15 hours ago, James105 said:

Sweden did it before there was even vaccines to roll out, and compared to most lockdown countries has a better outcome in every metric (cases/deaths/economy).

I read a post only yesterday that cited Sweden as doing badly relative to it's neighbours and it's policies were a failure financially, as the economy fell 8-9%. Per capita cases, they did worse than the UK, per capita deaths worse than South Africa and Russia..... 

Hard to know the reality.

Posts containing charts and content copy and pasted from some sites without any supporting links to the sources of information have been removed. 

My original post stating official UK government data showing average age of covid deaths in the UK was removed for lacking a link.  For those interested I attach a screenshot of the first page of the spreadsheet. For the moderators here is the link to the full spreadsheet data provided by UK Office of National Statistics. I defy anybody to refute the validity of the data source as not being an official UK government department. 

 

For clarity - the black scribble on the header bar of the image is me removing my name from  the ecxel file.

 

https://www.ons.gov.uk/file?uri=/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/adhocs/12773averageageofdeathmedianandmeanofpersonswhosedeathwasduetocovid19orinvolvedcovid19bysexdeathsregisteredinweekending9october2020toweekending1january2021englandandwales/finaltable.xlsx

 

 

Edited August 31, 20214 yr by Gsxrnz

23 hours ago, jacko45k said:

Yeah me too... what have you got booked?... A lot of fun in the planning and anticipation!

I'm not booking anything until November. Try and book now and everything turns to rubbish then try and ask for a refund "no have"... 555

23 hours ago, Daithi85 said:

Complain if they extend lockdowns, complain if they open up. Complainers will always complain. And theres Alot of complainers on here that's for Sure. 

Is it a complaint if I ask if they are permitted to serve alcohol.? 

My local caff says no but I just wanted to confirm. 

2 minutes ago, rott said:

Is it a complaint if I ask if they are permitted to serve alcohol.? 

My local caff says no but I just wanted to confirm. 

I've read no alcohol (officially at least)

On 8/30/2021 at 1:43 PM, smedly said:

a week ??????

 

they hadn't even put pen to paper 

 

I suggest they use a pencil

 

 

Time to remove the curfew also - it offers little value in the grand scheme of things

Oh no......its hugely important to get those pesky protesters off the streets nice and early.

23 hours ago, James105 said:

Sigh, I used the word “most” in what I said (not all) and even underlined it and put it in bold yet you still somehow missed it.   I know people don’t like facts on here as they are uncomfortable and they don’t really care about your feelings, but the fact is that Sweden has better outcomes than most countries that chose to lockdown.   

Sweden has twice the population of Norway. 

 

Sweden has 14,000 dead, Norway has 892.

 

Sweden has 10 times the number of Covid cases, compared to Norway. 

 

I think "better outcomes" should not be used in connection with Sweden, which has had a disastrous Covid response. 

Just now, Danderman123 said:

Sweden has twice the population of Norway. 

 

Sweden has 14,000 dead, Norway has 892.

 

Sweden has 10 times the number of Covid cases, compared to Norway. 

 

I think "better outcomes" should not be used in connection with Sweden, which has had a disastrous Covid response. 

At it again with the facts......it is not going to win you any friends....555

the re-opening of a lot of Thailand's facilities won't actually make a huge difference

If Thailand remains a "red" destination it is hardly likely to bring in a flood of tourists - unless Thailand wants to look after them for the next 6 months to a year.

Many businesses rely on tourism so if they reopen and there's no customers, they might as well remain closed or they'll just be losing money day after day.

If local derestriction then brings about a spike in infections again then the military goernment won't hesitate to lockdown stuff again.

3 minutes ago, Thunglom said:

Many businesses rely on tourism so if they reopen and there's no customers, they might as well remain closed or they'll just be losing money day after day.

Thinking the same.

 

I can see many places remaining shuttered.

 

It just isn't cost effective without the tourist trade.

19 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

Sweden has twice the population of Norway. 

 

Sweden has 14,000 dead, Norway has 892.

 

Sweden has 10 times the number of Covid cases, compared to Norway. 

 

I think "better outcomes" should not be used in connection with Sweden, which has had a disastrous Covid response. 

I said Sweden had better outcomes that most lockdown countries (not all of them - once again I’ve used bold and underlined this point, but I am now wondering if you know what the word ‘most’ means at this point so my efforts could be futile).    How did Sweden do against Belgium, UK, France, Italy, Spain for example, all of which had extreme lockdowns?        

3 minutes ago, James105 said:

I said Sweden had better outcomes that most lockdown countries (not all of them - once again I’ve used bold and underlined this point, but I am now wondering if you know what the word ‘most’ means at this point so my efforts could be futile).    How did Sweden do against Belgium, UK, France, Italy, Spain for example, all of which had extreme lockdowns?        

Question you should be asking is how did Sweden do with deaths per capita population against Thailand, even if Thailand was to double its deaths before the end of the 3rd wave it will still be a tiny fraction. There is no stomach for mass deaths here.

On 8/30/2021 at 5:29 PM, cyril sneer said:

Bars should be open before restaurants 

Yep, let's get our priorities right, never mind the masses.

1 hour ago, Will B Good said:

Thinking the same.

 

I can see many places remaining shuttered.

 

It just isn't cost effective without the tourist trade.

They're 40 million people short of capacity. The locals can't be expected to take up that amount of slack.

6 hours ago, Nsp64 said:

Oh no......its hugely important to get those pesky protesters off the streets nice and early.

Which won't happen, therefore some form of emergency decree will remain. 

1 hour ago, Will B Good said:

Thinking the same.

 

I can see many places remaining shuttered.

 

It just isn't cost effective without the tourist trade.

Yep, no tourists and even many expats are being put off by the silly restrictions that remain.
 

Why would I make the effort to go to a restaurant, find somewhere to park, socially distance with a plastic screen etc. so I can sit in a restaurant devoid of atmosphere and drink water with my meal? Then be kicked out at 8pm. I am expected to take a risk of getting COVID for that experience?

 

I would rather cook at home and watch live sport on my own big screen TV with a few cold ones. 
 

I feel sorry for the restaurant and bar owners. You can’t expect them to operate with their hands tied behind their back, only offering 50% of the experience to 30% of the customers. 

 

 

 

 

On 8/30/2021 at 9:26 AM, ThailandRyan said:

Of course I can see your complaining about the complainers and I am taking the bait and posting against my better judgment.  If the Emergency decree is lifted then CAAT should be lifting the ban on International flights into all of the country in my view, but then with Thailand being on the Red list and at Level 4, and the UK citizens dashing back home to avoid an expensive quarantine this past weekend, how will this all play out.   

The greatest UK demand probably comes from the retired, semi retired or self employed who can come for Christmas and stay from the end of November to the begining of March. It is almost impossible to anticipate what absurdities the UK government could come up with in the intervening period and so becomes an exercise  in personal risk management. I suspect many would go for it if only Thai entry restrictions were eased somewhat and international flights were reinstated. 

9 hours ago, James105 said:

I said Sweden had better outcomes that most lockdown countries (not all of them - once again I’ve used bold and underlined this point, but I am now wondering if you know what the word ‘most’ means at this point so my efforts could be futile).    How did Sweden do against Belgium, UK, France, Italy, Spain for example, all of which had extreme lockdowns?        

Your internet friends have given you a list of countries that did relatively poorly despite having lockdowns. Even so, most of the countries on your list had much fewer infections per capita than Sweden.

 

Because lockdowns work.

3 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

Your internet friends have given you a list of countries that did relatively poorly despite having lockdowns. Even so, most of the countries on your list had much fewer infections per capita than Sweden.

 

Because lockdowns work.

These countries did relatively poorly to Sweden as quite clearly lockdowns do not work.  If they did then there would be consistency in the results would there not?  Fewer Covid deaths per capita than the UK, France, Spain, Italy, Portugal, Poland, Belgium, Croatia, Romania, Lithuania, Slovenia, Hungary, Czech Rep, Slovakia, Bulgaria, Bosnia & Herzegovina, N. Macedonia and Moldova, and their kids didn't miss a single day of school so the long term benefits from not panicking must be better than any other country in the world.   

 

The mental gymnastics required to still believe lockdowns work without question is quite something.  I find peoples reactions to this pandemic truly fascinating and I'm sure this will be studied over time just like any time in history where populations have been coerced into believing something provably untrue by propaganda.   

5 minutes ago, James105 said:

These countries did relatively poorly to Sweden as quite clearly lockdowns do not work.  If they did then there would be consistency in the results would there not?  Fewer Covid deaths per capita than the UK, France, Spain, Italy, Portugal, Poland, Belgium, Croatia, Romania, Lithuania, Slovenia, Hungary, Czech Rep, Slovakia, Bulgaria, Bosnia & Herzegovina, N. Macedonia and Moldova, and their kids didn't miss a single day of school so the long term benefits from not panicking must be better than any other country in the world.   

 

The mental gymnastics required to still believe lockdowns work without question is quite something.  I find peoples reactions to this pandemic truly fascinating and I'm sure this will be studied over time just like any time in history where populations have been coerced into believing something provably untrue by propaganda.   

Each nation had a different level of restrictions. This is not a hard concept to understand.

 

Typically, the more restrictions, the less the virus spreads. A good example of a country with heavy restrictions is Singapore. 

Edited September 1, 20214 yr by Danderman123

2 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

Each nation had a different level of restrictions. This is not a hard concept to understand.

 

Typically, the more restrictions, the less the virus spreads. A good example of a country with heavy restrictions is Singapore. 

My point remains that Sweden had better outcomes than most countries that did lockdown.   Cherry picking the ones that did have better outcomes does not change that fact.  Besides, if I was to cherry pick I could simply point to the country that had the harshest restrictions (Peru) and had the worst outcome in the world if I wanted to play that game.    

1 minute ago, James105 said:

My point remains that Sweden had better outcomes than most countries that did lockdown.   Cherry picking the ones that did have better outcomes does not change that fact.  Besides, if I was to cherry pick I could simply point to the country that had the harshest restrictions (Peru) and had the worst outcome in the world if I wanted to play that game.    

Peru lifted its lockdown early, and basically gave up.

 

Sweden is #22 in per capita infections. Not too many countries with more infections had lockdowns.

 

 

6 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

Your internet friends have given you a list of countries that did relatively poorly despite having lockdowns. Even so, most of the countries on your list had much fewer infections per capita than Sweden.

 

Because lockdowns work.

Except there's always plenty of people who ignore the regulations/prevention measures to stop the spread. 

 

It's a global deadly pandemic for gods sake, why are some people so dumb, so stupid, so illogical, so selfish?

7 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

Peru lifted its lockdown early, and basically gave up.

 

Sweden is #22 in per capita infections. Not too many countries with more infections had lockdowns.

 

 

Is your argument now that lockdowns work because they cause less infections but more deaths as though that is a good thing?!  Sweden let it spread amongst those not at risk, therefore more infections, less deaths, more natural immunity, better outcome… unless you think a higher rate of death is a better outcome?  Lockdowns treat those at high risk the same as those at low risk, ergo infections are spread evenly ergo more deaths.      

3 hours ago, James105 said:

Is your argument now that lockdowns work because they cause less infections but more deaths as though that is a good thing?!  Sweden let it spread amongst those not at risk, therefore more infections, less deaths, more natural immunity, better outcome… unless you think a higher rate of death is a better outcome?  Lockdowns treat those at high risk the same as those at low risk, ergo infections are spread evenly ergo more deaths.      

Except that Sweden had very high mortality as well. 

 

There is a good reason that Sweden adjusted its Covid restrictions. 

 

Sweden adjusted their restrictions because it was becoming more costly politically for Sweden to be an outcast in the EU, not because they changed their mind. They can’t afford not to follow the herd rules in the EU. Politics.

21 hours ago, James105 said:

My point remains that Sweden had better outcomes than most countries that did lockdown.   Cherry picking the ones that did have better outcomes does not change that fact. 

But you cherry picking those that did not does change the fact?

What are you trying to prove with your attempt at false assertions.....?

Sweden is next below Pakistan in number of infections..... and slightly worse than South Africa in per Capita Covid deaths..... and did not fare as well  as it's neighbours. 

Lockdowns work.... look at the incredulous way Thai new infections are currently tumbling!!!!!

 

21 minutes ago, jacko45k said:

But you cherry picking those that did not does change the fact?

What are you trying to prove with your attempt at false assertions.....?

Sweden is next below Pakistan in number of infections..... and slightly worse than South Africa in per Capita Covid deaths..... and did not fare as well  as it's neighbours. 

Lockdowns work.... look at the incredulous way Thai new infections are currently tumbling!!!!!

 

What were the lockdowns in Thailand for the prior 3 months doing then whilst the infections were going up, up and away?  Were they on holiday?  Waiting for their big moment when they decide to miraculously become effective 3/4 months later?   I do find it amusing that despite not working at all for the prior 3 months they get all the credit when the virus naturally goes back in to decline.

 

But it doesn't change the fact that Sweden has had better outcomes than most countries that did lock down.  If lockdowns worked then Sweden would not have had better outcomes than most countries that locked down, and the country that had the worst outcome in the world, would not be one of the ones that did lock down.   

2 minutes ago, James105 said:

What were the lockdowns in Thailand for the prior 3 months doing then whilst the infections were going up, up and away?

Taking time to show effect and being refined, and somewhat ignored.