup 100%?

Or am I wrong?

I need to take my tablets

completedit

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Maybe because not everyone believes in locking away 20% of the population

But they should be doing it anyway. It's personal responsibility. If you're at risk then a level of it is required when you're dealing with a virus like this. The virus doesn't care how it gets to you. It's a sad reality but people in this situation re in a precarious situation and have to do what they can if they want to avoid getting it

Spanish Eyes

Deleted User wrote: »

People are not bothered to question those sort of things.

I personally want to know how we are suddenly able to pay a chunk of the population 350 a week over several months, offer financial support to businesses, order in lots of PPE, fund the schools with hundreds of millions and offer tax breaks for people to staycation. As well as apparently having lots of money to pump into restarting the economy. I want to know what the cost of that will be to me! I want to know what cuts will need to made for the coming years to pay the bill back.

I'd love to know how many will die from the months of no testing / screening and treatments. That will be swept under the carpet. Our CMO's are good at that I hear.

Covid seems to be the only thing that matters right now. And the experts know themselves that the deaths have been WAY overstated. And they know its practically harmless for people under 65.

With just 5 in ICU right now, I have no idea why they won't just open the country fully and advise cocooning for the elders.

Most "elders" as you call them are voluntarily being very cautious anyway. What more can they do? Many elders are active and vivacious too and are missing normal life by generally being cautious now.

I dunno what the answer is anymore, but am getting used to life as it is. Not much I can do about it really, apart from being careful and respectful to others by wearing a mask, keeping my distance from strangers and so on. Pubs don't interest me, and going for a meal now seems too much hassle to bother anymore. But have done so... however the experience just wasn't the same.

Staying in Ireland for the holliers too, now that's a first! Am looking forward to it actually and hope to put some money back in the economy that way at least.

Shopping is a pain and I won't do it now. Supermarket delivery, the rest is 95% online tbh.

It is a new way of existing, not living, but all the ranting and raving won't change it much.

charlie14

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

They really did.

The proposed functionality of the lockdown you are defending is the fact that without it we would see 100-200k excess deaths in Ireland without it.

The point is no evidence exist as to the protection lockdown offers nursing home citizen's. And Sweden is proof.

And they fact they are 4th with no restrictions is further proof.

They death rate is intrinsically linked to the population of citizen's in the over 65 age bracket.

If Sweden were 1st in the deaths per million they would need to have at least double the death rate to have any correlation between lockdown and death rate.

Interesting post I read on here recently thought that the virus death rate peaked and lowered significantly after 40 days or say. I found that interesting. What lowers the death rate is perhaps the fact that vulnerable citizens unfortunately died in the first few weeks and the healthier folk survived.

Lockdown didnt save lives, Covid just seem to kill the vulnerable at a faster rate than usual

They didn`t actually and it`s not just a case of the figures speaking for themselves. More a case of them not with 4,000 excess deaths in Sweden for the first half of the year above and beyond reported excess deaths from Covid-19.


Speculation that lockdown does not save lives. Is just that, speculation.
Sweden`s Nordic neighbours used it and their infections and deaths have been a fraction of those of Sweden.
All around the world when it was introduced infection rates and deaths fell.



Vulnerable people die because they are exposed to the virus which is what lockdown is intended to minimise. The fact that we didn`t protect our nursing homes with our lockdown was our fault. Nothing to do with the theory governing lockdown. Had we used it properly to protect nursing homes it would have shown how incorrect Sweden were. As their Nordic neighbours showed.


Btw. Sweden did have restrictions. Still do.

Arghus

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

Bizzare.

So the answer is lockup 100%?

Or am I wrong?

I need to take my tablets

Are you locked up Fintan?

Can you leave the house?

Have you been taken prisoner? Should we phone the authorities?

Arghus

Arghus wrote: »

It's killed over a 100 people under the age of 65 - but practically harmless.

That is a tiny percentage of the population.

FintanMcluskey

FintanMcluskey wrote: »

Bizzare.

So the answer is lockup 100%?

Or am I wrong?

I need to take my tablets

Who is locked up? Everyone sacrifices a little so that all can have some level of normality

charlie14

joeguevara wrote: »

And looking like getting worse. They are becoming neck and neck with the US. And they are being seen like a hazardous waste problem by their Nordic neighbours.

It is already much worse.
John Hopkins deaths from Covid-19 per 100,000. U.S.A. 45.62. Sweden 55.99.

FintanMcluskey

charlie14 wrote: »

They didn`t actually and it`s not just a case of the figures speaking for themselves. More a case of them not with 4,000 excess deaths in Sweden for the first half of the year above and beyond reported excess deaths from Covid-19.


Speculation that lockdown does not save lives. Is just that, speculation.
Sweden`s Nordic neighbours used it and their infections and deaths have been a fraction of those of Sweden.
All around the world when it was introduced infection rates and deaths fell.



Vulnerable people die because they are exposed to the virus which is what lockdown is intended to minimise. The fact that we didn`t protect our nursing homes with our lockdown was our fault. Nothing to do with the theory governing lockdown. Had we used it properly to protect nursing homes it would have shown how incorrect Sweden were. As their Nordic neighbours showed.


Btw. Sweden did have restrictions. Still do.

Im going to try and summarise the credibility in your argument here.

You said Sweden didnt impose restrictions and many excess citizen's died.

I said they didn't have excess deaths, not in any significant numbers, and performed better then many European countries that did impose strict lockdowns

You now say Sweden did have restrictions

So i wonder which is it so?

They did or didnt have restrictions, and did or didn't those restrictions have any correlation with death rate or not?

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

Who is locked up? Everyone sacrifices a little so that all can have some level of normality

I doubt anyone dying of undiagnosed cancer due to lack of screening will feel like they sacrificed a little.

Many people's lives and futures are been sacrificed to keep the covid numbers looking good.

FintanMcluskey

charlie14 wrote: »

It is already much worse.
John Hopkins deaths from Covid-19 per 100,000. U.S.A. 45.62. Sweden 55.99.

So the USA has done much better than the 4th perfoming country in Europe in terms of death rate.

Thats positive news. It surely makes sense to get those tourists in from America at that rate

Arghus

[Deleted User] wrote: »

That is a tiny percentage of the population.

It sure is. Thankfully we managed to get the spread under control. Otherwise that figure would have been much higher.

According to Prof. Philip Nolan it's estimated that between 1-5% of the population were exposed to the virus, thanks to the efficacy of the measures used to prevent the spread. So you can do the maths yourself about the estimated death toll without any counter measures.