Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Sweden avoiding lockdown

Options
1320321323325326338

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 8,426 ✭✭✭FintanMcluskey


    Tegnell had no choice

    The constitution in Sweden actually protected basic rights



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,426 ✭✭✭FintanMcluskey


    Ireland had no excess deaths because they had minimal numbers of vulnerable

    But they still had similar excess death levels to Sweden early days




  • Registered Users Posts: 13,751 ✭✭✭✭Goldengirl


    Not at all . Symptomatic treatment ie when someone finds a lump, has been continuing , although slowed due to pressure on hospitals DUE TO COVID .

    Breast check is screening for healthy people many of whom will not have any problem. It is a great system but all screening of healthy people while desirable is not a necessity in times of high pressure like , for example , during a pandemic where the risks outweigh the benefits for patients and staff . Doesn't mean I agree that it should have been paused .

    But even when the pause in service was lifted Breastcheck were on the airwaves asking people to return for screening as a majority of those with appointments were not attending . Obviously those people were more afraid of Covid than cancer , as it was just when vaccinationo were starting .

    So not due to " lockdown " as you put it ..



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,751 ✭✭✭✭Goldengirl


    Basic right ? Lying to people about herd immunity ? Refusing to get elderly even seen by a doctor or tested and treated for Covid?

    Go away out of that , Fintan .



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,149 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    Bullsh*t.

    I have already replied to you and listed the relevant Acts they could have used. Their own Coronavirus Commission even references one that they stupidly let laps and then could not reactivate it until April 2021 where the Commission said by that time it was to late.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 13,751 ✭✭✭✭Goldengirl


    Yes ...early days because they did the wrong thing with nursing's homes and masks and PPE in healthcare...but at least we learned from those mistakes . That is the point . Tegnell persisted with the lie until regional governments and health institutions took it into their own hands to impose measures .

    And you complain about NPHET ?



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,149 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    More harmful than death or a policy where doctors were not even visiting care home and recommending end of life medication over the phone rather than treatment.

    You can ramble on all you like about "fundamentally correct", but unless you are completely blind and biased there is no other way you can read that commissions report and not see that they believe lockdown should have been implemented by day one (or even before) and that the Public Health Authority got it totally wrong on masks.



  • Posts: 0 ✭✭ [Deleted User]


    I think there is some discrepancy in terminology here perhaps - as far as I was aware, Sweden didn't lockdown. It had some 'light touch' restrictions, as I mentioned before, such as number limits - but never full lockdown like other EU nations (nowhere near the severity of any of Ireland's lockdowns - so this notion of Sweden copying other nations into lockdown is an illusion).

    Have you looked in the mirror for your own bias? We all have them...

    "fundamentally correct" was the summary title of the report - if you don't like it then take it up with the commission or www.thelocal.se (I suggest you do).

    I will say no more about this because it is tiresome at this point and we are going around in circles, and frankly, I have better things to be doing in my time. Here is a good read to show that other opinions exist.

    https://theconversation.com/why-nobody-will-ever-agree-on-whether-covid-lockdowns-were-worth-it-161154

    Upshot: like morality, values are plural. Different people weigh values differently.



  • Registered Users Posts: 110 ✭✭therapist3


    I can categorically refute everything you said

    My other half works in oncology, everything that I said has happened. We have fųcked ourselves yet again



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,149 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    No discrepancy whatsoever in the Swedish Coronavirus Report. They were not impressed with Sweden`s light touch herd immunity strategy or their face mask policy. Both of which they made very clear in their final report, so what you think I should take up with the Commission I have no idea. Why if I was I would do so through a Swedish newspaper, even less.

    I have no need to look in a mirror. My posts have all been factual, and nothing to do with opinions, which actually are by nature biased. You should try it sometime.

    I see we have now moved from medical ethics being plural to morality values are plural. Best of luck with that insight, but I would be slow to share it with anyone who lost loved ones in Swedish care homes where doctors refused to attend and were giving authorisation for end of life medication down the phone rather than treatment for the sake of your own health if I was you. In fact probably best not to mention it to anyone whose lost love ones were among the thousands that died needlessly due to the unethical strategy.



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 ✭✭ [Deleted User]


    I said morality and ethics was relative and plural - and they are - we are not all just one culture, there is a variety of human experience and this accounts for the fact that ethics and morality are relative. I was not talking about medical ethics (more on this later). This is fact, unless you refuse to admit human difference, which I think would be very intolerant. I gave the example of relativity with China and Sweden response. Is there a difference there in the way these governments treated their citizens? If so then how do you explain it if ethics are universal? You can't because they're not. Oh, and by the way: "Medical ethics has a long history, from the days of Hippocrates to the present. The concept of ethics is very dynamic (MY WORDS: like science) and the same ethical principles are not necessarily followed everywhere around the world" (https://themsag.com/blogs/medical-school-interviews/the-importance-of-medical-ethics). HINT: Think about euthanasia laws, even just within the EU.

    Science and ethics are not monolithic, they are dynamic.

    You are putting words into my mouth (text), something that you appear to do often. You (and others who try to counter my points) have a way of picking at small parts (often less relevant) of my arguments without addressing major points of them. I've seen this occur with other poster's who you disagree with.

    You don't read what I typed to you and we go round in circles. I came here to learn and debate. I've learnt very little and I'm not prepared to debate with those who don't listen (read) so my cost benefit analysis ( something the government never did prior to lockdown by the way) for spending further time here says I oughtn't.

    Post edited by [Deleted User] on


  • Registered Users Posts: 16,708 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    To be fair, you aren't coming across as very well informed, an example would be posting the article from February rather than the articles that were written during the Winter months, something you didn't acknowledge because it went against your opinion, or completely ignoring the economic data.



  • Posts: 0 ✭✭ [Deleted User]


    To be fair, I don't really care what you think of me (shock, horror) . I am interested in truth.

    I posted the article in Feb (as they eased their restrictions, despite the large wave building), because Denmark had a lot of their deaths after Feb. That's why it was relevant, and more relevant than the ones you posted in fact (which were from earlier period).

    Still, nobody has answered my basic question - why didn't Denmark lockdown (instead of opening up) at the start, or at any point, during that wave (where cases peaked mid-feb, deaths mid-march).



  • Registered Users Posts: 16,708 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    But they did, as you were shown, they didn't go back to full lockdown, as that was unneeded post vaccination, as Ireland did as well with most retail and restaurants remaining open, albeit at reduced hours (unless you were unvaccinated).



  • Posts: 0 ✭✭ [Deleted User]


    No, the article I posted (from Feb 1) says 'Denmark Covid restrictions lifted despite increase in cases' (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-60215200). It was after that, where Denmark had a large number of cases and deaths (in March). What I am saying is that the large wave occurred after the lockdown(full or partial)/restrictions was lifted - which is not unexpected - BUT my question is why did they not lockdown to prevent those deaths? That was the idea of lockdowns, I thought? I think maybe there is some misunderstanding here? EDIT: let me try to rephrase (English is not my first language).

    OK, so Denmark had restrictions added in December, then eased them in Feb (1st), then experienced a large wave of illness. My question is, if the state (as a first duty) is responsible for the protection of the citizens, then why didn't they re-implement restrictions when the case numbers were rising? I am genuinely interested, because surely some might say (not speaking for myself here) that the state failed those who died after the restrictions were eased on feb 1st?



  • Registered Users Posts: 16,708 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    I'll take it at face value that you're genuinely interested, but there is a 4-6 week lag (sometimes longer) from case increases to deaths, the lag has got longer as new and more effective treatments have been used. Most of the deaths in these cases would be from Delta, whereas Omicron became prevalent and had a lower CFR thus the need not to lockdown (as was shown by the drop off in deaths afterwards).



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,751 ✭✭✭✭Goldengirl


    If you can ..categorically ..then please do , with numbers to back up your premise that we are " fqcked" !

    I am not in oncology ( as neither are you ), but apart from a few late diagnosed cases , which unfortunately happen all the time due to people not attending for screening even in normal times , there is not a tsunami as expected .

    Maybe you can supply some hard facts , to refute this , to back up your hyperbole ?

    My own oh was a late diagnosis due to lockdown , but thankfully successfully treated , and recovered well. Hope it stays that way goes without saying really .

    I know not everyone can be treated successfully if presenting late . True pre Covid also .

    But that is why hospitals are so busy since everything opened up , because people are coming in to get diagnosed and treated . Nobody is fvcked.



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,149 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    Worldwide we do not all share the same culture. Geographical proximity, a shared history and language are three elements that shape a countries culture and for the Nordic Nations you would be hard pressed to find a group of countries with so much of those three elements in common. In language historically the peoples of the Nordic Nations were able to understand each other, and even today find it much easier than understanding what a German or Dutchman is saying. Danes, Norwegians and Swedes can read and speak each others languages without great difficulty. Those three elements of commonality alone make a nonsense of attempts to compare Sweden with China, or jumping all over the world attempting to compare Sweden with any other country on lockdown, when the like for like comparisons are on Sweden`s own doorstep.

    Another interesting similarity between Scandinavian countries is the Law of Jante, or the Jantelovenn`s social code. It is an underlying Scandinavian philosophy principle that applies across Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Finland and Iceland and how that was used by Sweden`s authorities for their herd immunity strategy while the others used it differently.

    I actually was thinking about euthanasia and Swedish doctors refusing to visit care home to assess patients but instead sanctioning euthanasia down the phone, but not in relation to the E.U. My thoughts went back to long before the E.U. to the number of Swedish place-names associated with the Swedish word Attestupa and Sweden cultural heritage.

    I have put no words in your, or anybody else`s mouths. I have posted verifiable facts on data, statistics, e-mails and the results of the finding of Sweden`s own Coronavirus Commission, none of which you have had any credible rebuttal too, so no, you did not come here to learn or debate. You came here attempting to defend a strategy that has by any metric shown to have been a failure and are now attempting to drag the conversation off on a philosophical tangent hoping to somehow negate that.

    Not surprised that you feel you have learned very little here if you are still talking about a cost benefit analysis comparing Ireland to Sweden. The only quantifiable cost benefit analysis between both is in Covid deaths and economies, and Sweden comes out second best on both.



  • Posts: 0 ✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Yes, I knew about the lag rate (4 weeks +). My argument was that, if they had locked down in Feb 1, instead of easing restrictions - they could have avoided those 'coded-in' (not sure that it the right phrase, maybe 'baked-in') deaths?

    A philosophical tangent is required because the pandemic was not just a public health crisis - it's a social, moral, economic, educational and political crisis too. As per the article I posted previously (the conversation) - clearly I value liberty (and basic civil liberties) more than those who defend lockdown, that's all there is to it.

    I am not against all non-pharmaceutical interventions, masks, social distancing, testing, isolating the infected etc (small costs) what I am against is the scale of mass coercion and unselective stay at home orders (enormous costs) we have observed over the pandemic. Voluntary measures would have avoided coercion.

    Post edited by [Deleted User] on


  • Registered Users Posts: 15,149 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    Nope. You are now only off on a philosophical tangent because it is unquantifiable in comparison to all the data, statistics, e-mails and the findings of Swedens own Coronavirus Commission report. It`s nothing more than an attempt to move the discussion from the verifiable facts to down a meandering rabbit warren. But even on a philosophical level your arguement does not stand up when you considered the Janteloven social code common to all Scandinavian countries.

    THe simplest facts you seem unable or unwilling to grasp is that, even if we believed Sweden`s strategy was not herd immunity as well ignoring the threat of prosecution for not sending children with symptoms to school, and was just based on voluntary measures, then with their excess deaths compared to their neighbours it failed.

    You are also ignoring that in relation to Ireland how our easing of restrictions for Christmas 2020 resulted in a huge spike in our number afterwards which just shows how well we do with voluntary measures for a pandemic.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 16,708 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    But they wouldn't as those deaths were already happening based on the numbers in hospital and ICU at the time, the lower CFR of Omicron made further restrictions unnecessary as very few were being hospitalised by it, those deaths were the tail end of Delta brought on by lifting restrictions in Autumn and not reacting quickly enough to bring the restrictions back in during Winter (which is a politically hard thing to do).

    And as this was already explained, it's clear you're not "genuinely interested" but trying to push a narrative instead.



  • Posts: 0 ✭✭ [Deleted User]


    I am not trying to push any narrative, I am simply saying there are multiple sides to this argument and it's not just as simple as 'lockdown to save lives'. I fail to see why you can't grasp that? I guess the world really is turning more authoritarian (https://www.idea.int/news-media/news/democracy-faces-perfect-storm-world-becomes-more-authoritarian), applauded by many people.

    "Many democratic governments are increasingly adopting authoritarian tactics, accentuated by the Covid-19 pandemic, while autocratic regimes are consolidating their power."

    I am not ignoring that Xmas 2020 spike, that was totally predictable. If you lock people down for long periods and give them some freedom, they are not going to use it wisely because they don't know when they are getting locked down again, or how long for.

    There are indices that track democracy and civil liberties. They reported that certain developments in Ireland were ‘Potentially concerning covid related measures or developments to watch from a democracy and human rights perspective. These may lead to a violation of human rights or democratic benchmarks and be considered disproportionate, unnecessary, illegal or indefinite if enforced or maintained over time.’ (https://www.idea.int/gsod-indices/countries-regions-profile?rsc=%5B205%5D&covid19=1). Not my words, theirs. Quantifiable data for you, search the archives if you want to know the previous scores (i.e. years prior to lockdowns)



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,149 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    What you are doing is attempting to ignore all that is verifiable on Sweden`s strategy as opposed to that of their like for like counterparts while attempting to drag the conversation of on philosophical and human rights tangents. Now that the philosophical tangent hasn`t worked out too well when the Janteloven social code common to all Scandanavian countries is taken into consideration, you are off on a human rights tangent hoping that will somehow muddy the waters.

    How or what that link you posted on IDEA indices on "Ireland (covid 19)" is somehow supposed to do that is also farcical, as the only area they judge Ireland for low performance was on Direct Democracy, and for mid range performance was Electoral Participation. On every other indice we are rated high performance.

    No chance I suppose of you cutting out the hypothetical nonsense, (none of which go within a donkey`s roar of showing anything you hoped to side-track the conversation with), and accept the verifiable facts ?



  • Posts: 0 ✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Clearly the message will never get through. As I have said repeatedly - this is not just a public health issue, it's a political issue that has to weigh up all the competing factors, public health, liberty, economy, education etc.

    The points for Ireland have dropped, as I also said previously and there are 'Potentially concerning covid related measures or developments to watch' but it's OK to ignore those factors because they don't suit your agenda? Have I understood that correctly?


    It's the same way that earlier the WHO figures were favoured over the Lancet ones (copied from my earlier post):

    Lancet report again (https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)02796-3/fulltext#seccestitle150 Full table: https://www.thelancet.com/action/showFullTableHTML?isHtml=true&tableId=tbl1&pii=S0140-6736%2821%2902796-3):


    Estimated excess mortality rate (per 100 000)

    Norway (7·2)

    Sweden (91·2)

    Denmark (94·1)

    Finland (80·8 )


    Norway is the outlier here. Denmark did worse than Sweden.

    But, that doesn't suit the agenda, so let's use the WHO figures instead.



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,149 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    A load of rambling nonsense. I`m not the one here jumping on every passing bandwagon ignoring verifiable statistics and reports from Sweden itself, from e-mails to antibody test results, to Tegnell`s admission that chasing herd immunity was immoral, to the Coronavirus Commission report etc.etc.

    And now were back to some estimated figures you have dug up from God knows where that have nothing to do with the known excess death figures during the period Sweden was chasing herd immunity (2020) and their neighbours were not. From the figures on excess deaths Fintan posted #9626.

    Sweden for 2020 had +10.55% excess deaths, Denmark +1.27%, Finland +2.85, and Norway -0.18.

    If you have trouble with those figures, then I can again post you the monthly figures from Eurostat showing the excess deaths for each, not just based on 2019, but on the 2016-2019 average monthly deaths, so stop your nonsense makey uppey scenarios.



  • Posts: 0 ✭✭ [Deleted User]


    ...



  • Posts: 0 ✭✭ [Deleted User]


    The Lancet is a 'God knows where' source? Wow. Just, wow. The Lancet is among the world's oldest and best-known general medical journals.



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,751 ✭✭✭✭Goldengirl


    It certainly is . And should be taken with respect , but in context .

    If you are comparing over the two years up to Dec 21 the Lancet is the go to ..includes a year of restrictions by Sweden .

    If you are comparing their not locking down with the lockdowns in neighbouring countries , the WHO has data specifically for that time , 2020, so is accurate for that .

    And seeing as that is the entire premise of the thread astronomer, anything else is just ...flannel , as I accused you of a few days ago ..

    And here you are , still ...flannel ing 😁



  • Posts: 0 ✭✭ [Deleted User]


    ah come on, a bit of flannel never hurt anyone. The points that I've been consistently making are valid in the debate as a whole (though perhaps not specifically relevant to only the approach of Sweden)

    Anyway, we do have to look at the whole pandemic (thus far) not just different parts of it. Even Tegnell himself said something to the effect of 'judge us in a few (I think he said 5) years'. We can't just say country A did better in this period than country B because the waves peak at different times in different countries. But, Sweden did avoid lockdown, depending on how one defines lockdown (stay at home orders along with widespread business closures is often a definition).

    Post edited by [Deleted User] on


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 15,149 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    We know what the excess deaths for each of the four Nordic nations are for 2020, the year that like for like comparisons can be made on the two different strategies as Sweden, like everywhere else, began putting their faith in vaccines early 2021.

    So.... according to those estimated figures you posted, then from all those estimated figures to be correct on the numbers that died due to Covid, why are the actual excess deaths not higher, particularly for Denmark and Finland ?

    There is only one way that would be a possibility, and that is that all other causes of death were correspondingly lower. Now unless there was something about lockdown in both Denmark and Finland that resulted in that, (and which mysteriously didn`t translate to Norway or anywhere else for that matter), I can see no other explanation.

    It`s just more of you scrambling around, still trying to justify Sweden`s strategy and wasting not just your own time, but mine and others as well.



Advertisement