10 minutes ago, DrTuner said:

It's because they were late in response and had to do complete lockdowns because of it. The delay in response is still wreaking havoc, until the lockdown results in flattening of the curve. 

All the countries were late, to some extent.

 

Anyway, it seems that these three late to react countries have chosen the wrong strategy.

 

Otherwise, how to explain that, after more than a month of strict confinement, France has just beaten (yesterday and the day before) both world records (USA not included) in the number of cases and deaths in one day?

 

The answer seems quite obvious: these countries have locked together infected and non infected persons, thus spreading the disease instead of containing it...

4 minutes ago, Brunolem said:

The answer seems quite obvious: these countries have locked together infected and non infected persons, thus spreading the disease instead of containing it...

This is flat out a ridiculous statement but the fact that you think it is 'quite obvious' truly takes the biscuit.

7 minutes ago, Fairynuff said:

And you can prove categorically that things would be better without “the cure”? 

 

"If we hadn't done it, it would have been worse".

 

The classic political answer that justifies everything, including bailing out the rich and Wall Street, because otherwise...

 

Of course it is impossible to prove something like that...what you are asking is like asking to prove that God doesn't exist.

 

So let's forget this game, and instead listen to Pr Raoult, who explained that he was against the confinement, because it means locking together infected and non infected persons, with the brilliant result that you can see now in France, for example...

2 minutes ago, chessman said:

This is flat out a ridiculous statement but the fact that you think it is 'quite obvious' truly takes the biscuit.

Tell that to Pr Raoult...he will probably be interested in learning from a brilliant mind like yours...

15 minutes ago, chessman said:

Try telling that to the families of the dead!

 

The Swedish economy will also take a huge hit. Maybe not as bad as some other countries but still pretty big. Firms are still going into administration there, record numbers of new people applying for benefits

Walk around Pattaya and see what the measures are doing to Thais here, nearly every road i see free food given out, they can't even feed themselves anymore. Apparently there is little evidence of the benefit of the lockdowns and lots of evidence of the cost to peoples lives

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-usa-guidelines/trump-unveils-three-stage-process-for-states-to-end-coronavirus-shutdown-idUSKBN21Y31W

Someone please correct me for any mathematical or reasoning errors.

   From reading some of the replies in this thread and others it is clear that letting people do the right thing on their own is not feasible since many people don't even know what the right thing to do  is. 

  People say, the cure is worse than the disease yet they don't  realise a couple of things.

First the world population is 7,577,130,400, Using conservative estimates   if 70% get infected that is 5,289,991,280 and if there is a .5%  mortality rate  there would be  26,449,956. (did I do my math right? ) that's on top of all other deaths. 

Compared that to about 20 million military deaths during WW2.

The second thing to consider is that regardless of if Governments impose restrictions or not,  this number of deaths will in itself create  economic disruption .  

Does anyone really think that people would go to a USA football  game when they know that 70% of those attending the game will get infected and .5%  will die simply for going there????

Average US football game  attendance 2018 , 67,040X70%= 46,928   

46,928X.5%=234.64     

234 people dead from every football game. 

9 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

Walk around Pattaya and see what the measures are doing to Thais here, nearly every road i see free food given out, they can't even feed themselves anymore. Apparently there is little evidence of the benefit of the lockdowns and lots of evidence of the cost to peoples lives

Towns that rely on tourism are going to take a huge hit. They would be taking a huge hit whatever the Thai government had decided to do. In Sweden, you can go out but most people are choosing not to. Don't make the mistake of thinking it is a choice between lives and the economy. The economy will take a huge hit whatever happens.

1 hour ago, Brunolem said:

Governments have shown, one more time, their total incompetence in matters they shouldn't have gotten involved with in the first place.

Simply amazing...

26 minutes ago, Brunolem said:

 

"If we hadn't done it, it would have been worse".

 

The classic political answer that justifies everything, including bailing out the rich and Wall Street, because otherwise...

 

Of course it is impossible to prove something like that...what you are asking is like asking to prove that God doesn't exist.

 

So let's forget this game, and instead listen to Pr Raoult, who explained that he was against the confinement, because it means locking together infected and non infected persons, with the brilliant result that you can see now in France, for example...

No let’s not 

4 minutes ago, chessman said:

 In Sweden, you can go out but most people are choosing not to.

Yes, educated people are doing self isolation and social distancing, without the need for the government to hammer them down. Unfortunately that's not the entire population. Even so, they do have same type of measures in place, voluntarily. Swedes are not going around oblivious kissing strangers on the streets.

How many are responding to this survey from outside Thailand, basically just annoyed they had to cancel their 2 week shagging holiday ?

20 minutes ago, Brunolem said:

Tell that to Pr Raoult

His mind is much more brilliant than mine but I'm sure he would admit that he is in a tiny minority of experts who think this way.

 

I do like a good counter-intuitive bit of reasoning but this is too much. Spain, France and Italy were the first countries in Europe to be really hit by this virus. They all started suffering from 20%+ increases per day. Then they locked down. The lockdown didn't cause those 20%+ increases, it slowed it down though.

28 minutes ago, Brunolem said:

Tell that to Pr Raoult...he will probably be interested in learning from a brilliant mind like yours...

You appear to like this guy, I guess he has the answers that suit you best

4 minutes ago, chessman said:

His mind is much more brilliant than mine but I'm sure he would admit that he is in a tiny minority of experts who think this way.

 

I do like a good counter-intuitive bit of reasoning but this is too much. Spain, France and Italy were the first countries in Europe to be really hit by this virus. They all started suffering from 20%+ increases per day. Then they locked down. The lockdown didn't cause those 20%+ increases, it slowed it down though.

You’ll never convince those who don’t want to be convinced 

6 minutes ago, sirineou said:

 

First the world population is 7,577,130,400, Using conservative estimates   if 70% get infected that is 5,289,991,280 and if there is a .5%  mortality rate  there would be  26,449,956. (did I do my math right? ) that's on top of all other deaths. 

Compared that to about 20 million military deaths during WW2.

 

Right calculations but wrong conclusions.

 

You consider that all these deaths would be added to the deaths from other causes.

 

But we know that most of the virus victims are elderlies and people who were already suffering from other diseases or ailments.

 

So, many among them would have died anyway.

 

It is not possible to make the calculations to determine the results of "what if..." because the virus is not a blind killer, it acts more like a culling machine set against the weakest among the population.

16 minutes ago, chessman said:

Towns that rely on tourism are going to take a huge hit. They would be taking a huge hit whatever the Thai government had decided to do. In Sweden, you can go out but most people are choosing not to. Don't make the mistake of thinking it is a choice between lives and the economy. The economy will take a huge hit whatever happens.

In Sweden have they stopped non essential jobs? shops still open? restaurants, bars? i heard it's no groups over 50

22 hours ago, Skeptic7 said:

So what's your opinion of The Global Shutdown due to the Corona virus?

Feel free to leave comments. Voting is anonymous. 

You answer options don't include any "local" options.

Should the measures i.e. in New York city be the same as in some remote country or city with no cases?

Social distancing makes a lot of sense to slow down any infections.

And if there are many many infected people like i.e. NY then it's obviously important to make sure the situation does not get worse.

I think it's a little annoying that I can't sit in my favorite coffee shop and drink an espresso by myself or together with my gf who lives together with me. And I think it's a little annoying that we can't sit somewhere on bench in a park to relax outside for an hour or two.

But I understand that lots of people don't think and only don't do something if it's illegal. If i.e. parks would be open then I am sure sensible people would go there and still keep the distance from each other. But other people would join in groups and in groups of people who don't live together and might infect each other. Or people sit outside of convenience stores and drink beer together. Not a good idea!

So on second thought I can live with some restrictions for some time to make the overall situation better.

It's not a good idea to rely on everybody to do the right thing. That's unfortunately not what many people do.

12 minutes ago, chessman said:

The lockdown didn't cause those 20%+ increases, it slowed it down though.

This is wrong!

 

Just check the latest numbers from France.

 

After more than a month, they have never been so high!

11 minutes ago, Fairynuff said:

You appear to like this guy, I guess he has the answers that suit you best

This is not "a guy", he is the highest authority in the world (according to his peers) for this kind of infectious disease.

 

And by the way I opened a thread a few weeks ago, showing the comments of many high profile doctors, worldwide, who were all against these confinement measures.

2 hours ago, nervona81732 said:

THE WAS FREAKING engineered like all global events.

 

2 hours ago, nervona81732 said:

Get your heads out of your <deleted> and find out instead of buying into hysteria.

I put your words into the correct order.

I hope you will get better soon.

2 minutes ago, Brunolem said:

This is not "a guy", he is the highest authority in the world (according to his peers) for this kind of infectious disease.

 

And by the way I opened a thread a few weeks ago, showing the comments of many high profile doctors, worldwide, who were all against these confinement measures.

Politics has taken over, UK says they will "follow the science", how about the economics? I'm pretty sure at the beginning there was competition who would lockdown quickest

2 hours ago, fred110 said:

Sweden didn't shut down, no disaster there.

You may want to reconsider this.

 

4 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

Politics has taken over, UK says they will "follow the science", how about the economics? I'm pretty sure at the beginning there was competition who would lockdown quickest

The question is: "Whose science?"

The government's? The Big Pharma's? The independent scientists'?

 

Reading the comments here I think it's sad to see how many TV members think they know it all.

- Do this and not that.

- I see it clearly, they should have done xyz.

- It's like the flu.

- All governments are bad and they all work against us, the smart people who know everything.

 

Are you real?

Why do you think you know so much better what to do than everybody else?

Where do your insider information come from?

Where you ever in a position where you were responsible for millions of people? Were you stressed? Did you always do the right things?

 

The whole idea about most of the measures is to flatten the curve. That shouldn't be too difficult to understand.

 

6 minutes ago, garrya said:

You may want to reconsider this.

 

You might read this,  about their mitigation

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/04/can-you-beat-covid-19-without-a-lockdown-sweden-is-trying

12 minutes ago, Brunolem said:

This is wrong!

 

Just check the latest numbers from France.

 

After more than a month, they have never been so high!

No, you are completely wrong.

 

French lockdown started on 17th March.

 

% Increase of cases in the 5 days before that: 26% (on the 12th of March), 28%, 23%, 20%, 22%(on the 16th of March

 

% Increase of new cases in the last 5 days: 1.8% (on the 12th of April), 2.8%, 5.6%, 2.5%, 2.5% (on the 16th of April)

 

You can see they have slowed the increase, right?

 

Can you imagine what would have happened if they had done nothing and the increases had continued at 20%+? Unimaginable!

 

 

2 minutes ago, fred110 said:

You might read this,  about their mitigation

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/04/can-you-beat-covid-19-without-a-lockdown-sweden-is-trying

But they are losing the battle. Huge country with low and sparse population. Of course it spreads slower.

But the numbers don't lie. They are at nr 20 in the ranking of infections but within a week they will make it up to nr 15.

There are many countries where they don't test, and use less restrictive measures. The virus still spreads. 

You need to specify: are you asking about in Thailand, or where? There cannot be a single answer globally since there is so much variation among countries in response.

55 minutes ago, chessman said:

Try telling that to the families of the dead!

 

The Swedish economy will also take a huge hit. Maybe not as bad as some other countries but still pretty big. Firms are still going into administration there, record numbers of new people applying for benefits

Condolences to the loved ones of the dead, but death is a family tragedy...not international news, nor concern. People die every day of every year from other causes in higher numbers. Why are those deaths diminished and not in the headlines everyday? Because they don't belong there...and neither do these. The media loves driving unnecessary fear and loves sensationalizing.

 

80% of total cases are mild or without symptoms at all and 90% of those hospitalized had at least one underlying condition or co-morbidity. 

 

https://www.usatoday.com/in-depth/news/2020/04/15/coronavirus-risk-90-patients-had-underlying-conditions/2962721001/

 

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6915e3.htm