Interesting take from Sweden

[papa al]

17 minutes ago, Surelynot said:

Hence the comment only time will tell

In time,

all will die;

but

reincarnated in 7-10 days

so don't worry.

No biggy.

[GroveHillWanderer]

31 minutes ago, TheDark said:

But there are also some mutations / strains of the covid-19 virus, which are thought to be a lot more deadly than the original one.

There's no evidence of this. While there are always tiny differences in the genomes of virus samples taken from different cohorts, there are only two major known strains of SARS-CoV-2, known as the L and S strains. Neither has been shown to be more deadly than the other and as the article below states:

 

Quote

The differences between the two identified strains are tiny. In fact, they can’t really be considered to be separate “strains”, says Jones. And many of the genetic differences won’t affect the production of proteins, and so won’t change the way the virus works, or the symptoms it causes, he says. One is not more deadly than the other.

 

Coronavirus - are there two strains and is one more deadly?

[otherstuff1957]

9 minutes ago, papa al said:

same same

Actually not.

 

Sweden: Population about 10 million,  2000+ deaths.

Norway: Population about 5 million, 200+ deaths.

 

But don't let facts get in your way.

[UbonThani]

Just now, otherstuff1957 said:

Actually not.

 

Sweden: Population about 10 million,  2000+ deaths.

Norway: Population about 5 million, 200+ deaths.

 

But don't let facts get in your way.

Heart disease?

Roads?

UK?

Spain?

 

Yes lets look at facts please

enough scare mongering

[yuyiinthesky]

1 hour ago, Rookiescot said:

How is Sweden doing in comparison with Norway? 

Comparisons like that are flawed, we will only know what was better after many months. Until then it is all just a momentary snapshot, doesn't mean much.

[yuyiinthesky]

3 minutes ago, UbonThani said:

enough scare mongering

yes please.

[Guderian]

1 hour ago, mauGR1 said:

I think virus mutations are supposed to be weaker than the original.

It would be indeed very puzzling if a second wave would be stronger, but i agree with you about the uncertainty about the immunity.

 

You really need to read a bit more. Try having a look at what happened during the second wave of the Spanish flu.

 

https://www.history.com/news/spanish-flu-second-wave-resurgence

 

 

 

[Surelynot]

1 minute ago, yuyiinthesky said:

Comparisons like that are flawed, we will only know what was better after many months. Until then it is all just a momentary snapshot, doesn't mean much.

You mean like.....only time will tell?

[RobbyXNorway]

Norway vs Sweeden. Norway has less deaths due to more stringent quarantine and lockdown. But the Sweedish argument is that it is just a delay in numbers because once you HAVE TO open up then the virus will take its toll.

 

Also worth mentioning the recent UCLA study that showed far more people have had the virus (showing antibodies) and they estimated the real infection numbers at 28-55 times the official numbers. Which again meant that the fatality is close to 0,1% and the same as a regular influenza.

 

The shutdowns and quarantine is a complete overreaction. Instead all the now lost resources should have been used to improve care in hospitals, research into medication and to isolate/protect the most vulnerable part of the population (the elderly).

[connda]

55 minutes ago, TheDark said:

Sweden is not doing well when compared to the neighboring countries.

 

Ok. So how is Sweden doing when compared to the US or UK?  Don't cherry pick to fit your own narratives.

 

Group Sweden with other countries that have not locked down and compare those groups to countries that have locked down world-wide.  Sure you can do that now, but more accurate data will surface of the next year.

Look at statistics in 6 months to a year when we have countries with functioning economies (non-lockdown) with countries with a new class of impoverished in countries whose economies are destroyed (lockdown).
Non-lockdown countries will show higher infection rates initially and will have reached herd-immunity faster.  Lockdown countries will be dealing with the virus for months while non-lockdown countries are back to normal.  The case mortality figures will range between 0.01 to 0.03 worldwide regardless of lockdown or non-lockdown once the media hyperbole is forced to look at epidemiological data.

I'd venture that virtually every person on this planet who is agruing for lockdowns is paralyzed by fear.  Humankind has evolved immunological defences toward viruses.  Our bodies are built to fight them and then for the majority to develop immunity.  The weakest die.  This is how Nature works.
"We must destroy our economies, our cultures, our societies, and our lives to fight this virus!!!"
That is about the most illogical, flawed approach that humans in leadership positions have ever devised.  And it's not working other then to destroy humanities ability to function.  Wait for the artificial food shortages that are coming.  You think this virus is dangerous?  Wait for 1 billion people who can't obtain enough food on a daily basis and see how dangerous that is along with the death rate due to starvation and violence. 

"But Sweden should have saved all those old people in nursing homes!!!"  A couple of hundred years ago in the far north of Sweden those same old people were expected to take a walk out onto the ice flows so the rest of the tribe could survive. 

Nature: old and weak die; the group survives and becomes stronger. 

[xylophone]

5 minutes ago, RobbyXNorway said:

Norway vs Sweeden. Norway has less deaths due to more stringent quarantine and lockdown. But the Sweedish argument is that it is just a delay in numbers because once you HAVE TO open up then the virus will take its toll.

 

Also worth mentioning the recent UCLA study that showed far more people have had the virus (showing antibodies) and they estimated the real infection numbers at 28-55 times the official numbers. Which again meant that the fatality is close to 0,1% and the same as a regular influenza.

 

The shutdowns and quarantine is a complete overreaction. Instead all the now lost resources should have been used to improve care in hospitals, research into medication and to isolate/protect the most vulnerable part of the population (the elderly).

This article though, is worrying........

 

A rampage through the body…

https://science.sciencemag.org/content/368/6489/356

 

 

 

 

[toofarnorth]

31 minutes ago, yuyiinthesky said:

Thanks for posting this.

It seems to be that the Swedes are the only reasonable people left on this planet.

I watched that , most experts I am wary of but this chap made sense.

[mauGR1]

2 minutes ago, Guderian said:

You really need to read a bit more. Try having a look at what happened during the second wave of the Spanish flu.

 

https://www.history.com/news/spanish-flu-second-wave-resurgence

 

 

 

Why did you choose to bring spanish flu as comparison and not swine flu, sars and the likes ?

Why would you want the lock down to last forever ?

Actually i am not aiming at becoming a virologist, but i am questioning how suddenly we have become hostages of some sort of scientific dictatorship.

[Rancid]

1 hour ago, Surelynot said:

He might be wrong about no second wave. There are indications that contracting the virus does not confer immunity.........that being the case Sweden could be in big trouble, unless of course all the people likely to die from the virus all die in the first wave!

The WHO came out and said immunity may not occur and that people might be reinfected. This was based on zero evidence, and as just an meaningless opinion. Worse in fact, lets dig a little deeper as to why they may have released this, what does the WHO only recommend? A vaccine. Now where does the WHO get a considerable amount of its funding? From the vaccine industry...look it up.

 

How is this different from the study out a few years ago declaring that sugar was in fact good for us? It was funded by Coca Cola.

 

Sadly there is a lot of BS out there. Institutes with fancy official sounding names that release "opinions" are usually funded by the same people that benefit from that opinion. Medical studies are little different, always see who funded the study, they always get the opinion they want. Ferguson that release the initial massive death modelling from corona, that proved wrong, was funded by...Bill Gates. Join the dots.

[Bkk Brian]

4 minutes ago, RobbyXNorway said:

Norway vs Sweeden. Norway has less deaths due to more stringent quarantine and lockdown. But the Sweedish argument is that it is just a delay in numbers because once you HAVE TO open up then the virus will take its toll.

 

Also worth mentioning the recent UCLA study that showed far more people have had the virus (showing antibodies) and they estimated the real infection numbers at 28-55 times the official numbers. Which again meant that the fatality is close to 0,1% and the same as a regular influenza.

 

The shutdowns and quarantine is a complete overreaction. Instead all the now lost resources should have been used to improve care in hospitals, research into medication and to isolate/protect the most vulnerable part of the population (the elderly).

I would not reply too much on those studies, very small sample size to make such predictions and test kits that have false/positives that can skew results. Not saying its totally to be ignored just to wait for more decent size studies and better test kits. To hear both sides of the argument on the results and test procedures for the studies this is a very good read https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/04/20/feud-over-stanford-coronavirus-study-the-authors-owe-us-all-an-apology/

[spidermike007]

Many are now suggesting that by isolating people within their homes, they are eliminating any resistance to the virus, weakening immune systems, and creating a likely scenario for a second wave. I happen to think a lot of what these doctors are saying is accurate, and makes sense. Especially, if like me, you believe that the damage done by the worldwide economic lockdown, will be 200 times worse than the virus itself. 

 

A voice of reasoning in the wilderness of panic and fear of the zombie apocalypse. What they are saying makes total sense. There is an astonishing amount of bad information out there, and alot of medical personnel who do not know what they are working with, are unwilling to break normal influenza protocol (therefore killing alot of people, inadvertently) and listening to Fauci, the CDC, the FDA, and the WHO way too much, and not thinking outside the box, and dancing on their feet. As this guy says, theory and reality are not always the same.  

 

https://www.facebook.com/KGET17News/videos/537566680274166/

[Rancid]

Viral death tolls. We were told to flatten the curve to reduce the strain on hospitals, not to reduce the death rate. This is because the get it over with vs the lock down have the same death rate, unless a cure or vaccine emerges. Virus burn out themselves after enough of the population has been infected, or herd immunity as its also called. That is why the 2nd wave hits the lock down countries hard as opposed to those that just cop it.

 

Sweden should as such get a much milder 2nd wave or none at all, the lock down countries will be hit, then of course comes the 3rd wave. Thailand should also avoid a large 2nd wave as they did let it run for a long time before lock down. We can't really judge who did better until its all over.

[Bkk Brian]

14 minutes ago, xylophone said:

This article though, is worrying........

 

A rampage through the body…

https://science.sciencemag.org/content/368/6489/356

 

 

 

 

As is this one:

 

A report on her autopsy, posted Saturday night by the San Francisco Chronicle, shows that her body struggled so hard against the virus that a valve in her heart ruptured, a pathologist who reviewed the document told this news organization. .

Dr. Judy Melinek, a Bay Area forensic pathologist who reviewed the autopsy report, said it showed the heart “muscle was infected, that’s what caused her heart to rupture.”

 

https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/04/25/coronavirus-first-known-victim-in-u-s-died-of-burst-heart-pathologist-says/

[ChouDoufu]

4 minutes ago, Rancid said:

The WHO came out and said immunity may not occur and that people might be reinfected. This was based on zero evidence, and as just an meaningless opinion. Worse in fact, lets dig a little deeper as to why they may have released this, what does the WHO only recommend? A vaccine. Now where does the WHO get a considerable amount of its funding? From the vaccine industry...look it up.

 

How is this different from the study out a few years ago declaring that sugar was in fact good for us? It was funded by Coca Cola.

 

Sadly there is a lot of BS out there. Institutes with fancy official sounding names that release "opinions" are usually funded by the same people that benefit from that opinion. Medical studies are little different, always see who funded the study, they always get the opinion they want. Ferguson that release the initial massive death modelling from corona, that proved wrong, was funded by...Bill Gates. Join the dots.

 

conspiracy theories are great.  they're fun to talk about, and sometimes they actually turn out to be correct.  i don't think so in this case. 

 

the who statement was in response to several countries (i think germany and chile?) plans to issue "immunity certificates" that would allow exemption from lockdown/distancing rules, or possibly for international travel.

 

the underlying concept, recovery from covid offers immunity, has not been proven, therefore the certificates are worthless from a scientific standpoint.

 

regardless of whether you think there is immunity or what should or should not be necessary, the burden of proof in this case is on showing recovered individuals DO have immunity.  additionally, "most" or "the majority" gaining immunity is insufficient if the certificates are to be used to circumvent measures designed to prevent spread of the virus.

 

the who doesn't need to "prove" that recovered people DON'T gain immunity.  the null hypothesis is that immunity following recovery does not exist until shown to exist.

[scubascuba3]

1 hour ago, Surelynot said:

There are indications that contracting the virus does not confer immunity.........

Out of the 3 million already had it how many have caught it again? not really worth worrying about but good scaremongering material

[Logosone]

56 minutes ago, nauseus said:

SInce this VDO Swedish deaths have doubled.

Yes, they have doubled from 0.0107 percent of the population to:

 

 0.0213 (today's figure on Johns Hopkins) of the population.

 

Coronapocalypse this ain't.

[Surelynot]

4 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

Out of the 3 million already had it how many have caught it again? not really worth worrying about but good scaremongering material

People can get the coronavirus more than once, experts warn — recovering does not necessarily make you immune

https://www.businessinsider.com/wuhan-coronavirus-risk-of-reinfection-2020-2

 

Okay not a pier reviewed paper in the Lancet, but sufficient, I think, for me to say, there are indications.....no?

 

This is a forum for discussion.

[Logosone]

5 minutes ago, ChouDoufu said:

 

the who statement was in response to several countries (i think germany and chile?) plans to issue "immunity certificates" that would allow exemption from lockdown/distancing rules, or possibly for international travel.

 

the underlying concept, recovery from covid offers immunity, has not been proven, therefore the certificates are worthless from a scientific standpoint.

 

regardless of whether you think there is immunity or what should or should not be necessary, the burden of proof in this case is on showing recovered individuals DO have immunity.  additionally, "most" or "the majority" gaining immunity is insufficient if the certificates are to be used to circumvent measures designed to prevent spread of the virus.

 

the who doesn't need to "prove" that recovered people DON'T gain immunity.  the null hypothesis is that immunity following recovery does not exist until shown to exist.

No, it's exactly the other way round.

 

Immunity is the rule. It would be the lack of immunity that is the exception. The burden of proof is on those who would have you believe, quite fantastically, that there is no immunity.

 

We know already that 50% of the people who get it are immune.

 

Of course the WHO is strictly speaking correct, only if you have super extenstive testing of antibodies can you confirm one way or the other, however, immunity is the rule, not the exception. 

 

Certificates are perfectly sensible if re-infection is the exception, rather than the rule. Which most epidemiologists will tell you is the case.

 

"Prof Jon Cohen, emeritus professor of infectious diseases at Brighton and Sussex Medical School, said: “The answer is that we simply don’t know [about reinfection] yet because we don’t have an antibody test for the infection, although we will have soon.

“However, it is very likely, based on other viral infections, that yes, once a person has had the infection they will generally be immune and won’t get it again. There will always be the odd exception, but that is certainly a reasonable expectation.”

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/16/the-big-question-over-coronavirus-can-a-person-get-it-twice

[ChouDoufu]

1 hour ago, Surelynot said:

He might be wrong about no second wave. There are indications that contracting the virus does not confer immunity.........that being the case Sweden could be in big trouble, unless of course all the people likely to die from the virus all die in the first wave!

"There are indications" is very similar in meaning to the "no clear evidence" of human-human transmission used by the who in mid-january.

 

"indications" means there are anecdotes, some suspected cases, but insufficient evidence to 'prove' the theory.

 

has there been a published, peer-reviewed study showing that contracting the virus DOES confer immunity?

[scubascuba3]

6 minutes ago, Surelynot said:

People can get the coronavirus more than once, experts warn — recovering does not necessarily make you immune

https://www.businessinsider.com/wuhan-coronavirus-risk-of-reinfection-2020-2

 

Okay not a pier reviewed paper in the Lancet, but sufficient, I think, for me to say, there are indications.....no?

 

This is a forum for discussion.

Yeah we knew about that weeks ago but back to the point, of those 3m classed as having corona, how many caught it a second time? extremely low so I won't be worrying about it

[Lacessit]

49 minutes ago, papa al said:

In time,

all will die;

but

reincarnated in 7-10 days

so don't worry.

No biggy.

What was your last incarnation?

[ChouDoufu]

24 minutes ago, Logosone said:

No, it's exactly the other way round.

 

Immunity is the rule. It would be the lack of immunity that is the exception. The burden of proof is on those who would have you believe, quite fantastically, that there is no immunity.

 

We know already that 50% of the people who get it are immune.

 

Of course the WHO is strictly speaking correct, only if you have super extenstive testing of antibodies can you confirm one way or the other, however, immunity is the rule, not the exception. 

 

Certificates are perfectly sensible if re-infection is the exception, rather than the rule. Which most epidemiologists will tell you is the case.

 

"Prof Jon Cohen, emeritus professor of infectious diseases at Brighton and Sussex Medical School, said: “The answer is that we simply don’t know [about reinfection] yet because we don’t have an antibody test for the infection, although we will have soon.

“However, it is very likely, based on other viral infections, that yes, once a person has had the infection they will generally be immune and won’t get it again. There will always be the odd exception, but that is certainly a reasonable expectation.”

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/16/the-big-question-over-coronavirus-can-a-person-get-it-twice

immunity is the rule?

 

is it?  we have absolute proof of that?  in all cases?  assuming immunity from the B strain in wuhan and europe and new york, is one guaranteed immunity from the C strain in singapore or australia?

 

we know already that 50% of the people who get it are immune.

 

what of the other 50%?  sounds like immunity is equal to a coin toss.

 

it's exactly the other way round.

 

why would it be the other way around?  would you take a medicine or urdergo treatment because it's been proven to be effective, or because it hasn't been proven to not be effective?

 

 

Edited April 27, 2020 by ChouDoufu

[TheDark]

3 minutes ago, Logosone said:

No, it's exactly the other way round.

 

Immunity is the rule. It would be the lack of immunity that is the exception. The burden of proof is on those who would have you believe, quite fantastically, that there is no immunity.

 

We know already that 50% of the people who get it are immune.

Afaik 0% of the people who get covid-19 are immune. Some people don't have strong or even noticeable symptoms, but they still get the infection and can spread it around. 

 

Immune people don't get infected and don't spread the virus forward.

[Lacessit]

1 hour ago, mauGR1 said:

 

Feel free to live and die in fear, and ask yourself what are you gaining in spreading the fear.

There's a difference between living in fear, and taking sensible precautions.

IMO the main fear factor with COVID-19 is the potential for gasping one's lungs out despite being intubated.

[connda]

37 minutes ago, xylophone said:

This article though, is worrying........

 

A rampage through the body…

https://science.sciencemag.org/content/368/6489/356

 

 

 

 

And close to 90% are asymptomatic.  Difficult times for 4 to 6 % who contract it. 

Ever have Dengue?  I have. It was very unpleasant.  Research how much damage Dengue can do to a body.  It's easy to publish fear-porn to support the case for lockdowns and over-reactions.  But as a whole, most people who contract the virus will become mildly ill or not ill at all and the majority will develop antibodies and life will go on.  There are thousands of kinds of viruses in this world and some do some really terrible damage to a human body - but up to this year we didn't destroy our economies and our way of life our to fear of viruses.