Covid-19

[SpeedFlex27]

When trying to become great again really means you are truly stupid. #greatpeople

Edited May 2, 2020 by SpeedFlex27

[Tracker]

 

 

 

                                                 

[do or die]

26 minutes ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

When trying to become great again really means you are truly stupid. #greatpeople

What's with that Tony Montoya piece?   This patriot, should devote his energies to doing something really useful.....like shipping overseas and wiping out the Taliban, or something.....

[bustamente]

44 minutes ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

When trying to become great again really means you are truly stupid. #greatpeople

You just know that these guy would be hiding in their basements if a war ever started 

[17to85]

35 minutes ago, do or die said:

What's with that Tony Montoya piece?   This patriot, should devote his energies to doing something really useful.....like shipping overseas and wiping out the Taliban, or something.....

I have heard them described as LARPers and it really fits. 

[Mark H.]

3 hours ago, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

Do you work as a teacher in the public school system?

Yes, I’m at a Hutterian school that is part of the public system, so I teach the mainstream curriculum. 

[SpeedFlex27]

Since Sweden was mentioned today,  sadly it looks like the chickens have come home to roost.  Click on the link below:

 

https://nypost.com/2020/04/28/sweden-records-deadliest-week-of-century-after-resisting-lockdowns/?fbclid=IwAR3a_sHOq5fk8r5V8id0n3R9Bl5NaY1exHpDXR8U2P1N5BvGjqWIMO8D_Io

 

 

 

Edited May 3, 2020 by SpeedFlex27

[TrueBlue4ever]

16 hours ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

Gawd, not Sweden again. That is so April 2020 here.

 

I know it’s easy to be dismissive of J5V if you don’t agree with his position, but we shouldn’t be dismissive of these reports without actually listening to them. At the same time, one shouldn’t just read the headline and cherry-pick a single response and pretend that the article is supportive of their alternate viewpoint without engaging in the same critical examination of the information provided. This won’t be a short post, so if a quick sound bite that reinforces your side’s position is what you want, just stop reading now and don’t bother sending me a “TLDR” post. But understand my from my viewpoint that this just highlights the problems we have right now in engaging in this discussion, that we don’t bother digging into our arguments and just spout one-off comments. 
 

From listening to the full recorded interview, in my opinion the radio host seems to have a veiled bias towards supporting the Swedish approach to non-lockdown, saying the Dr.’s comments point out Sweden’s “positive approach”. I don’t think the comments go that far. What I hear the doctor saying is that in the future, countries may have to decide that a lockdown is no longer feasible to combat the virus, and if they want to live in a world without lockdown they could look at the Swedish model as a way to coexist with the virus, allowing schools and businesses to be open but being extra mindful of social distancing precautions, which is what the Swedish government says it has been advocating. The Dr. doesn’t take a position one way or another on the Swedish approach as positive or negative, but says lessons can be learned from it by other countries going forward. He does not, to my mind, advocate that this was the right strategy from the outset, or the wrong one, for that matter. 
 

It is also important to note that the original question asked was whether the “herd immunity” concept Sweden was going for means that this was the better approach, and in answering he cautioned that very few who had contracted COVID 19 had developed the antibodies to combat the virus as a result of exposure, meaning they were still very susceptible to the virus in the future. Herd immunity may well not result from Sweden’s approach. 
 

Hindsight will be 20/20 as to which approach will be better in the long run. If Sweden does not have a second wave, survives this wave without overwhelming its healthcare system, develops herd immunity, and kept its economy humming the whole time, then we can say they chose wisely. That’s a lot of “if’s”, mind you. Those same “if’s” could apply to Canada if the lockdown doesn’t reduce the number of overall deaths or cases in the end, still overwhelms the health care system and resources, and drags down the economy irrevocably in the process with no real net benefit. But if Sweden’s approach means unnecessary deaths to save an economy that would have rebounded anyway, and Canada’s approach saves a health care system from collapse and its economy does rebound  with no lingering effects long term, then you could say Sweden chose poorly. No one can say what the best approach long term will be because we are nowhere near long term yet. 
 

What I can say confidently is that short-term, New Zealand and South Korea both took strong measures to lock down their countries quickly and have virtually eliminated cases in their countries for the time being. Italy was late in responding with devastating results for their population. Canada has taken strict measures but the numbers of new cases and deaths does not seem to be waning just yet (although there are some stark regional differences at play). Sweden has put its trust in its citizens to govern themselves accordingly without over-regulation. Their numbers of cases are lower than Canada’s, and although their total deaths are close with one third of the population, their numbers in terms of new cases and daily deaths seem to be going down now, while Canada’s hold level. And I’m not sure all Canadians would show the same self-restraint if merely “encouraged” to stay at home and avoid public gatherings which put them at risk. We’ve seen plenty of examples of lack of self-restraint south of the border, which puts everyone at risk, the reckless and the careful alike. 
 

Finally, what I see as telling are the results of the closed cases in select countries. All numbers courtesy of worldometers.com. Worldwide there are 3.5 million cases, and one third of them are now closed (meaning ended in recovery or death). 18% of those closed cases worldwide resulted in death. In South Korea, 85% of their cases are closed, and only 2.7% of those closed cases were deaths. In New Zealand, likewise 85% of their cases are closed with a 1.5% death rate. In Canada, just under 50% of our cases are closed, and 13% of those closed cases resulted in death. In the US, only 20.7% of cases are closed, with a death result of 28%. And in Sweden, only 16.5% of their cases are closed, and of those closed cases a staggering 73% have resulted in death. Interpret those numbers as you wish, but for me it’s hard to argue that Sweden’s approach has not put many more lives in jeopardy unnecessarily in the short term given that very high fatality rate. 

Edited May 3, 2020 by TrueBlue4ever

[Super Duper Negatron]

The success or failure of Sweden's strategy can't be measured in today's numbers. The deaths were always going to be higher in Sweden earlier on. The real test will be 6 months or a year from now. Remember, flattening the curve was never about a lower overall death count, it was about spreading that number over a longer period to avoid overwhelming the health care system. If the health care system can handle the higher early spike in hospitalizations, in theory, Sweden would be able to go back to normal earlier than everyone else, with little to no difference in overall mortality.

It is a hell of a gamble, though.

[J5V]

2 hours ago, Super Duper Negatron said:

The success or failure of Sweden's strategy can't be measured in today's numbers. The deaths were always going to be higher in Sweden earlier on. The real test will be 6 months or a year from now. Remember, flattening the curve was never about a lower overall death count, it was about spreading that number over a longer period to avoid overwhelming the health care system. If the health care system can handle the higher early spike in hospitalizations, in theory, Sweden would be able to go back to normal earlier than everyone else, with little to no difference in overall mortality.

It is a hell of a gamble, though.

Sweden has said all along that this was never about "herd immunity". Their approach has been that they've seen these viruses come and go many times before and that this one will be no different -- it'll infect them, peak, subside, and be gone, just like every other virus in the past. It's not a novel (new) corona virus to them, just another in a long line (229E (alpha), NL63 (alpha), OC43 (beta), HKU1 (beta), MERS-CoV, MERS, SARS-CoV,  (SARS), SARS-CoV-2, which causes COVID-19. Sweden says their approach is nothing new, they've always taken this tact, it is the rest of the world, with their lock-down of it's citizens and the trashing of their businesses and economies that are conducting the untested experiment, not them.

They've put their trust in their population to do what is necessary and they aren't going to over-react, panic, instill fear and angst in their population, and destroy their economy. In other words they don't need big brother ramping up the hype machine to impose it's will, with potentially disastrous results, on their populace. Imagine, people actually deciding for themselves what is best for them as if it were their lives and their choice. How refreshing!

It's not like they've done nothing. They have practiced social distancing, working from home when possible, etc. They prepared extra beds and had the facilities in place to handle a huge surge in cases that might overwhelm their health system but that never happened. 

You're right, in the end there might be little to no difference in mortality AND they won't have trashed their economy with persistent lock-downs. You say it's a hell of a gamble on their part but it's a hell of a gamble on our part too and we're the ones that have wandered off into uncharted waters.

Edited May 3, 2020 by J5V

[Mark H.]

2 hours ago, Super Duper Negatron said:

The success or failure of Sweden's strategy can't be measured in today's numbers. The deaths were always going to be higher in Sweden earlier on. The real test will be 6 months or a year from now. Remember, flattening the curve was never about a lower overall death count, it was about spreading that number over a longer period to avoid overwhelming the health care system. If the health care system can handle the higher early spike in hospitalizations, in theory, Sweden would be able to go back to normal earlier than everyone else, with little to no difference in overall mortality.

It is a hell of a gamble, though.

But surely not overwhelming the health care system would result in fewer deaths?  It’s hard to imagine that the idea is to have the same number of deaths, but to just spread them out more.  That would make Heath care almost redundant. 

[Mark H.]

17 minutes ago, J5V said:

Sweden has said all along that this was never about "herd immunity". Their approach has been that they've seen these viruses come and go many times before and that this one will be no different -- it'll infect them, peak, subside, and be gone, just like every other virus in the past. It's not a novel (new) corona virus to them, just another in a long line (229E (alpha), NL63 (alpha), OC43 (beta), HKU1 (beta), MERS-CoV, MERS, SARS-CoV,  (SARS), SARS-CoV-2, which causes COVID-19. Sweden says their approach is nothing new, they've always taken this tact, it is the rest of the world, with their lock-down of it's citizens and the trashing of their businesses and economies that are conducting the untested experiment, not them.

They've put their trust in their population to do what is necessary and they aren't going to over-react, panic, instill fear and angst in their population, and destroy their economy. In other words they don't need big brother ramping up the hype machine to impose it's will, with potentially disastrous results, on their populace. Imagine, people actually deciding for themselves what is best for them as if it were their lives and their choice. How refreshing!

It's not like they've done nothing. They have practiced social distancing, working from home when possible, etc. They prepared extra beds and had the facilities in place to handle a huge surge in cases that might overwhelm their health system but that never happened. 

You're right, in the end there might be little to no difference in mortality AND they won't have trashed their economy with persistent lock-downs. You say it's a hell of a gamble on their part but it's a hell of a gamble on our part too and we're the ones that have wandered off into uncharted waters.

The problem with people deciding what is best for themselves - if it doesn’t work out they need the government and the health care system just like everyone else.  And if deciding what is best for themselves means ignoring science, that is a huge problem.  

If Sweden really was thinking that this was just another virus, perhaps they should have considered the impacts of the Spanish Flu, over 17 million deaths world wide, from a population of 1.8 billion. 

[FrostyWinnipeg]

21 minutes ago, J5V said:

You're right, in the end there might be little to no difference in mortality AND they won't have trashed their economy with persistent lock-downs. You say it's a hell of a gamble on their part but it's a hell of a gamble on our part too and we're the ones that have wandered off into uncharted waters.

Well their mortality rate is 10-11%  ours is 6%. They sacrificed lives for economy, we sacrificed economy for lives.

I do find it odd that they reported 778 new cases on Apr29 which was a record high and 64 on May 1 which is the lowest since March 8.

 

Edited May 3, 2020 by FrostyWinnipeg

[Super Duper Negatron]

25 minutes ago, Mark H. said:

But surely not overwhelming the health care system would result in fewer deaths?  It’s hard to imagine that the idea is to have the same number of deaths, but to just spread them out more.  That would make Heath care almost redundant. 

Sweden's argument has always been they have the capacity to handle a huge spike, unlike other jurisdictions. I have no idea how true that is.

[J5V]

1 hour ago, Mark H. said:

The problem with people deciding what is best for themselves - if it doesn’t work out they need the government and the health care system just like everyone else.  And if deciding what is best for themselves means ignoring science, that is a huge problem.  

"The science behind the Swedish strategy
While the Prime Minister has drawn criticism from many for this stance, it’s actually data from the health authorities that is the driver. " https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidnikel/2020/03/30/why-swedens-coronavirus-approach-is-so-different-from-others/#739b22ce562b

1 hour ago, Mark H. said:

If Sweden really was thinking that this was just another virus, perhaps they should have considered the impacts of the Spanish Flu, over 17 million deaths world wide, from a population of 1.8 billion. 

“Sweden has gone mostly for voluntary measures because that’s how we’re used to working,” Tegnell added. “And we have a long tradition that it works rather well.”

Since you don't trust people in a democratic government what form of government are you advocating?

In this excellent paper written by Martin Holmberg he shows how well Sweden has studied the viruses in the past 200 years including Spanish Flu. It's a good read, give it a go.

"The past 200 years of influenza epidemics in Sweden are examined with a special focus on key social structures—households, schools, transportations and the military. These are shown to have influenced the progression of influenza pandemics. Prevailing beliefs around influenza pandemics have also profoundly influenced intervention strategies. Measuring long-term trends in pandemic severity is problematic because pandemics are non-linear events where the conditions surrounding them constantly change. However, in a linearised view, the Spanish flu can be seen to represent a historical turning point and the H1N1 2009 pandemic not as an outlier, but following a 100-year trend of decreasing severity. Integrating seasonal and pandemic influenza, and adopting an ecosocial stance can deepen our understanding and bring the ghost-like pandemic past to life."

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5629937/

Edited May 3, 2020 by J5V

[J5V]

1 hour ago, FrostyWinnipeg said:

Well their mortality rate is 10-11%  ours is 6%. They sacrificed lives for economy, we sacrificed economy for lives.

I do find it odd that they reported 778 new cases on Apr29 which was a record high and 64 on May 1 which is the lowest since March 8.

 

You persist in looking at data from now. Let's revisit in a year or two.

Did we (sacrifice lives for economy)? How do you know we won't end up in exactly the same place? How many spikes and lock-downs are you predicting we'll have?

Oh I see. Insinuating lying? Riiiiiight.

[TrueBlue4ever]

10 minutes ago, J5V said:

"The science behind the Swedish strategy
While the Prime Minister has drawn criticism from many for this stance, it’s actually data from the health authorities that is the driver. " https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidnikel/2020/03/30/why-swedens-coronavirus-approach-is-so-different-from-others/#739b22ce562b

“Sweden has gone mostly for voluntary measures because that’s how we’re used to working,” Tegnell added. “And we have a long tradition that it works rather well.”

Since you don't trust people in a democratic government what form of government are you advocating?

One issue I would take with this article is when it was written. It was March 30 and the number of cases then was comparable to other Nordic countries. So the driving data from health authorities may well be outdated and inaccurate now given what has happened in the last month in Sweden compared to other countries. 

[J5V]

36 minutes ago, TrueBlue4ever said:

One issue I would take with this article is when it was written. It was March 30 and the number of cases then was comparable to other Nordic countries. So the driving data from health authorities may well be outdated and inaccurate now given what has happened in the last month in Sweden compared to other countries. 

Agreed. My only point here was that Sweden wasn't just going off on a tangent here. The data drove the decision at that time and as I said, they have made modifications since. They have studied these pandemics for a long time and their decisions were, after all, based on science, which was the insinuation.

[TrueBlue4ever]

2 hours ago, J5V said:

Sweden has said all along that this was never about "herd immunity". Their approach has been that they've seen these viruses come and go many times before and that this one will be no different -- it'll infect them, peak, subside, and be gone, just like every other virus in the past. It's not a novel (new) corona virus to them, just another in a long line (229E (alpha), NL63 (alpha), OC43 (beta), HKU1 (beta), MERS-CoV, MERS, SARS-CoV,  (SARS), SARS-CoV-2, which causes COVID-19. Sweden says their approach is nothing new, they've always taken this tact, it is the rest of the world, with their lock-down of it's citizens and the trashing of their businesses and economies that are conducting the untested experiment, not them.

They've put their trust in their population to do what is necessary and they aren't going to over-react, panic, instill fear and angst in their population, and destroy their economy. In other words they don't need big brother ramping up the hype machine to impose it's will, with potentially disastrous results, on their populace. Imagine, people actually deciding for themselves what is best for them as if it were their lives and their choice. How refreshing!

It's not like they've done nothing. They have practiced social distancing, working from home when possible, etc. They prepared extra beds and had the facilities in place to handle a huge surge in cases that might overwhelm their health system but that never happened. 

You're right, in the end there might be little to no difference in mortality AND they won't have trashed their economy with persistent lock-downs. You say it's a hell of a gamble on their part but it's a hell of a gamble on our part too and we're the ones that have wandered off into uncharted waters.

I pulled up some articles based on a search “Sweden COVID health care strain” to see if the health care system has not been overwhelmed as you say. Here are 4 that I pulled from that don’t necessarily take that point of view.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thelocal.se/20200406/heres-what-healthcare-workers-in-sweden-are-saying-about-the-coronavirus/amp
 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newsweek.com/coronavirus-second-wave-sweden-lockdown-herd-immunity-covid-19-1500046%3famp=1
 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.news-medical.net/amp/news/20200419/How-are-the-interventions-against-COVID-19-working-in-Sweden.aspx
 

https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/swedish-coronavirus-no-lockdown-model-proves-lethal-by-hans-bergstrom-2020-04

Also, two of the more favourable articles in that regard also say that Sweden’s goal absolutely WAS herd immunity as quoted by their own health experts. 
 

Beyond that, there are 2 other things in your post that I’d take strong issue with:

1) Saying “they’ve seen these viruses come and go many times before and that this one will be no different” is the root of the problem according to the science we have. The numbers of cases, mortality rates, and exponential spread for a virus there is no vaccine for all make it completely different than what has been seen before, so the same old same old approach may well not work. Italy’s crisis seemed to back that up. THAT is why many see Sweden’s approach as misguided. And I cannot speak to your personal circumstance, but could you elaborate on how our economy has been “trashed” and “destroyed”? Those words to me speak of something that cannot be recovered from. Do I mis-interpret your words, or do you exaggerate the extent of the damage, or are we somewhere in the middle?

2) Using words like “instill fear”, “panic”, “over react”, “big brother” and “hype machine” is pretty hyperbolic without establishing a basis for it beyond your own personal feeling, but that aside, saying sarcastically how “refreshing” it is that people get to make their own choices with their lives is quite disingenuous. Every democratic government allows for reasonable infringements on individual rights to keep peace, order, and good government for the betterment of society as a whole. You may feel is it your “right” to drive as fast as you want, but posted speed limits are not just suggestions, and penal sanctions are put in place for those who violate them. Is this the oppressive government restricting your rights, or is it putting safeguards in place because everyone’s right to public safety outweighs one person’s right to do what they want, how they want, when they want, not caring that their personal choice puts many others at risk on the road, even those who abide by the rules of government by not speeding?

The risk those beach goers on spring break at Daytona, or those pastors and churchgoers across the southern US, or those protesters blocking hospitals demanding to open up restrictions is not just a risk for them, they potentially endanger every person they encounter. If I need to go shopping and have obeyed all the rules and stayed home and wear a mask, I don’t find it refreshing that someone is putting me at greater risk because the rules didn’t apply to them and they got infected because they didn’t social distance and are now increasing my risk when they enter the supermarket. And those armed protesters in Michigan were hardly refreshing to the legislators who now have to strap on bullet proof vests in fear for their lives simply by showing up at work. 

Edited May 3, 2020 by TrueBlue4ever

[TrueBlue4ever]

12 minutes ago, J5V said:

Agreed. My only point here was that Sweden wasn't just going off on a tangent here. The data drove the decision at that time and as I said, they have made modifications since. They have studied these pandemics for a long time and their decisions were, after all, based on science, which was the insinuation.

I think the insinuation was that the science for this virus is not the same science that rules all other viruses in terms of infection rates or mortality rates, but fair point that they were not ignoring science. But it used to be “science” that the earth was flat or leeches were the best medical treatment, so old science may not be the best science as we evolve. 

[Mr Dee]

1 hour ago, J5V said:

The science behind the Swedish strategy
While the Prime Minister has drawn criticism from many for this stance, it’s actually data from the health authorities that is the driver. " https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidnikel/2020/03/30/why-swedens-coronavirus-approach-is-so-different-from-others/#739b22ce562b

^^dated article...March 30^^

Some Swedes have gotten quite sick. More than 2,650 have died. The country's COVID-19 death rate is 12.3%, roughly triple that of Sweden's Nordic neighbors, Finland and Norway. The Swedish case-fatality rate also surpasses some of the hardest-hit countries: Spain (11.5%), and the US (5.9%).

The actions that the Swedish government has taken are good and it perhaps makes the performance of Sweden's economy less bad than other economies,' said Jens Henriksson, CEO of the country's biggest mortgage lender Swedbank. April 23

JP Morgan has forecast that Sweden's economy will shrink by less than the eurozone average, but still with a 13.7 per cent contraction in the current quarter. 

That compares with a projected 17.3 per cent contraction for the euro area, 16.6 per cent for Germany and 21.4 per cent for France.   May 1st

Trägårdh said that while herd immunity is not "an explicit policy goal" for Sweden, "you know, it's there in the mix."

However, the World Health Organization warns that there's "not enough evidence" yet to guarantee people who get COVID-19 will be immune from re-infection, stressing that "no study" has yet evaluated the question.

https://www.businessinsider.com/sweden-coronavirus-strategy-explained-culture-of-trust-and-obedience-2020-4.      May 2

👁‍🗨It will be a long time before any relevant criteria can be analyzed with any degree of correctness, and even then, each country is different with very different circumstances.

I like what Frosty said “They sacrificed lives for economy, we sacrificed economy for lives.”

[J5V]

4 minutes ago, TrueBlue4ever said:

I think the insinuation was that the science for this virus is not the same science that rules all other viruses in terms of infection rates or mortality rates, but fair point that they were not ignoring science. But it used to be “science” that the earth was flat or leeches were the best medical treatment, so old science may not be the best science as we evolve. 

Fair points all around and with your issues with what has been going on in some circumstances. This thing is fairly fluid and there are still lots of unknowns. I apologise for being disingenuous with some of my comments however, lots of that going around and I am far from the worst in that regard. 

In reference to the economy I'm mostly referring to what's happening down South which cannot be ignored since our economies are entwined. There is significant data coming out of the U.S. that shows the economic damage to be immense and far worse than what is being reported. We have issues of our own. Places like Vancouver (COVID-19: City of Vancouver at risk of bankruptcy, says mayor) and Montreal (‘It’s unprecedented’: Montreal’s economy feels impact of COVID-19) are hurting badly and getting worse. We can't just keep throwing hundreds of billions of dollars at this thing. Where is that money coming from and how will it be replaced, taxes? How much damage are we asking ourselves and future generations of Canadians to recover from? 

As for rights, it is always the same, isn't it? Watch the steady erosion of our rights and freedoms as we trade them for security, whether from a gun or a virus. It always seems someone is there willing to ask us to give up a little more privacy, a little more freedom, in exchange for safety and security fuelled by a fear-inducing MSM. It's not the same as getting a speeding ticket, is it? On virtually every front our freedoms are being challenged and our ability to say something about it censored and labeled as conspiracy theories and/or hate speech. Someone is always offended by some else's freedoms so let's just take them all away, one by one, until no one is offended and groupthink rules supreme. 

One thing is for sure. This virus, and our reaction to it, is sure exposing a lot about what is wrong with our society so please forgive me if I find Sweden's approach to this thing ... refreshing.

[J5V]

54 minutes ago, TrueBlue4ever said:

I think the insinuation was that the science for this virus is not the same science that rules all other viruses in terms of infection rates or mortality rates, but fair point that they were not ignoring science. But it used to be “science” that the earth was flat or leeches were the best medical treatment, so old science may not be the best science as we evolve. 

Old science? Come on now. We're dealing in decisions made mere weeks ago about something mankind has been gathering data on for centuries. 

[17to85]

So the USA was heading towards a recession before covid anyway, but the biggest reason their economy is going to be ****** is  because the government isn't doing **** to help people or small businesses. 

Completely different approach to other countries. The economy will recover.

[FrostyWinnipeg]

Restrictions not lifting yet in Ontario, Kenora mayor warns as Manitobans flock to cottage country

 

Edited May 3, 2020 by FrostyWinnipeg