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

[tlock]

Science involves the scientific method, with reproducible experiments that have a control group.  I don't think that this qualifies as strict science.  If this were a proper experiment, we would have isolated populations with similar density using different approaches (strict lockdown, levels of partial lockdown, no lockdown at all) and we would compare the long term results.  

 

This all started from a model that came from computer software that was so bad they are still refusing to publish the original source code.  They got a team of microsoft engineers to rewrite the code and published that.  The code is broken.  It produces different outputs for the same inputs.  We haven't widely acknowledged that the original model was broken, only the conspiracy theorists seem to acknowledge that.  

 

And even then, it's just a model.  An educated guess.  It's impossible to accurately predict the future.  

 

[JensenZ]

28 minutes ago, yuyiinthesky said:

These arguments were made a couple of times in this and in other threads, so I'll only say "time will tell" and refer to the other threads and posts where this was discussed already.

Despite my sympathy with the Swedish model I wish also all the other countries to suffer only the absolute minimum of deaths, be it from Covid-19 or from Influenza or from lockdowns and the economic problems it causes.

All we have to go on are the stats available to us, and the numbers do not give the OP the right to praise Sweden and insult the rest of the world. I'm discussing this in the context of the OP's title and submission. I'm not aware of "other threads" nor interested in them. The numbers are the numbers.

 

We don't need time to see the mortality rate in Sweden is quite high compared to the rest of the world, even taking a large degree of error into consideration. 

[sead]

48 minutes ago, steelepulse said:

If one were to look at the stats, 40% of all deaths in Sweden were from the Somali population, which makes up less than 1%, yet has been 40% of the deaths.  Add in the deaths from nursing homes with quite elderly people and comorbidities, and now you have 90+% of all the deaths in Sweden.

 

The Somalis were vitamin D deficient, as would be all the elderly in nursing homes.

 

I would bet if you take out the above population, the deaths of the rest of the population would be incredibly low.

The Somalis in Sweden are for sure not missing any D. They are in Sweden so they are being taken care of for SURE. And theres Guaranteed not enough sun in Sweden for them to lack vitamin D. They dont live in Africa anymore. The vitamin D is being rebuild with proper food and no sun.

[steelepulse]

7 minutes ago, sead said:

The Somalis in Sweden are for sure not missing any D. They are in Sweden so they are being taken care of for SURE. And theres Guaranteed not enough sun in Sweden for them to lack vitamin D. They dont live in Africa anymore. The vitamin D is being rebuild with proper food and no sun.

Watch the video.  He quotes some study that showed 73% of Somalis were vitamin D deficient.  

 

Cheers!

[Scott]

Posts have been removed.   Please do not post videos from unapproved sources.   Off-topic, inflammatory and troll posts have also been removed.  

 

[Dumbastheycome]

So did  Baldrick covet a  swede or a  turnip?

[steelepulse]

5 minutes ago, Scott said:

Posts have been removed.   Please do not post videos from unapproved sources.   Off-topic, inflammatory and troll posts have also been removed.  

 

To help all board members out, what are the "unapproved sources"?

[JensenZ]

12 minutes ago, sead said:

The Somalis in Sweden are for sure not missing any D. They are in Sweden so they are being taken care of for SURE. And theres Guaranteed not enough sun in Sweden for them to lack vitamin D. They dont live in Africa anymore. The vitamin D is being rebuild with proper food and no sun.

Yes, surely in Sweden they are finding enough supplementary vitamin D to take care of their needs. It's a cold country with limited strong sunshine, so you'd think Sweden of all countries would be on top of this for all populations. Vitamin D3 is a very cheap supplement. I can purchase a year's supply (5000 IU x 360) for US $11.

[Scott]

2 minutes ago, steelepulse said:

To help all board members out, what are the "unapproved sources"?

In general, Youtube videos don't make the cut, unless they are from an approved news source, meaning one which actually fact checks the information.  

 

Please take note of this rule about commenting on moderation to avoid problems:

 

10) Do not comment on moderation publicly in the open forum; this includes individual actions, and specific or general policies and issues. This also includes posting an emoticon in response to a public notice made by a moderator. 

 

You may send a PM to a moderator to discuss individual actions or email support (at) thaivisa.com to discuss moderation policy.

[mommysboy]

There's not a one size fits all solution. End of.

 

 

[JackThompson]

2 hours ago, Susco said:

There is no immunity. That has been proven in several countries already, because people got infected a second time

Then no vaccine can work either - they work on creating immunity.

 

But I do not accept the premise that, because some had a relapse, that means there "is no immunity."  It just means some fraction of the fraction who get any  symptoms at all, had a relapse. 

 

Given those who are vulnerable to this virus are the very old and/or already sick, this should not be a surprising development.

[Credo]

There is still a lot we don't know about this virus.   I am mildly skeptical about the Swedish model, but it will be interesting to see how it plays out in the long run.   On the upside, the model was planned; it wasn't a failure to do something, it was a conscious choice made by medical professionals.   

 

Many of the countries that locked down did so because it was clear that the medical system was not going to be able to handle the influx of sick.   The 'flattening the curve' was designed more for the benefit of the medical providers.   Of course, if the health system is not overwhelmed and patient can receive good care, lives will be saved.   But essentially, it's aim was not to drop the number of sick, but to drop the number of sick at one time.   

 

Sweden with a modest number of people and an excellent and easily available free medical system is a good place to watch this play out.   Compare that to a city like New York.   It simply would not work in such a densely populated and well traveled city.   

 

We are also now seeing problems in children who have had the virus.   Will there be other long term effects?   Will we have immunity for a significant length of time?  

 

So, I don't know if Sweden is a good model, but it is well worth watching and remember it was planned and they have the easily accessible, free medical services.

[JackThompson]

2 hours ago, chessman said:

The common cold? That’s a Coronavirus that most people are able to catch multiple times.

The "common cold" is like saying "the flu" - but there are myrad different viruses that are "cold viruses" and "flu viruses."  Getting immunity for one, doesn't confer immunity to all others - though having had one strain of flu can provide immunity to similar future strains - even occurring years or decades apart.

[yuyiinthesky]

2 hours ago, Susco said:

There is no immunity. That has been proven in several countries already, because people got infected a second time

This is incorrect. Every single mention of such a possible second infection was explained by the same doctors who mentioned it as more likely to be a relapse or due to wrong test results.

[JensenZ]

7 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

Then no vaccine can work either - they work on creating immunity.

 

But I do not accept the premise that, because some had a relapse, that means there "is no immunity."  It just means some fraction of the fraction who get any  symptoms at all, had a relapse. 

 

Given those who are vulnerable to this virus are the very old and/or already sick, this should not be a surprising development.

A re-infection is probably a mutation. These viruses mutate quickly. In 1918 the first influenza wave hit in January, and by July, a new, far more virulent strain appeared.

 

There has never been any vaccination for a coronavirus.

[Mama Noodle]

1 minute ago, JackThompson said:

The "common cold" is like saying "the flu" - but there are myrad different viruses that are "cold viruses" and "flu viruses."  Getting immunity for one, doesn't confer immunity to all others - though having had one strain of flu can provide immunity to similar future strains - even occurring years or decades apart.

 

Perfect example of this was the Swine Flu (N1H1) and part of the reason it wasn't as bad as it could have been. 

 

Quote

From the beginning of the 2009 H1N1 pandemic, illness in people 65 and older has been less common than illness in younger people. This was true both in the United States and in the Southern Hemisphere during their flu season. In fact, people 65 and older were the group least likely to get sick with this virus. (One analysis showed that only 1.3 people for every 100,000 people 65 and older are had been infected with 2009 H1N1. This is compared to 26.7 per 100,000 of those 5 years to 24 years of age and 22.9 per 100,000 in those younger than 5 years old. Rates among younger persons were 15 to 20 times higher.) Laboratory tests on blood samples indicate that some older people likely have some pre-existing immunity to the 2009 H1N1 flu virus.

https://www.cdc.gov/H1N1flu/vaccination/vaccine_seniors.htm

[JackThompson]

10 minutes ago, JensenZ said:

A re-infection is probably a mutation. These viruses mutate quickly. In 1918 the first influenza wave hit in January, and by July, a new, far more virulent strain appeared.

 

There has never been any vaccination for a coronavirus.

Agree on the last point.  I was not aware they had isolated variations of the 1918 flu - just remember when they "dug it up" in Alaska for "study."  Scary.   I wonder if the Jan-infected were immune to the next variant?

The mortality of the 1918 flu had a lot to do with conditions - people packed together in war-stress.  One of the treatments that seemed to help, was getting the patients outside, in the sun, and fresh air in well-ventellated spaces. 

 

But, for some reason, "lockdown" was prescribed for this bug - with parks and beaches closed.  Social-distancing is one thing - locking people in boxes where viruses spread best, is something else.

[vermin on arrival]

21 minutes ago, JensenZ said:

A re-infection is probably a mutation. These viruses mutate quickly. In 1918 the first influenza wave hit in January, and by July, a new, far more virulent strain appeared.

 

There has never been any vaccination for a coronavirus.

Or maybe bad testing. Most of these covid tests are highly inaccurate.

[tlock]

2 hours ago, JensenZ said:

A re-infection is probably a mutation. These viruses mutate quickly. In 1918 the first influenza wave hit in January, and by July, a new, far more virulent strain appeared.

 

There has never been any vaccination for a coronavirus.

The spanish flu *did* confer immunity on people who caught the milder first wave.  Most were immune to the more deadly second wave.  Note also the part about natural selection favors a milder strain because those with the milder strain circulate about the population.  

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_flu#Deadly_second_wave

 

The second wave of the 1918 pandemic was much more deadly than the first. The first wave had resembled typical flu epidemics; those most at risk were the sick and elderly, while younger, healthier people recovered easily. By August, when the second wave began in France, Sierra Leone, and the United States,^[103] the virus had mutated to a much more deadly form.

 

*Edited for Fair Use Policy*

 

 

Edited May 16, 2020 by Scott
Edited for Fair Use

[tlock]

I think it's worth it to reiterate this part.  Even with the best of intentions, we may be inadvertently setting ourselves up for a more deadly second wave.  It really makes sense to me to let nature run it's course rather than trying to outwit nature and potentially muck things up even worse.  But I know, I know, it's all about me me me me.

 

This increased severity has been attributed to the circumstances of the First World War.^[105] In civilian life, natural selection favors a mild strain. Those who get very ill stay home, and those mildly ill continue with their lives, preferentially spreading the mild strain. In the trenches, natural selection was reversed. Soldiers with a mild strain stayed where they were, while the severely ill were sent on crowded trains to crowded field hospitals, spreading the deadlier virus.

[geriatrickid]

Another thread filled with the usual shouters and bullies pushing their  delusions of world control and ignorance.

 

Sweden has modified its public health strategy twice since it realized that its initial strategy  was not working. The continued praising  of a strategy no longer used is laughable. Sweden has since implemented  multiple measures seen in other countries;

- high schools and universities are closed

- gatherings of more than 50 people are legally banned, and the public has voluntarily avoided large gatherings of  10 or more

- many businesses introduced work at home policies

- long term care facilities have restrictions on access

- public movement in the at risk high population density cities has fallen significantly with fewer commuters and fewer people on the streets.

 

Yes, Sweden has not implemented a full lock down but this reflects Sweden's demographics. It is a small country with a relatively small population spread out giving a relatively low population density. A majority of the population lives in single family units. It does not have the  issue of multi-generational  homes as one sees in other cultures and countries.  One can take risks in Sweden that one cannot take in a city like Moscow or NYC. Comparing the Swedish strategy with countries where the demographics and  population  densities at risk are  different is idiotic because they are not comparable. It is easier to social distance when there is space to stay 2 meters away. Try doing that on a Bangkok city street or in Mumbai.  Sweden doesn't have the high density retail space as is seen in the USA or China with their mega malls. Sweden doesn't have the high volume  service trade like the USA or Canada; There are no high turnover outlets like Waffle House,Denny's, Applebee etc. in every neighborhood.

 

Public health policy  requires the co-operation of the general public. The  Covid 19 management strategies that have been deployed around the world reflect the population participation/buyin of the strategy. Some countries/cultures are more willing to accept a tougher approach (e.g. Taiwan, South Korea), other countries require prodding and "encouragement" (e.g. Canada, Australia, Denmark, Norway) and other countries have large populations who will not listen and think of their individual needs first (e.g. USA, Italy) making a consistent and rapid  application of policy difficult.  I do not see the Swedish public health policy as the best, but it seems this is what the Swedish people were willing to accept and what the country had the ability to implement. One can have the best strategy in the world, but if people do not comply, it is a useless strategy. The swedish government and the public also accept that thousands of its elderly and vulnerable will die before their time. This is not acceptable public policy in countries like Canada or Denmark. Sweden has used a strategy that its  population will comply with.

 

If the population does not buy in to the public health policy, it won't work. Australia and New Zealand  are having success now because the population did their part. Vulnerable regions of Canada are disease free because the locals went farther than government policy and blocked or restricted entry of anyone not from the region. India has deployed public security forces to smack a few bums to ensure that large gatherings are  broken up.

 

There is a cost to pay when the tough measures are delayed or not effectively implemented. Australia and New Zealand are opening up again in a safe and orderly manner. Their people have confidence to go out again. Canada is reopening in many regions and confidence is  back in the regions which have been disease free for weeks. Some EU countries that had a poor implementation and  then spotty compliance still have a shattered consumer confidence and it is unlikely that their economies will recover as quickly as those who had the tougher approach.  Yes, some Swedes are out in the cafes and restaurants.  The country already has an issue mental health and its suicide rate is significantly higher than its peer countries of Denmark, Norway and Canada. I expect that the Covid 19 issue will add to the repressed worries that weigh down the Swedish collective psyche - It will be  just another thing to worry about.  In the USA, with its rush to reopen, consumer confidence is evaporating as reported infections increase. 

 

The undeniable reality is that  infection with SARS Cov-2 leaves behind significant physical damage in many of the infected.  Circulatory and cardiac damage, scarred and damaged lungs and kidney damage. This damage is the unseen impact. And the more people who are infected, the more likely the damage will manifest itself in other illness events. This is an aspect not measured  by the champions of limiting the response.

Edited May 16, 2020 by geriatrickid

[nauseus]

3 hours ago, yuyiinthesky said:

Sorry, no, the density was not my argument, I simply told Susco that if he talks about the density and Sweden, that in order to have a meaningful comparison the vast empty forests should be taken out of the calculation.

If you want to examine the influence or importance of density, then look at Stockholm and London, compare them, not at the beautiful but empty forests, where not many people live beneath the trolls and elks, not even corona viruses.

I don't. The Covid stats are countrywide.

[nauseus]

4 hours ago, yuyiinthesky said:

Yes, herd immunity is the normal here, to be expected.

 

Please be aware that if immunity does not work, then a conventional vaccine does not work too. Vaccines provoke a reaction of the immune system, teach it what to do to fight the virus, if it shows up.  We get both or nothing.

More rubbish. Vaccines can still be developed from antibodies. Give it up.

[nauseus]

4 hours ago, yuyiinthesky said:

Sorry if the word "a given" disturbs you. I was just quoting from nauseous, and therefore even putting it in quotes, and "assume" in front of it:
 

 

You weren't quoting me, you were quoting yourself. And if you want to name names then have the decent courtesy to spell them correctly. 

[yuyiinthesky]

7 minutes ago, nauseus said:

You weren't quoting me, you were quoting yourself. And if you want to name names then have the decent courtesy to spell them correctly. 

Here is what you posted, see post #70, and my post quoting it at #76:
 

Quote

What if herd immunity is not achievable with this novel virus? There is a big herd on this thread that assumes that herd immunity is a given, almost a human right, but this is not known for sure as yet. And even if there is some immunity, it may not be long-lasting. 

And this "assumes that herd immunity is a given," was what I then repeated, after explaining it.

I apologize for the typo in your name, I blame the spellchecker for that. 

[yuyiinthesky]

21 minutes ago, nauseus said:

More rubbish. Vaccines can still be developed from antibodies. Give it up.

Please explain how a vaccine developed from antibodies can possibly work when there is no immunity.

You might want to read up a little how antibodies, immunity, and vaccines based on antibodies work. Or better don't do it, you seem to know already that it's all rubbish.

[yuyiinthesky]

1 hour ago, geriatrickid said:

The undeniable reality is that  infection with SARS Cov-2 leaves behind significant physical damage in many of the infected.

It is new to me that an infection with SARS-CoV-2 alone, which are as you certainly know mostly asymptotic, "leaves behind significant physical damage". Did you confuse that with Covid-19, the sickness caused by SARS-CoV-2?

 

If not, please provide a source for this statement, preferably an "undeniable" one ????

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, yuyiinthesky said:

Here is what you posted, see post #70, and my post quoting it at #76:
 

And this "assumes that herd immunity is a given," was what I then repeated, after explaining it.

I apologize for the typo in your name, I blame the spellchecker for that. 

 

 

This is your own post:

 

  5 hours ago, yuyiinthesky said:

There is immunity to the other corona viruses. Even to SARS there seem to still be antibodies today in recovered patients. So if the would be no immunity to SARS-CoV-2 this would be an exception, different to what is seen with all the other corona viruses. Thus we assume that "herd immunity is a given".

And even the dubious Bill Gates agrees, his touted vaccine would not be able to work if there would be no immunity.

[nauseus]

56 minutes ago, yuyiinthesky said:

Please explain how a vaccine developed from antibodies can possibly work when there is no immunity.

You might want to read up a little how antibodies, immunity, and vaccines based on antibodies work. Or better don't do it, you seem to know already that it's all rubbish.

A vaccine is primarily designed to immunise anyone against the virus. That's the whole point.

 

The make up of antigens and antibodies, once known, give initial data necessary for the development of the vaccine. 
 

[yuyiinthesky]

26 minutes ago, nauseus said:

A vaccine is primarily designed to immunise anyone against the virus. That's the whole point.

 

The make up of antigens and antibodies, once known, give initial data necessary for the development of the vaccine. 
 

Obviously you didn't really understand this. Give it up.