14 hours ago, geriatrickid said:

 

You have confused the social benefits  options with public health outreach. Educating at risk groups has nothing to do with the money given to them. Sweden  failed to communicate clearly to some high risk segments of its population. I am not the one who came to that conclusion. The Swedish government Health Agency did and it has since modified its outreach strategy. Multiple observers have reported on the situation too.  Go and express your outrage to them if you are offended. I list three of the typical articles below. 

 

The Swedish government strategy did not account for cultural differences and its initial strategy did not penetrate the ethnic communities. Printing pamphlets in a foreign language is only one measure. The message has to be adapted and their must be an outreach. The strategy has changed but the minimalist methods from the prior period are a factor in some of the community spread.   One can say that the  foreigners should adapt, but that is not the issue.  Unfortunately, such a strategy won't protect the rest of the population if they are infected.

 

If  someone cannot speak Swedish well and does not understand Swedish social practice, then  one had better make sure the person gets a message he can understand otherwise there will not be compliance with the  Swedish disease mitigation protocols. Communicating in multiple languages is a common practice in many countries like India, Canada, UK and even the USA. The USA made sure that it provided spanish language documentation and outreach workers to hard hit areas. The UK and Canada had Punjabi, Urdu and Mandarin language options from the start of the crisis. 

https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/04/21/sweden-coronavirus-anti-lockdown-immigrants/

The government expects citizens to freely follow its advice—but not all ethnic groups have equal access to expertise. 

The country chose to lean on its high-trust culture and tradition of citizens independently following authorities’ recommendations. But there was one major overlooked problem with that approach—one that’s increasingly reflected in the country’s medical data: Sweden’s distinctive national culture and traditions, and the government’s efforts to amplify and support them, aren’t equally accessible to its increasingly diverse residents. The most segregated segments of the population are not as tuned in to the mainstream culture or to authorities’ messaging around the pandemic.

...... a general unwillingness among Swedish authorities to consider how cultural

........Sweden’s Civil Contingencies Agency, which is responsible for public safety and emergency management, has acknowledged that there were delays in translating information about the virus to other languages.

..........information needs to be not just directly translated but also conveyed in different ways to different groups.

 

https://www.thelocal.se/20200418/swedens-foreign-population-more-at-risk-of-the-coronavirus

People in Sweden with foreign backgrounds are disproportionately affected by the coronavirus, according to the country's Public Health Agency, raising fears that a "blind spot" is masking the spread of the coronavirus in some communities.

A distrust of authorities could also play a role, but the authorities' real "blind spot" was that immigrant communities sometimes have their own social networks, power hierarchies and authority figures. 

....... Swedish authorities strongly discouraged people from travelling at Easter, but failed to mention the risks of cramped housing or living with elderly relatives.

 

https://theunionjournal.com/swedens-unique-response-to-coronavirus-is-hurting-its-minority-communities/

This reports that despite  “an astonishing high rate” of fatalities amongst the Somali populace in late March' the Swedish government did not provide recommendations on the pandemic in the non-Swedish languages spoken by  a large number of people like the Somalis. The federal government’s activities did not take into account the social distinctions within a country whose migrant as well as asylum-seeker populations has grown."

This section  expresses a good point; "authorities’ typical presumptions concerning exactly how Swedes act as well as the absence of clear limitations have actually jumbled their message. “People that are living in the shadow society, in the immigrant areas, are very confused,” stated Nuri Kino, a reporter that belongs to Sweden’s area of Syriac Christians from the Middle East.

........The country is attempting to enhance its coronavirus response. Swedish authorities have boosted their outreach to minority communities,

 

 

 

 

Reading those statements isnt as if you live there. 99% of those are muslims going to a mosque where their being told that if you pray then you wont get the virus. people living in Sweden for 25 years and still arent able to read nor speak Swedish is a failure, that i agree since Sweden has been a fk pussy on demanding them to learn. But all of them has children in school and all schools have informed their student and gave them flyers. That never came up did it? Now we have news in arabic(<deleted> great) 

You are confusing reports with the ignorance of people that put their faith in religion and completely ignoring all warnings from several locations. Distrust of authorities it says. Dear god. If you know how many areas the fire, ambulance, police cant enter in Sweden you would be baffled. Failed to mention the risk of cramped housing. Well i didnt tell them to have 6 children in a 2 room apartment. What are their options? to get new apartments for them. The school has warned them through letters and their children. The schools that are for adults have warned them directly. They all go to the mosque or their communities such as Somalians. They have sure been warned by their community leaders and preachers. 

What you see here is a simply ignorance from people that are simply giving <deleted> about anything but yet they still keep it going as its all the Swedish governments fault.

For those who believe you can't compare Sweden to the UK because of population density, turns out  the Covid epicentre in the UK is not London, but the Northwest, which, you guessed it...has less population density.

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8282603/The-North-West-overtakes-London-Covid-epicentre.html

 

 

On 5/1/2020 at 2:42 PM, offset said:

Deaths of 256 per million population and 17500 still active cases (only 1000 recoveries) does not seem very good to me need to wait to see the final outcome before we know what country did good or bad

Hit the nail on the head. Nothing to laud about the Swedish model. 3 weeks ago they had less cases and deaths then Australia. Look at them now they have one of the highest rates of death for known infections. The reality is most of Sweden is in a self imposed lockdown as they are mostly afraid to go out, the ones that are going out are probably the ones that are dying.

Who cares what WHO say i don't think any country is taking any notice of them anymore after their gross incompetence in handling the pandemic from the beginning. They are past relevance to the pandemic and don't really have anything to offer. Countries are relying on their own experts and data.

1 hour ago, Logosone said:

For those who believe you can't compare Sweden to the UK because of population density, turns out  the Covid epicentre in the UK is not London, but the Northwest, which, you guessed it...has less population density.

Of all the ridiculous statements you have made on this thread (and you have made many), this is one of the ones that makes least sense. London is by far the worst hit area of the UK. After months of being the worst hit area, according to the latest figure it is overtaken in terms of people in hospital by another region. and this is your proof that population density is not so important. Unbelievable!

 

Again, you are taking a very selective bit of data and twisting it to suit your own narrow agenda.

21 hours ago, yuyiinthesky said:

Let's see what another Nobel Prize Winner, Professor Michael Levitt (Professor of Structural Biology at the Stanford School of Medicine, and winner of the 2013 Nobel Prize for Chemistry for “the development of multiscale models for complex chemical systems.”) has to say about the Swedish approach:

 

 

Source: https://unherd.com/thepost/nobel-prize-winning-scientist-the-covid-19-epidemic-was-never-exponential/
 

 

Thank you for posting this. Even though his view is different to mine, I find some of his arguments very persuasive. I wish he actually provided more concrete examples to back up what he says... I think an article by this guy would be really interesting.

 

 

11 minutes ago, chessman said:

1 hour ago, Logosone said:

For those who believe you can't compare Sweden to the UK because of population density, turns out  the Covid epicentre in the UK is not London, but the Northwest, which, you guessed it...has less population density.

Of all the ridiculous statements you have made on this thread (and you have made many), this is one of the ones that makes least sense. London is by far the worst hit area of the UK. After months of being the worst hit area, according to the latest figure it is overtaken in terms of people in hospital by another region. and this is your proof that population density is not so important. Unbelievable!

 

Again, you are taking a very selective bit of data and twisting it to suit your own narrow agenda.

It would be interesting to see a heat-map of new cases by area for the UK (as this is the point I'm responding to), but also Globally.

 

Population density definitely plays roll in the spread of Covid-19, the statistics have already proven this whereby countries and cities with a higher population density were hit the worst. Additionally, countries and cities with a higher population density received more incoming visitors - All of this stands to reason.

 

That said: Other areas in the UK are now receiving a greater number of new cases than more highly populated areas, i.e. Swansea, Middlesbrough. 

 

Looking at population density alone is flawed, but so is suggesting that population density does not impact the transmission of any respiratory illness.

 

Transmission rates are obviously impacted by a multitude of varying factors, starting with population density and continuing on with how disciplined or how well policed the populace of a region are vs when the country actually managed to lock down.

 

 

That Sweden has been 'recognised' as a success in fighting Covid-19 is also highly flawed - I have friends in Sweden, while places are open the majority of Swedes are well and truly locked down. Additionally any non-EU citizen is unable to travel into Sweden.  The 'slightly' lighter numbers of Covid-19 cases and deaths in Sweden can not be accurately compared to Countries like the UK, Spain or Germany.

It would seem more accurate to look at cases per Million of Population which tells a minor part of the story, then work out on an population density basis. The comparison also needs to involve actual cases as the systems to test and record cases vary.

 

 

 

The criticisms of the Swedish model have went from, "you are all insane you will all be dead in no time, trust me"... to "ok, but you still have much higher death numbers".

 

Well, first, that pattern shows even the most skeptical "lockdown enthusiasts" are coming around. Sort of.

 

Which brings me to my next point... we all know...! Nobody who has locked down will ever admit that a country that did not lock down could possibly get better or equal results! And that is what we are seeing in my opinion, people looking at figures with extremely biased eyes, because they are in a lockdown, and.... "it must be working, if it is not, why are we doing all of this?". 

 

The people who knock Sweden, even though your view has changed drastically in the past weeks, are judging an entire golf tournament after only having watched the first round. There is still a lot of golf yet to be played. Declaring a winner after the first round is silly. 

 

Those people I keep mentioning who are coming around on the Sweden model, well, they are gonna come around even more when their country tries to come out of its lockdown. Let's just say Australia eases up on its lockdown and deaths spike in the coming weeks. What then? Lock it down again? How is the public going to react to that.

 

Yep. Right about then, the Swedish model is going to start looking real good. To bad nobody seems to have thought about this factor BEFORE locking down. 

Death rate for Sweden is about what it is for the USA.  When looking at the charts for all the countries, the lowest death rates are in Africa and hot weather countries like Thailand, Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia.  Since Norway is a cold weather country the fact that its death rate is low would seem to indicate that its measures though mild by the standards of other countries worked very well.  Some have conjectured that keeping people quarantined may have actually increased the infection rate since the virus does not do well when exposed to fresh air, sunshine, and warm temperatures and you have to be in close proximity to a carrier to catch it. One way or another, Swedens economy has not crashed nor have they spent billions/trillions of dollars to prop it up.  With the USA having 800,000 deaths per year from smoking related illnesses and Thailand losing 55 lives per day by traffic deaths the response seems like hitting a fly with a sledgehammer. 

14 minutes ago, sucit said:

The criticisms of the Swedish model have went from, "you are all insane you will all be dead in no time, trust me"... to "ok, but you still have much higher death numbers".

This argument can also be made in the reverse. There have been many posters on this forum who said with certainty that Sweden got it correct and the rest of the world is making a terrible mistake. Now, as the death toll continues to rise, many posters on here who think that Sweden got it correct are saying things like 'well, we'll have to see what happens in the future'.

 

That's fair enough

 

but unless there's a second wave that kills thousands in the neighbouring countries but spares Sweden and/or the Swedish economy becomes turbocharged as other countries slump then the Swedish policy will not be seen as a successful one. 

22 minutes ago, chessman said:

but unless there's a second wave that kills thousands in the neighbouring countries but spares Sweden and/or the Swedish economy becomes turbocharged as other countries slump then the Swedish policy will not be seen as a successful one. 

 

No, the Swedish model is already seen as a success, indeed the WHO has lauded it as the model for the future.

 

The figure of 0.02 per cent of the population having died only illustrates that Sweden's lack of enforced social lockdown was in no way a hindrance to having a tolerable mortality rate, certainly a lot lower than the UK's with its extreme social lockdown.

 

Obviously the above figure will rise somewhat going forward, but it would take a lot for an apocalypse to happen in Sweden. It won't.

19 minutes ago, Logosone said:

No, the Swedish model is already seen as a success, indeed the WHO has lauded it as the model for the future

Again, as usual, you are twisting the meaning. The WHO are talking very specifically about the importance of keeping social distancing measures in the future and countries having a partnership with its citizens to mean that these measures are adhered to.

 

 

4 hours ago, Logosone said:

For those who believe you can't compare Sweden to the UK because of population density, turns out  the Covid epicentre in the UK is not London, but the Northwest, which, you guessed it...has less population density.

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8282603/The-North-West-overtakes-London-Covid-epicentre.html

 

 

Less population density than where?

2 hours ago, sucit said:

The criticisms of the Swedish model have went from, "you are all insane you will all be dead in no time, trust me"... to "ok, but you still have much higher death numbers".

 

Well, first, that pattern shows even the most skeptical "lockdown enthusiasts" are coming around. Sort of.

 

Which brings me to my next point... we all know...! Nobody who has locked down will ever admit that a country that did not lock down could possibly get better or equal results! And that is what we are seeing in my opinion, people looking at figures with extremely biased eyes, because they are in a lockdown, and.... "it must be working, if it is not, why are we doing all of this?". 

 

The people who knock Sweden, even though your view has changed drastically in the past weeks, are judging an entire golf tournament after only having watched the first round. There is still a lot of golf yet to be played. Declaring a winner after the first round is silly. 

 

Those people I keep mentioning who are coming around on the Sweden model, well, they are gonna come around even more when their country tries to come out of its lockdown. Let's just say Australia eases up on its lockdown and deaths spike in the coming weeks. What then? Lock it down again? How is the public going to react to that.

 

Yep. Right about then, the Swedish model is going to start looking real good. To bad nobody seems to have thought about this factor BEFORE locking down. 

What a mess.

4 hours ago, Swimfan said:

Hit the nail on the head. Nothing to laud about the Swedish model. 3 weeks ago they had less cases and deaths then Australia. Look at them now they have one of the highest rates of death for known infections. The reality is most of Sweden is in a self imposed lockdown as they are mostly afraid to go out, the ones that are going out are probably the ones that are dying.

Who cares what WHO say i don't think any country is taking any notice of them anymore after their gross incompetence in handling the pandemic from the beginning. They are past relevance to the pandemic and don't really have anything to offer. Countries are relying on their own experts and data.

There are 2 main groups in Sweden:

1) Those who accept the recommendations and don't go out unless necessary. Elderly take it the most / very seriously of course. Others simply avoid going out when it's not necessary, they're the ones who don't go to evening restaurants, gyms etc, any longer but they still queue for food at lunch restaurants. 

2) The rest. Most people under 35 for sure. Many families with children don't see the point as their children by law must go to school where there is zero social distancing. Most school children must also take public transport to school, where there also is zero social distancing. 

 

From what I see: the younger and stronger, the less people care. The more risk for themselves, the more they care.

1 hour ago, Logosone said:

 

No, the Swedish model is already seen as a success, indeed the WHO has lauded it as the model for the future.

 

The figure of 0.02 per cent of the population having died only illustrates that Sweden's lack of enforced social lockdown was in no way a hindrance to having a tolerable mortality rate, certainly a lot lower than the UK's with its extreme social lockdown.

 

Obviously the above figure will rise somewhat going forward, but it would take a lot for an apocalypse to happen in Sweden. It won't.

The Swedish model is only seen as a success by blind bats, which species WHO also seems to be a member of. Sweden's curve is lagging the UK's and tomorrow with be the time to see how they are really doing.

 

 

Please keep in mind that Sweden is 2-4 weeks behind other European countries closer to the epicentre. 

6 minutes ago, nauseus said:

The Swedish model is only seen as a success by blind bats, which species WHO also seems to be a member of

To be fair to the WHO, the press conference where these quotes come from is much more about diplomacy than anything else. After the problems with the USA, the WHO can't make any more enemies. They get a question from a Swedish journalist and find parts of the Swedish system they can praise and do so. Business as usual. The fact that included in this answer is the grovelling "It could be a coincidence but I actually received a letter from His Excellency, the Prime Minister, Prime Minister Stefan Löfven, today and he shared with me the strong measures they're taking. Tack så mycket, Your Excellency" tells you all you need to know about the tone of the press conference.

 

More worrying for Sweden are their discussions about antibodies and how initial research has shown that "the general outcome; even in areas of fairly intense transmission the proportion of people who have seroconverted or who have antibodies in their blood is actually quite low, which is a concern because it does mean many, the vast majority of people remain susceptible"

 

The question about Sweden can be found starting on Page 11

https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/transcripts/who-audio-emergencies-coronavirus-press-conference-29apr2020.pdf?sfvrsn=aaa81d24_2

2 hours ago, chessman said:

To be fair to the WHO, the press conference where these quotes come from is much more about diplomacy than anything else. After the problems with the USA, the WHO can't make any more enemies. They get a question from a Swedish journalist and find parts of the Swedish system they can praise and do so. Business as usual. The fact that included in this answer is the grovelling "It could be a coincidence but I actually received a letter from His Excellency, the Prime Minister, Prime Minister Stefan Löfven, today and he shared with me the strong measures they're taking. Tack så mycket, Your Excellency" tells you all you need to know about the tone of the press conference.

 

More worrying for Sweden are their discussions about antibodies and how initial research has shown that "the general outcome; even in areas of fairly intense transmission the proportion of people who have seroconverted or who have antibodies in their blood is actually quite low, which is a concern because it does mean many, the vast majority of people remain susceptible"

 

The question about Sweden can be found starting on Page 11

https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/transcripts/who-audio-emergencies-coronavirus-press-conference-29apr2020.pdf?sfvrsn=aaa81d24_2

I know it's not the way of the world but I have to say that WHO should not need to be concerned with politics in any way. 

6 minutes ago, nauseus said:

I know it's not the way of the world but I have to say that WHO should not need to be concerned with politics in any way. 

Agreed, but if you are funded by countries who have have the power to remove that funding then it is inevitable.

8 hours ago, sead said:

Reading those statements isnt as if you live there. 99% of those are muslims going to a mosque where their being told that if you pray then you wont get the virus. people living in Sweden for 25 years and still arent able to read nor speak Swedish is a failure, that i agree since Sweden has been a fk pussy on demanding them to learn. But all of them has children in school and all schools have informed their student and gave them flyers. That never came up did it? Now we have news in arabic(<deleted> great) 

You are confusing reports with the ignorance of people that put their faith in religion and completely ignoring all warnings from several locations. Distrust of authorities it says. Dear god. If you know how many areas the fire, ambulance, police cant enter in Sweden you would be baffled. Failed to mention the risk of cramped housing. Well i didnt tell them to have 6 children in a 2 room apartment. What are their options? to get new apartments for them. The school has warned them through letters and their children. The schools that are for adults have warned them directly. They all go to the mosque or their communities such as Somalians. They have sure been warned by their community leaders and preachers. 

What you see here is a simply ignorance from people that are simply giving <deleted> about anything but yet they still keep it going as its all the Swedish governments fault.

 

You are all over the place now . First, you rejected the  position that  education campaigns had not been effective with some high risk groups. Not possible you argued. Those groups  receive generous benefits.   I explained that the  issue wasn't benefits, but dissemination of the  message, and preventative measures.

 

Now, you come back with an argument that isn't particularly relevant, because you have confused cultural and social practices & customs with the inadequacy of the initial campaign to target the at risk groups. 

 

Yes, we can all agree that there are people who  have not listened or will not listen. We see this in India where Covid19  prevention health workers are attacked when they enter some neighborhoods. However, as  stated earlier, if people are to be educated, the message has to be provided to them in a manner they can  understand. It is a fundamental principle of public health  education that the message must be adapted for the target audience  cultural norms and  practices. It doesn't matter if someone is a religious nutter or has cultural practices that we do not like. What matters is that we  keep the person from being infected  so that we are in turn protected. If the people have not been educated on best practices, they won't understand.

 

Yes, it is a challenge to get the message to some groups, but it is possible. That is what my reference to the outreach efforts to the immigrant communities in the UK, USA (and Australia and Canada) was about. In those countries, imams and mosques are part of the outreach and some have done a fantastic job of it too. Mosques in these countries  initiated  virtual ramadam practices including online communal iftars. One can ridicule the  efforts all one wants, but they are making an important contribution.

 

If the initial Swedish strategy had been working, there would not have been a need to modify it, would there? Sweden changed its strategy. Now there is an effort to blanket the hot spot neighborhoods with information. Social and health workers in conjunction with the community activists are out in force, providing clearer instructions and documentation in languages the target audience understand. 

8 hours ago, geriatrickid said:

 

You are all over the place now . First, you rejected the  position that  education campaigns had not been effective with some high risk groups. Not possible you argued. Those groups  receive generous benefits.   I explained that the  issue wasn't benefits, but dissemination of the  message, and preventative measures.

 

Now, you come back with an argument that isn't particularly relevant, because you have confused cultural and social practices & customs with the inadequacy of the initial campaign to target the at risk groups. 

 

Yes, we can all agree that there are people who  have not listened or will not listen. We see this in India where Covid19  prevention health workers are attacked when they enter some neighborhoods. However, as  stated earlier, if people are to be educated, the message has to be provided to them in a manner they can  understand. It is a fundamental principle of public health  education that the message must be adapted for the target audience  cultural norms and  practices. It doesn't matter if someone is a religious nutter or has cultural practices that we do not like. What matters is that we  keep the person from being infected  so that we are in turn protected. If the people have not been educated on best practices, they won't understand.

 

Yes, it is a challenge to get the message to some groups, but it is possible. That is what my reference to the outreach efforts to the immigrant communities in the UK, USA (and Australia and Canada) was about. In those countries, imams and mosques are part of the outreach and some have done a fantastic job of it too. Mosques in these countries  initiated  virtual ramadam practices including online communal iftars. One can ridicule the  efforts all one wants, but they are making an important contribution.

 

If the initial Swedish strategy had been working, there would not have been a need to modify it, would there? Sweden changed its strategy. Now there is an effort to blanket the hot spot neighborhoods with information. Social and health workers in conjunction with the community activists are out in force, providing clearer instructions and documentation in languages the target audience understand. 

Again misrepresentation as always, what he actually said was that the children of migrants went to school and in Swedish schools there was plenty of information about the pandemic. What's more you seem to think that migrants are somehow total dimwits who don't know what's going on. Most migrants will be perfectly aware of the Covid19 issues and what they need to do. Your whole point is a non-point. It was not migrants but those looking after the elderly in Sweden who needed extra information.

 

Giving an example of how wonderful the US and UK have issued pamphlets in Punjabi and Urdu has not made one iota of difference in the fight against the virus which in both countries has resulted in abysmal mortality rates by comparison with more successful countries like Sweden.

 

If you had any clue about Sweden's strategy you would be aware that it has not changed its strategy at all.  It was always Sweden's strategy to limit the spread of the virus, but to avoid as much as possible enforced social distancing which it has done throughout the pandemic and is still doing now. However Dr Tegnell has said from the very beginning that he was saving the most severe lockdown options for such times when they would be most needed. All that Sweden has done is to fine-tune its strategy with more attention towards elderly care homes, however, the strategy of Sweden has been the same throughout. The main issue has been the deaths in care homes because careworkers did not use common sense when looking after the elderly, not the migrant issue. This issue has not led Sweden to change its strategy to any real extent.

11 hours ago, nauseus said:

tomorrow with be the time to see how they are really doing.

 

 

And so we had the lowest new case days for 39 days in Sweden yesterday.

 

Any comment?

13 hours ago, chessman said:

Now, as the death toll continues to rise, many posters on here who think that Sweden got it correct are saying things like 'well, we'll have to see what happens in the future'.

Not me. As long as the rate does not SIGNIFICANTLY exceed that in countries that have strict lockdowns ( US, UK etc ) IMO it's the way to go.

13 minutes ago, Logosone said:

And so we had the lowest new case days for 39 days in Sweden yesterday.

There’s just been a 4 day weekend in Sweden. Very likely a big delay in reporting. 

10 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Not me. As long as the rate does not SIGNIFICANTLY exceed that in countries that have strict lockdowns ( US, UK etc )

Why not compare Sweden to its neighbouring countries that are demographically, culturally and geographically similar? Those are the fairest comparisons to judge the success of the policy. And Sweden’s rate does significantly exceed Finland, Denmark and Norway.

13 hours ago, nauseus said:

The Swedish model is only seen as a success by blind bats, which species WHO also seems to be a member of.

 

 

So you think Nobel Prize Winner, Professor Michael Levitt (Professor of Structural Biology at the Stanford School of Medicine, and winner of the 2013 Nobel Prize for Chemistry) is a blind bat?

 

  Quote

 I see the standout winners as Germany and Sweden. They didn’t practise too much lockdown and they got enough people sick to get some herd immunity. I see the standout losers as countries like Austria, Australia and Israel that had very strict lockdown but didn’t have many cases. They have damaged their economies, caused massive social damage, damaged the educational year of their children, but not obtained any herd immunity.

 

There is no doubt in my mind, that when we come to look back on this, the damage done by lockdown will exceed any saving of lives by a huge factor.

 

Source: https://unherd.com/thepost/nobel-prize-winning-scientist-the-covid-19-epidemic-was-never-exponential/

 

And what a dastardly and fiendish attack on Mike Ryan for daring to say that Sweden was the model for the future....one is shocked and raises the eyebrows.

5 hours ago, Logosone said:

And so we had the lowest new case days for 39 days in Sweden yesterday.

 

Any comment?

Yes, wrong. 80 90 new fatalities 3rd/4th May.

3 hours ago, Logosone said:

So you think Nobel Prize Winner, Professor Michael Levitt (Professor of Structural Biology at the Stanford School of Medicine, and winner of the 2013 Nobel Prize for Chemistry) is a blind bat?

 

  Quote

 I see the standout winners as Germany and Sweden. They didn’t practise too much lockdown and they got enough people sick to get some herd immunity. I see the standout losers as countries like Austria, Australia and Israel that had very strict lockdown but didn’t have many cases. They have damaged their economies, caused massive social damage, damaged the educational year of their children, but not obtained any herd immunity.

 

There is no doubt in my mind, that when we come to look back on this, the damage done by lockdown will exceed any saving of lives by a huge factor.

 

Source: https://unherd.com/thepost/nobel-prize-winning-scientist-the-covid-19-epidemic-was-never-exponential/

 

And what a dastardly and fiendish attack on Mike Ryan for daring to say that Sweden was the model for the future....one is shocked and raises the eyebrows.

I am talking about WHO, especially the way it is directed, not individual experts. And I am talking about now, not 2013.

5 hours ago, chessman said:

Why not compare Sweden to its neighbouring countries that are demographically, culturally and geographically similar? Those are the fairest comparisons to judge the success of the policy. And Sweden’s rate does significantly exceed Finland, Denmark and Norway.

And again, you're trying to compare a snapshot in time, not the end result (which we do not know yet, obviously). 
As in sports, the winner is known at the finish line, not a few minutes after the start. 

I wish Sweden and it's neighbors that this nightmare is over soon and that they all have a minimum of deaths and a minimum of destruction of their economy, no matter which strategy they chose.

17 hours ago, nauseus said:

The Swedish model is only seen as a success by blind bats

The same which did allegedly breed the Covid 19 causing virus? If so, they should know best. ???? ????