3 hours ago, utalkin2me said:

So, what you need to do is follow your own beliefs and sit in your cave for however long you see fit.

As much as you would like to frame the argument like this, it’s not really accurate is it? 
We have both been asked to sit in our metaphorical caves for a short while, as our governments resolve a potentially devastating problem. Some of us do that understanding that having less contacts with other people for a short amount of time will help to stop the virus spreading, keep health services running and give scientists valuable time to find ways to fight the virus. This is just being a responsible citizen. 
 

10 hours ago, Logosone said:

Either way, Sweden has a miniscule number of deaths, 0.04 % of the population is of course a tiny figure. Even if it were to double Sweden will be perfectly fine.

I'm not sure why you keep quoting the figure of deaths as a percentage of the population for Sweden as if it somehow makes them look good. It doesn't - every country's death rate looks like a small number if you choose to express it in that format.  If you look at their neighbours (with similar demographics) Norway's is ten times less, at 0.004% and Denmark's around 4 times less, at 0.01%. The fact is that their death rate as a percentage of total population is the 6th highest in the world. This means they have suffered more deaths per capita than all but 5 other countries in the entire world.

 

If you want see how they're doing right now, as compared to other nations, their current 7-day rolling average of deaths per million is the highest in the world and has been for over a week. They are followed by Brazil, a country that has no official lockdown.

2 minutes ago, GroveHillWanderer said:

I'm not sure why you keep quoting the figure of deaths as a percentage of the population for Sweden as if it somehow makes them look good. It doesn't - every country's death rate looks like a small number if you choose to express it in that format.  If you look at their neighbours (with similar demographics) Norway's is ten times less, at 0.004% and Denmark's around 4 times less, at 0.01%. The fact is that their death rate as a percentage of total population is the 6th highest in the world. This means they have suffered more deaths per capita than all but 5 other countries in the entire world.

 

If you want see how they're doing right now, as compared to other nations, their current 7-day rolling average of deaths per million is the highest in the world and has been for over a week. They are followed by Brazil, a country that has no official lockdown.

Logo thinks we are all daft....????

1 hour ago, Bkk Brian said:

Just been reported on the BBC, Laura Bicker, that all South Korean residents have been told to stay indoors this weekend.

Corry catch up on?

15 minutes ago, Kinnock said:

Agree ..... but some people have been infected with COWARDICE-19 and want everyone else to cower at home posting their favourite albums on Facebook.

Well i dont want u near me.

7 minutes ago, GroveHillWanderer said:

I'm not sure why you keep quoting the figure of deaths as a percentage of the population for Sweden as if it somehow makes them look good. It doesn't - every country's death rate looks like a small number if you choose to express it in that format.  If you look at their neighbours (with similar demographics) Norway's is ten times less, at 0.004% and Denmark's around 4 times less, at 0.01%. The fact is that their death rate as a percentage of total population is the 6th highest in the world. This means they have suffered more deaths per capita than all but 5 other countries in the entire world.

 

If you want see how they're doing right now, as compared to other nations, their current 7-day rolling average of deaths per million is the highest in the world and has been for over a week. They are followed by Brazil, a country that has no official lockdown.

I don't think anyone is saying Sweden is doing everything right.

 

They don't use masks, their social distancing is weak and I've not seen a strong public education campaign like in Vietnam.  But the point is that with no lockdown and limited measures, their rates are not signficanrly different.

 

And there are so many other important variables so any small differences in the figures you quote may not be significant.

 

Standard of health care, demographics, general health of the population, implementation of measures in care homes are all key factors.

 

It's probable that with Sweden's more relaxed approach to immigration, they have a less healthy population and a greater burden on health services than their neighbours. 

 

But look closer to home - Thailand had packed public transport and malls with the first phase of the relaxation - and one week later, no spike.

 

Even if the limited testing and reporting is a factor, the hospitals are certainly not overflowing.

 

The simple truth is that old, sick, fat people die in higher numbers every time there's an epidemic ..... seasonal flu or something new, but we only report the figures on every news channel, every minute when it's something new.

4 hours ago, utalkin2me said:

I am not sure what the problem is. You an I have different opinions. So, what you need to do is follow your own beliefs and sit in your cave for however long you see fit. Further, you don't need to be telling anyone else what to do... whatever you would like to tell others to do, just do that yourself. That is how it works. When you are deathly afraid, you do not get to superimpose your fear onto others. You have to deal with it yourself. If you think what I am doing has some impact on you, you need to sit in your cave even more hardcore... it is your problem to deal with. This is not selfishness, or anything like that, it is just the way one person with one opinion will behave, and the other one will behave the way he sees fit. Neither one is better or worse. 

how about you just follow the scientific evidence. If thats not enough just follow the law.

 

Stay away from people that dont want to die because of you.

 

Under no circumstances should you follow any beliefs.

On 5/16/2020 at 7:24 PM, vermin on arrival said:

Then we are pretty much doomed

Struth if  80+% get almost  no symptoms how are we  "doomed"

3 minutes ago, bodga said:

Struth if  80+% get almost  no symptoms how are we  "doomed"

Crikey we are all <deleted>*ed

37 minutes ago, Kinnock said:

They don't use masks, their social distancing is weak and I've not seen a strong public education campaign like in Vietnam.  But the point is that with no lockdown and limited measures, their rates are not signficanrly different.

Social distancing is the one thing that works very well to stop the spread of the virus. Lockdowns are simply a way to enforce social distancing; and perhaps also a better way to teach people about the importance of social distancing. Maybe that is why we have not seen the virus spread too much when some countries began to open up.

 

I simply do not understand what you man by "not signficanrly different". How much difference do you need before you will call it significant? They have death numbers more than four times higher than Denmark and even more compared to Norway and Finland.

 

Quote

But look closer to home - Thailand had packed public transport and malls with the first phase of the relaxation - and one week later, no spike.

First, there may be other factors in play in Thailand (like temperature and humidity); second, you will not be able to see an effect until after two or three weeks.

 

13 minutes ago, farang51 said:

Social distancing is the one thing that works very well to stop the spread of the virus. Lockdowns are simply a way to enforce social distancing; and perhaps also a better way to teach people about the importance of social distancing. Maybe that is why we have not seen the virus spread too much when some countries began to open up.

 

I simply do not understand what you man by "not signficanrly different". How much difference do you need before you will call it significant? They have death numbers more than four times higher than Denmark and even more compared to Norway and Finland.

 

First, there may be other factors in play in Thailand (like temperature and humidity); second, you will not be able to see an effect until after two or three weeks.

 

Incubation period is typically 3 to 5 days .... so more than enough time already.

 

And with the massive economic and negative health related impacts of the lockdowns, I believe we need to see clear evidence of the benefits.

 

Looking at US, UK, Italy and comparing with Australia, Sweden, Thailand there looks to be no evidence that lockdowns add any real value.

 

The main factor is population health - demographics, diet, healthcare.  Parts of the US have widespread obesity and related health issues, the same parts that have high death rates.

 

UK, Italy, India, Philippines also have major health issues - many related to diet.  And UK has a healthcare system that keeps sick people hanging on, so a longer life expectancy.  Many developing countries have an average life expectancy of 65 to 69 years, so not many 70 year olds about to boost the figures.

 

When analysing the figures there are many variables, but one thing they do not support is lockdowns, so why do we have them?   Simple ..... media induced fear.

7 minutes ago, Kinnock said:

When analysing the figures there are many variables, but one thing they do not support is lockdowns,

More than 20 academic articles linked from this site suggest lockdowns are effective. It also feels intuitively correct, without pharmaceuticals interventions to affect the mortality rate, states promote social distancing measures to reduce the spread of the virus. 

 

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/05/did-the-lockdowns-work/

Troll post and replies removed

1 hour ago, Kinnock said:

The simple truth is that old, sick, fat people die in higher numbers every time there's an epidemic ..... seasonal flu or something new, but we only report the figures on every news channel, every minute when it's something new.

And why might that be do you think?

12 minutes ago, Kinnock said:

Incubation period is typically 3 to 5 days .... so more than enough time already.

 

And with the massive economic and negative health related impacts of the lockdowns, I believe we need to see clear evidence of the benefits.

So, you are able to see a spike in people feeling a bit sick in their homes? The rest of us cannot see a spike until it begins to appear in the hospitals - which means after 2-3 weeks.

 

As you say, the factors in the various countries vary. Then, why not compare Sweden with the countries that look most like Sweden regarding population, health, social systems, etc. That is Norway, Denmark, and Finland. Sweden is doing significantly worse than those countries. In those countries, you see a clear evidence of benefits compared to Sweden - much fewer deaths (and not much difference in the economy).

By the way, Denmark just announced opening it's borders to some of their neighbouring countries - but not to Sweden because Sweden do not have the virus under control.

5 minutes ago, chessman said:

More than 20 academic articles linked from this site suggest lockdowns are effective. It also feels intuitively correct, without pharmaceuticals interventions to affect the mortality rate, states promote social distancing measures to reduce the spread of the virus. 

 

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/05/did-the-lockdowns-work/

And I'm sure there's an equal number saying the opposite - the recent JP Morgan study being one.  And for me, logic says the quarantine of healthy people is just wrong.  We know it's elderly people with pre-existing conditions who are at risk.  Focus on protecting them, and let working people go to work.

 

There's also been studies by Oxfam saying 500 million people forced into poverty by the lockdowns and one in Australia saying increased suicide rate due to rising unemployment will exceed COVID deaths. 

 

Whatever view a person holds, there will be studies to support it, but to do something as economically damaging as a lockdown, you should have solid evidence to support it .... not theories and debate.

 

Also, with the recent reports showing immunity may be short term, anything that flattens the curve will inevitably extend the duration, and so increase the total case numbers due to second wave re-infections, and so increase the total deaths.

 

Flattening the curve and therefore lockdowns was only about avoiding overloading hospitals, but the negative health impacts may be worse than the possible overloading of health services.

 

And in Thailand, with currently no medical tourism, overloading hospitals will just not happen.

 

But fear trumps logic. 

 

2 minutes ago, Kinnock said:

And I'm sure there's an equal number saying the opposite - the recent JP Morgan study being one.

If you had looked at that link, you would have noticed that the JP Morgan one is included as a study that suggests lockdowns are not effective.

 

but the numbers are not the same, there are more studies suggesting that lockdowns are effective.

2 minutes ago, chessman said:

If you had looked at that link, you would have noticed that the JP Morgan one is included as a study that suggests lockdowns are not effective.

 

but the numbers are not the same, there are more studies suggesting that lockdowns are effective.

There are still many contradictory studies, and the truth is not dictated by numbers, as the numbers of studies promoting one theory over another can be heavily influenced by vested interests - but a lockdown is so economically damaging it should not be implemented based on unproven theories.

 

Governments just copied what they saw China do in Wuhan in an international dick waving contest to see who could lock down the most of their people.  Most didn't even notice that China did no do a full lockdown outside of Hubei Province.

 

21 minutes ago, Kinnock said:

but a lockdown is so economically damaging it should not be implemented based on unproven theories.

 

Governments just copied what they saw China do in Wuhan in an international dick waving contest to see who could lock down the most of their people. 

 

The economy is also effected with no lockdown. The governments did not just copy China, they did what they know is working; now, in 1918, and even further back through history.

 

The problem is the people that do not adhere to a lockdown, insisting on their right to endanger other people. An example: Back in 1711 Copenhagen was successful in keeping the plague away - until a boy from Helsingør (city of Hamlet fame) broke the lockdown and brought the plague to Copenhagen. 30 per cent of the population in Copenhagen died.

1 hour ago, chessman said:

If you had looked at that link, you would have noticed that the JP Morgan one is included as a study that suggests lockdowns are not effective.

 

but the numbers are not the same, there are more studies suggesting that lockdowns are effective.

So then the issue is very much in dispute, yes?

 

1 hour ago, farang51 said:

The economy is also effected with no lockdown. The governments did not just copy China, they did what they know is working; now, in 1918, and even further back through history.

 

The problem is the people that do not adhere to a lockdown, insisting on their right to endanger other people. An example: Back in 1711 Copenhagen was successful in keeping the plague away - until a boy from Helsingør (city of Hamlet fame) broke the lockdown and brought the plague to Copenhagen. 30 per cent of the population in Copenhagen died.

In 1711, bloodletting was medical science. Some other things have changed since then as well.

1 hour ago, farang51 said:

The economy is also effected with no lockdown. The governments did not just copy China, they did what they know is working; now, in 1918, and even further back through history.

 

The problem is the people that do not adhere to a lockdown, insisting on their right to endanger other people. An example: Back in 1711 Copenhagen was successful in keeping the plague away - until a boy from Helsingør (city of Hamlet fame) broke the lockdown and brought the plague to Copenhagen. 30 per cent of the population in Copenhagen died.

Copenhagen was never successful in keeping any plague away, it was repeatedly ravaged by plagues. These are just stupid scare stories to make people fall in line with a nonsensical stupid policy:

 

"In Copenhagen, the physician and antiquarian Ole Worm experienced six to seven major outbreaks in his lifetime, and he also distinguished plague from other epidemic diseases such as the malignant and contagious fever that ravaged Copenhagen in 1644-45. He was certainly familiar with plague, having lost first his oldest daughter in the 1618-20 outbreak, then his wife, his father and his brother-in-law in the 1629 outbreak and, finally, his second wife in the 1636-38 epidemic. Nowhere in his correspondance is there any indication, incidentally, that familiarity lessened the dread of the disease."

http://www.academia.dk/MedHist/Sygdomme/Pest/PDF/Pest-DK_Christensen_2003.pdf

 

Yeah, Copenhagen had the plague under control. Sure. Sure.

 

As for governments not copying China Neil Ferguson admitted publicly that he looked at China and took social distancing from there, figuring that China had it under control and they used it, so that was the reason he favoured it.

 

It's wonderful we have countries like Sweden, Japan, etc who never introduced full mandatory lockdowns, and yet still have miniscule death rates, so we can see that lockdowns are total nonsense.

 

The UK had lockdown Gestapo style, and still never managed to get the virus under control with lockdowns. 

 

Who are you kidding but yourself.

 

1 hour ago, farang51 said:

The economy is also effected with no lockdown. The governments did not just copy China, they did what they know is working; now, in 1918, and even further back through history.

 

The problem is the people that do not adhere to a lockdown, insisting on their right to endanger other people. An example: Back in 1711 Copenhagen was successful in keeping the plague away - until a boy from Helsingør (city of Hamlet fame) broke the lockdown and brought the plague to Copenhagen. 30 per cent of the population in Copenhagen died.

It can only be said so many times. There is nobody "insisting on their right to endanger other people". If you are that scared, stay at home. Cower in fear all you would like. Nobody is stopping you. You have the right to stay home and fully protect yourself, and others have the right to go out. What is there not to understand here? 

1 hour ago, chessman said:

If you had looked at that link, you would have noticed that the JP Morgan one is included as a study that suggests lockdowns are not effective.

 

but the numbers are not the same, there are more studies suggesting that lockdowns are effective.

Keep telling yourself anything you would like. Lockdowns have not been proven to be effective. Likewise, unlocking has not been shown to be harmful in any major way. We do happen to know economic shutdowns kill many. 

 

The funny part is you should be jumping up and down at these facts. If lockdowns were actually effective, why on earth would we ever come out of them short of a vaccine or good treatment? 

 

I never thought I would see the day:

Governments: "stay home or else".

People (cowering in fear): "yes sir, what else should we do?"

Government: "shame other people who leave their houses, and report them to authorities".

People: "yes sir, thank you sir".

Government: "you know, I think it is high time to unlock this sucker"

People: "why no sir, we love this enslavement, and what we love even more is keeping other people enslaved, you know the ones who think they should be able to go outside and all that nastiness".

Government: "my god, what have we done".

4 minutes ago, utalkin2me said:

It can only be said so many times. There is nobody "insisting on their right to endanger other people". If you are that scared, stay at home. Cower in fear all you would like. Nobody is stopping you. You have the right to stay home and fully protect yourself, and others have the right to go out. What is there not to understand here? 

The thing to understand is that the right you and others demand is not to decide whether to put yourself in harms way, it is to put other people in harms way too. I could not care less if you decide to risk your health or life by doing stupid things. I do care if you put other people at risk.

 

By the way, I don't think any of us is cowering in fear.

4 minutes ago, utalkin2me said:

 

If lockdowns were actually effective, why on earth would we ever come out of them short of a vaccine or good treatment? 

Exactly thats why the positive news is that most European countries are easing lockdown restrictions now having flattened the curve and controlling the virus. Heck Greece is even open for international tourist arrivals from 15th June from 29 countries with more to come. 

 

 

I'm hoping you'll join me and celebrate the good news, its one world right, embrace positive outcomes ????

6 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Exactly thats why the positive news is that most European countries are easing lockdown restrictions now having flattened the curve and controlling the virus. Heck Greece is even open for international tourist arrivals from 15th June from 29 countries with more to come. 

 

 

I'm hoping you'll join me and celebrate the good news, its one world right, embrace positive outcomes ????

"Controlling the virus". You really think that? You really believe humans and politicians are "controlling this virus". 

 

One person started all this. If everything you believe were true unlocking would be a catastrophe in every country. The truth is that the infection curves we see country to country are very similar, whether strict lockdowns were implemented or not". 

 

It is easy to see the difference between you and I. We have an "earthquake" here if I may. You think humans and politicians can control it. You are very much mistaken. If it is going to take off again, it is going to take off again... cowering in your home is not going to save you.

 

In fact, inside a home is looking like it is turning out to be the worst place to be. But yeah, keep believing in those lockdowns. 

^^and so to the conspiracy theories their true beliefs^^^

25 minutes ago, farang51 said:

The thing to understand is that the right you and others demand is not to decide whether to put yourself in harms way, it is to put other people in harms way too. I could not care less if you decide to risk your health or life by doing stupid things. I do care if you put other people at risk.

 

By the way, I don't think any of us is cowering in fear.

If Thaivisa had an auto response I could just type in "well then stay inside if you feel that way" and it would completely neutralize every one of your posts. 

 

Stay inside. If you are not scared, great. I am happy for you. You have the right to be safe as you want and stay inside. Nobody is endangering you... you are inside. 

 

Do I need an analogy so it sinks in? If you thought cars were horrendous death machines, you do not get to tell others to not drive them. You can however not drive one. and stay away from them all you would like. Nobody is stopping you.