Sweden - is the rest of the world dumb, blind or worse ?

[MikeyIdea]

On 5/16/2020 at 9:58 AM, Bob A Kneale said:

What did Sweden do?

This! 

We were told not to send them in'

"They told us that we shouldn't send anyone to the hospital, even if they may be 65 and have many years to live. We were told not to send them in," says Latifa Löfvenberg, a nurse who worked in several care homes around Gävle, north of Stockholm, at the beginning of the pandemic.

"Some can have a lot of years left to live with loved ones, but they don't have the chance... because they never make it to the hospital," she says. "They suffocate to death. And it's a lot of panic and it's very hard to just stand by and watch."

Image captionLatifa Löfvenberg works as a nurse in Stockholm

Ms Löfvenberg is now working on a Covid-19 ward in a major hospital in the Swedish capital, where she says the demographic of patients she's treating is further evidence that the elderly are being kept away. "We don't have many older people. It's a lot of younger people born in the 90s, 80s, 70s."

 

A paramedic working in Stockholm, who wanted to remain anonymous, told the BBC she had not had a single call-out to an elderly care home connected to Covid-19, despite putting in overtime during the crisis.

 

Source

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-52704836

Edited May 22, 2020 by MikeyIdea

[MikeyIdea]

2 hours ago, Puccini said:

From the news article in my previous post:

 

 

Could the health services have coped better and would consequently the death rate in Sweden have been lower than it has actually been if Sweden had been on the type of lockdown that other European countries enforced?

Yes, much lower.

 

The problem is that you can't really protect the elderly in Sweden the way the covid-19 response is implemented. Put them in care homes and they risk dying, let them be treated at home and they risk dying, in both cases because health care workers don't have proper protective equipment and they're not moved to hospital to protect the curve. Take care of them yourself and they are at risk because you can't protect yourself fully in a society where so many people don't care and you are forced by law to send your children to school where there is no social distancing. The kids must take public transportation to school and again, there's no social distancing there either. 

 

School... Children in Sweden have a duty to go to school, not a duty to learn. Principals have threatened parents with handing over cases to the social authorities if they don't send their children to school. Then you have investigations if you are a suitable parent and their opinion always win, even more so if it is necessary to protect the system. 

 

Media found out that 10 teachers in a school had tested positive for covid-19 and the school had to close for a while. Parents of children going to the school wanted to be tested. What did the health authorities do? Oh sh*t, we got to stop that... No tests. Door closed. 

 

Work... Large companies like Volvo arrange work from home of course but quite a few smaller companies don't care. Many people must take public transportation to work, queue in the lunch restaurant to get food. Social distancing? Not really.

 

Sweden has relatively few multi generation homes, imagine these problems, with less restrictions, in southern Europe where it is much more common. 

 

Another thought: Minorities are much harder hit. Is it really because they don't read Swedish and don't bother to find out from someone who does? How much of a contributing factor is it that they have many more multi generation households and live more people in each apartment? 

 

It's difficult to protect risk groups in Sweden, the system simply doesn't support it. Its easier the stricter the rules are.

 

Then we have the asymptomatic transmissions that China has warned about since February and Sweden has conveniently chosen to ignore.

 

CDC estimates that 35% of coronavirus patients don't have symptoms

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/05/22/health/cdc-coronavirus-estimates-symptoms-deaths/index.html

 

The Swedish health authorities are recommending people to stay home a day extra after they recover. What are they going to recommend when they can't deny asymptomatic transmission any longer? Stay home a few days before you start to get symptoms too? ????

 

Edited May 22, 2020 by MikeyIdea

[scubascuba3]

11 hours ago, chessman said:

Perhaps you are the one being fed selective statistics?
 

Look here for example:

https://www.ft.com/content/40fc8904-febf-4a66-8d1c-ea3e48bbc034
 

More than 50,000 excess deaths in the UK compared with an average year. Makes a very strong case that Covid deaths are being underestimated. You can find very similar trends from Italy to Indonesia.

It has a pay wall so not much use but would be interesting to see Thailands average deaths figures especially as their testing is low

[scubascuba3]

3 hours ago, Puccini said:

From the news article in my previous post:

 

 

Could the health services have coped better and would consequently the death rate in Sweden have been lower than it has actually been if Sweden had been on the type of lockdown that other European countries enforced?

Yes obviously but it's about the avoiding the economic costs which may cost more lives

[marqus12]

2 hours ago, MikeyIdea said:

The problem is that you can't really protect the elderly in Sweden the way the covid-19 response is implemented. Put them in care homes and they risk dying, let them be treated at home and they risk dying, in both cases because health care workers don't have proper protective equipment and they're not moved to hospital to protect the curve. Take care of them yourself and they are at risk because you can't protect yourself fully in a society where so many people don't care and you are forced by law to send your children to school where there is no social distancing. The kids must take public transportation to school and again, there's no social distancing there either. 

 

you should move somewhere to a more responsible country where lockdown saves lives.

 

 

[geriatrickid]

37 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

Yes obviously but it's about the avoiding the economic costs which may cost more lives

Sweden has paid a heavy economic cost and it really isn't in any better shape than   its peer group in respect to economic indicators.  The argument that the economy was being protected isn't backed up by the  data. Norway, Denmark have done  better. Canada with a larger population is better placed for economic recovery.

[pineapple01]

You can play with numbers, but dirty overpopulated areas will always have a greater death  toll. The only good side to any Pandemic it Culls the Nations Weak 

[scubascuba3]

26 minutes ago, geriatrickid said:

Sweden has paid a heavy economic cost and it really isn't in any better shape than   its peer group in respect to economic indicators.  The argument that the economy was being protected isn't backed up by the  data. Norway, Denmark have done  better. Canada with a larger population is better placed for economic recovery.

Let's see actual numbers, plus Sweden hasn't spaffed 100s of billions up the wall giving people money

[thaibeachlovers]

On 5/21/2020 at 1:20 PM, Saddic said:

According to figures collated by the Our World in Data website, Sweden had 6.08 deaths per million inhabitants per day on a rolling seven-day average between May 13 and May 20.

This is the highest in the world, above the UK, Belgium and the US, which have 5.57, 4.28 and 4.11 respectively.

Which is, far as I can calculate about half a death more than The UK, 1.something more than Belgium and 2 more than the US, per MILLION. Yet that is enough to castigate Sweden. I'm boggled at the attempts to force Sweden to impose lockdown like all the other countries, IMO, because they don't want to be shown to have gone down the wrong track.

Sweden, IMO has absolutely got it right. That many people probably die by falling off a ladder every day.

Edited May 22, 2020 by thaibeachlovers

[thaibeachlovers]

1 hour ago, geriatrickid said:

Sweden has paid a heavy economic cost and it really isn't in any better shape than   its peer group in respect to economic indicators.  The argument that the economy was being protected isn't backed up by the  data. Norway, Denmark have done  better. Canada with a larger population is better placed for economic recovery.

Proof?

[thaibeachlovers]

3 hours ago, MikeyIdea said:

The problem is that you can't really protect the elderly in Sweden the way the covid-19 response is implemented. Put them in care homes and they risk dying, let them be treated at home and they risk dying, 

You apparently come from a point of view that the majority must be sacrificed to save the elderly and infirm for a few more years. Significantly, the younger demographic that will suffer because of that policy were not asked if they agreed to suffer.

I'm elderly and infirm, and no one asked me if I wanted to be saved at the expense of younger generations. I don't.

[Stygge]

The counting of deaths are not very accurate. In Italy they suspect at least 19 000 more deaths not being recorded as covid-19 deaths even though they probably are. If you count them, where does Italy stand on the international death list? The same is suspected in  GB, France and Spain. People dying outside hospitals are not diagnosed wtih Covid-19. Sweden noted that a couple of weeks ago and changed it´s numbers to an accurate level. So you can probably ad 20-25 000 deaths to the countires mentioned above.

 

It´s also important where you are on the virus curve. Italy is clearly before Sweden, and Italy´s deathrate is therefore sinking since a week back.

 

Antibodies shown in tests take weeks to develop. The numbers presented from Sweden are from April. Today immunity is probably much higher. Also experts claim that you don´t neccesarely need to show antibodies to accuire immunity. The defending T-cells also have a "memory" for the attacking virus that enables a sufficient defence. Many people with minor symptoms of the virus will not show antibodies but still be immune.

 

The shown figures of the economic impact are first of all guesswork. Second Sweden shows better figures then neighbour countries, even if not dramatically so. Sweden is heavily depending on export more so then the neighbours and that´s of cours is a negative factor. But the national economy is in a significally better shape then it´s neighbours.

 

And again, 90 % of the deaths has taken place in elderly care homes, out of hospitals. Not in the general population. The majority of these people were very sick before with a very short expected remaining lifespan. Now the virus took away maybe 0,5 - 2 years of them. The failure of protecting this vulnerable group has been discussed widely and rightly critisized.

[johnnybangkok]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

You apparently come from a point of view that the majority must be sacrificed to save the elderly and infirm for a few more years. Significantly, the younger demographic that will suffer because of that policy were not asked if they agreed to suffer.

I'm elderly and infirm, and no one asked me if I wanted to be saved at the expense of younger generations. I don't.

Yeah so lets just go around the world and ask every single older person 'death or economy?' 

I'm pleased you are quite so willing (and dare I say even eager) to shuffle off this mortal coil but your proposed martyrdom is both disingenuous and unrepresentative because I suspect many, many more of your fellow older generation are not quite as willing to pop their clogs before they absolutely must.

[GalaxyMan]

Well, anyone who thinks that Sweden is being smart, isn't. ???? Easy enough to compare to the neighbors, who used their heads instead of sticking them where the sun don't shine like the Swedes, among others. ????

 

As of today:

 

Sweden: 32,809 cases; 3,925 deaths; 389 Deaths Per Million (Top 10)
Finland: 6,537; 306; 55
Norway: 8,332; 235; 43

 

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

Edited May 23, 2020 by GalaxyMan

[BeltAndRoad]

21 hours ago, DeadBite said:

The death rate, year to year, seems to be the same if not less in all countries.
We have been fed selective statistics, and Hollywood style coffin shots, so that fear would keep us inside when the lock-down started.

In Asia they used the threat of violence to keep people inside, in the West they used fear. It won't happen again, at least in the West.

People will never comprehend that they are mere pawns on the world stage.  After this virus threat has died down (until the next killer virus) we will again be scared stiff over the nuclear missile threat from an unhinged rogue state, or perhaps another round of terrorist attacks.  Everyone scared stiff over this virus just calm down, it will soon be time to wag the dog.

[Curt1591]

My sister-in-law transferred to Oslo at the beginning of this mess. No one wears a mask. She can't because, being Asian, she already has trouble fitting in. 

[Logosone]

8 minutes ago, GalaxyMan said:

Well, anyone who thinks that Sweden is being smart, isn't. ???? Easy enough to compare to the neighbors, who used their heads instead of sticking them where the sun don't shine like the Swedes, among others. ????

 

As of today:

 

Sweden: 32,809 cases; 3,925 deaths; 389 Deaths Per Million (Top 10)
Finland: 6,537; 306; 55
Norway: 8,332; 235; 43

 

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

People who just take figures off worldometre and can not interpret them correctly aren't very smart.

 

3925 deaths in a population of 10 million, obviously higher than Norway, is 0.039 percent of the population.

 

A perfect confirmation that Sweden's model is indeed, as the WHO has said, the model for the future.

 

Economically preferable and the cost is small.

[BeltAndRoad]

3 minutes ago, Logosone said:

People who just take figures off worldometre and can not interpret them correctly aren't very smart.

 

3925 deaths in a population of 10 million, obviously higher than Norway, is 0.039 percent of the population.

 

A perfect confirmation that Sweden's model is indeed, as the WHO has said, the model for the future.

 

Economically preferable and the cost is small.

If only the WHO could advice Sweden on how to curb their out of control rape statistics.

[GalaxyMan]

5 minutes ago, Logosone said:

People who just take figures off worldometre and can not interpret them correctly aren't very smart.

 

3925 deaths in a population of 10 million, obviously higher than Norway, is 0.039 percent of the population.

 

A perfect confirmation that Sweden's model is indeed, as the WHO has said, the model for the future.

 

Economically preferable and the cost is small.

How interesting that you didn't include Finland, with a population half that of Sweden. Numbers don't lie. ???? Finland and Norway both have just over 5 million, half of Sweden. You need to check out how to interpret things fairly instead of trying to make reality conform to the way you'd like things to be. ????

Edited May 23, 2020 by GalaxyMan

[scubascuba3]

6 minutes ago, Logosone said:

 

 

A perfect confirmation that Sweden's model is indeed, as the WHO has said, the model for the future.

 

 

Countries couldn't afford lockdowns when the next virus comes so it's just not a sustainable policy. 1 big lesson learnt, don't do it again

[chessman]

17 minutes ago, Logosone said:

 

3925 deaths in a population of 10 million, obviously higher than Norway, is 0.039 percent of the population.

And he's back!

 

A few weeks ago you were touting the same arguments when the number was 0.022ish of the population. It rises 80% in a few weeks, 1000s of more people dead and you continue. How high do those numbers have to get before you entertain the idea that perhaps Sweden made a mistake?

[tlock]

1 hour ago, scubascuba3 said:

Countries couldn't afford lockdowns when the next virus comes so it's just not a sustainable policy. 1 big lesson learnt, don't do it again

 

I've said before it may be a case of the boy who cried wolf- I don't think the death rate of covid-19 merited a lockdown.  Next time we may have something that legitimately does merit a lockdown and it's going to be harder to convince people to do it due to this overreaction.  

[GroveHillWanderer]

4 hours ago, scubascuba3 said:

Let's see actual numbers, plus Sweden hasn't spaffed 100s of billions up the wall giving people money

According to CNBC, Sweden's economy looks to be worse off than many other European countries, including its neighbours:

 

Quote

Economic contraction
Sweden	6.9-9.7%
Italy	9.1%
Spain	8%
France	7.2%
UK	7%
Germany	6.5%
Denmark	6.5%
Finland	6%

Sweden's death rate and economy worse than neighbours

 

As the article points out, its death rate per capita also surpasses its neighbours, a point reinforced more recently by the following piece, which shows Sweden's 7-day rolling average of deaths per capita now exceeds every other country in the world:

 

Sweden's death toll becomes highest in world

 

Quote

Sweden had 6.08 deaths per million inhabitants per day between May 13 and May 20. This is the highest in the world, above the UK, Belgium and the US, which have 5.57, 4.28 and 4.11, respectively.

 

[tlock]

1 minute ago, GroveHillWanderer said:

According to CNBC, Sweden's economy looks to be worse off than many other European countries, including its neighbours:

 

Sweden's death rate and economy worse than neighbours

 

As the article points out, its death rate per capita also surpasses its neighbours, a point reinforced more recently by the following piece, which shows Sweden's 7-day rolling average of deaths per capita now exceeds every other country in the world:

 

Sweden's death toll becomes highest in world

 

 

 

I think to see the full picture we would also need to see the changes in unemployment rate as well as the percentage of those economies that depend on exports vs. domestic consumption.

 

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, Logosone said:

People who just take figures off worldometre and can not interpret them correctly aren't very smart.

 

3925 deaths in a population of 10 million, obviously higher than Norway, is 0.039 percent of the population.

 

A perfect confirmation that Sweden's model is indeed, as the WHO has said, the model for the future.

 

Economically preferable and the cost is small.

The deaths per 1M pop (389) are there in a standalone column for Sweden - no interpretation is necessary.

 

Sweden's model is indeed a poor model for the future. Try Taiwan (at 0.3)!

 

[Bender Rodriguez]

panic makes people lose use of their little brain

 

infected or carrier, does not mean you will die

 

people who die :  weak immune

 

brainless zombie =  quarantine the HEALTHY , instead of the sick

[scubascuba3]

11 minutes ago, tlock said:

 

I think to see the full picture we would also need to see the changes in unemployment rate as well as the percentage of those economies that depend on exports vs. domestic consumption.

 

Yes we never get the full picture, as well as unemployment let's include money spaffed up the wall and deaths caused by lockdowns

[johnnybangkok]

47 minutes ago, tlock said:

 

I've said before it may be a case of the boy who cried wolf- I don't think the death rate of covid-19 merited a lockdown.  Next time we may have something that legitimately does merit a lockdown and it's going to be harder to convince people to do it due to this overreaction.  

You are comparing a low death rate thanks to lockdown as a reason not to have lockdown? That's some mental gymnastics right there. 

Even at a VERY conservative 1% death rate, if 1 billion people were infected that would result in 1,000,000 deaths. 2 billion infected 2,000,000 etc. etc.

Currently the death toll is in the region of 340,000 thanks mainly to self-isolation.

[Bender Rodriguez]

1 hour ago, johnnybangkok said:

You are comparing a low death rate thanks to lockdown as a reason not to have lockdown? That's some mental gymnastics right there. 

Even at a VERY conservative 1% death rate, if 1 billion people were infected that would result in 1,000,000 deaths. 2 billion infected 2,000,000 etc. etc.

Currently the death toll is in the region of 340,000 thanks mainly to self-isolation.

600.000 FLU deaths per year and there was no WORLD LOCKDOWN EVER !

 

but keep the panic in the news 24/7, take away freedom & liberty

 

make people feel like a PRISONER in their own home

 

release CONVICTED FELLONS to make place to jail people who dare to think outside the box

 

 

tell me how walking on the beach for a morning or evening walk, would cause you to infect other people ?   just one example

 

 

this is a WET DREAM for any banana republic, but now 1st world countries can impose these rules...

 

We are going to lockdown for the next 30 years ???

 

People need to get this and get over with ... the more people get this with no symptoms, the less virulent it will be, there is no choice or you want to lock up everybody forever in fear ?

 

When things will relax, the numbers will go up, you cannot avoid... but it does not mean SICK & DEAD people all over.... 58 people dead in 3-4 months ... my home country STILL get this PER DAY ....  or road kill in Thailand

[chessman]

12 minutes ago, Bender Rodriguez said:

600.000 FLU deaths per year

How do you think they calculate those numbers of flu deaths?
 

will you be OK when the same researchers use the same methodology to calculate Covid deaths and the numbers increase by 200+ %?