WHO Lauds Lockdown-Ignoring Sweden As a 'Model' For Countries Going Forward (nypost.com) 467
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The New York Post: The World Health Organization lauded Sweden as a "model" for battling the coronavirus as countries lift lockdowns -- after the nation controversially refused restrictions. Dr. Mike Ryan, the WHO's top emergencies expert, said Wednesday there are "lessons to be learned" from the Scandinavian nation, which has largely relied on citizens to self-regulate. "I think there's a perception out that Sweden has not put in control measures and just has allowed the disease to spread," Ryan told reporters. "Nothing can be further from the truth."
Ryan noted that instead of lockdowns, the country has "put in place a very strong public policy around social distancing, around caring and protecting people in long-term care facilities." "What it has done differently is it has very much relied on its relationship with its citizenry and the ability and willingness of its citizens to implement self-distancing and self-regulate," Ryan said. "In that sense, they have implemented public policy through that partnership with the population." He said the country also ramped up testing and had adequate capacity in hospitals to handle any outbreaks. "I think if we are to reach a new normal, Sweden represents a model if we wish to get back to a society in which we don't have lockdowns," Ryan said. Last month, more than 2,300 Swedish researchers penned a letter demanding the government enact stricter regulations. "Until we get a better idea of the situation, I think it is a good idea to close schools, restaurants and entertainment venues," said Olle Kampe, an immunology researcher at the Karolinska Institute, in March.
"[Sweden], which has a population of 10.3 million, has seen more than 20,300 cases and 2,462 deaths as of Thursday afternoon -- far higher than its Nordic neighbors, which implemented stricter containment measures," the report adds.
UPDATE (5/22/2020): 19 days later, Covid-19 deaths in Sweden "were the highest in Europe per capita in a rolling seven-day average," reports the Guardian, citing data from the scientific online publication Ourworldindata.com. And Sweden's death rate per million (376) was "far in advance of Norway's (44), Denmark's (96) and Finland's (55) — countries with similar welfare systems and demographics, but which imposed strict lockdowns..."
Ryan noted that instead of lockdowns, the country has "put in place a very strong public policy around social distancing, around caring and protecting people in long-term care facilities." "What it has done differently is it has very much relied on its relationship with its citizenry and the ability and willingness of its citizens to implement self-distancing and self-regulate," Ryan said. "In that sense, they have implemented public policy through that partnership with the population." He said the country also ramped up testing and had adequate capacity in hospitals to handle any outbreaks. "I think if we are to reach a new normal, Sweden represents a model if we wish to get back to a society in which we don't have lockdowns," Ryan said. Last month, more than 2,300 Swedish researchers penned a letter demanding the government enact stricter regulations. "Until we get a better idea of the situation, I think it is a good idea to close schools, restaurants and entertainment venues," said Olle Kampe, an immunology researcher at the Karolinska Institute, in March.
"[Sweden], which has a population of 10.3 million, has seen more than 20,300 cases and 2,462 deaths as of Thursday afternoon -- far higher than its Nordic neighbors, which implemented stricter containment measures," the report adds.
UPDATE (5/22/2020): 19 days later, Covid-19 deaths in Sweden "were the highest in Europe per capita in a rolling seven-day average," reports the Guardian, citing data from the scientific online publication Ourworldindata.com. And Sweden's death rate per million (376) was "far in advance of Norway's (44), Denmark's (96) and Finland's (55) — countries with similar welfare systems and demographics, but which imposed strict lockdowns..."
Lesson? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Lesson? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Nah. The lesson is, let people decide whether to self-isolate or be stupid enough to go out, get infected and die.
The Swedish model is basically to cull the idiots.
Re: (Score:3)
Unfortunately the idiots won't just infect themselves but also you when you go out once per week to shop for groceries.
Re: (Score:2)
Someone could be stupid enough to go out, but get lucky and not get infected, get infected and not die, or, worst case, show little/no symptoms and continue to go out.
Someone could self-isolate, but go to the outside world at some point (i.e. for food or medicine) and come in contact with one of the aforementioned stupid people and get infected and die from them.
Re:Lesson? (Score:4, Interesting)
No, that's exactly the opposite of what we want. I don't want my right to life curtailed by how many selfish assholes there are in my city / county / state, because as it turns out my city / county / state is filled with selfish assholes.
I'm all fine with the libertarian view when you only affect yourself. Viruses don't work like that - if you are infected and don't know it (super possible with this virus), you are trampling on others' right to life by continuing to go out like a selfish asshole. Even if I stay home as much as possible, I'm at risk every time I go out. If there's a bunch of fuckwits running around spreading this thing because they can't be bothered to stay home unless there's legal consequences, we are all at much higher risk.
What TFS is talking about is that Sweden doesn't have nearly the level of selfish asshole per capita that many other countries have, so not putting mandatory measures in place works. I doubt it would work in very many other countries though, and it absolutely will not work here in the US.
Re:Lesson? (Score:5, Insightful)
Pretty much all of us Swedish neighbours in our domestic debates on what to do about our lockdown rules agree that it's worse than that. Swedish culture has been for century at this point to pretend outward that they're really humanitarian while brutally culling the elements of their society they don't like outside the limelight. They were among the last to stop eugenic state programs for example, forcibly sterilizing women with "undesirable behaviour" for all the way into 1970s. And now they seem to be using this virus to cull the two current undesirable population groups: immigrants with clan-based culture who just keep raping and blowing things up and elderly who's numbers are vastly overstressing the wellfare system due to growth of their number in relation to working age people.
And they're quite successful at it, their death rates are over ten times ours and overwhelming majority of the dead come from aforementioned two population groups. All while Swedes get to continue to pretend to everyone who hasn't lived on their borders and doesn't know how their culture works to be humanitarian.
And to us Finns, Danes and Norwegians, this is just Swedes being Swedes. Nothing new.
Re: (Score:3)
their death rates are over ten times ours
No. Nordic countries range from 3-4% official death rate, while Sweden is around 12%. I'm not sure why Sweden is so much higher since their cases per 1mil is only around 60% higher, but they are not over ten times the death rate of their neighbors.
Re: (Score:3)
Meanwhile, Finland's response has been total social isolation for life. There is no objection to this within Finland, because this is already their normal culture.
Re:Lesson? (Score:4, Insightful)
Or maybe make your country more like Sweden. People have more trust in the government and feel like a part of society with a stake in their collective future. They have a strong social healthcare system that is well funded, and also strong social care for the elderly.
In countries where everyone is in it for themselves and doesn't trust the government (e.g. the UK and US) things have got very bad. They picked poor leaders and didn't fund the things they need to save them now.
Re:Lesson? (Score:5, Insightful)
Or maybe make your country more like Sweden.
It doesn't work that way. Not one bit. The summary flat-out states that a big part of this is the self-regulated behavior of the citizens. That is an aspect of culture, and culture is not something you legislate, litigate or otherwise make happen. That is the "personality" of the country which is determined by the behavior of the people as a collective, and that comes to be over many generations of people passing down behaviors, viewpoints, ideas, etc in that geographic region. So the fact that the WHO has touted Sweden as a model, because they haven't mandated lock-downs and still not had bad infection, is ridiculous. Essentially the people have voluntarily locked down and obeyed "guidelines" without threat of police enforcement, and you'd better believe that would not be the case in the majority of countries.
Re: (Score:3)
If you think that society only changes when the law forces it to... I mean it's usually the other way around isn't it?
Re: (Score:2)
What's the lesson ... "fill your country with Swedish people"?
This.
When the Swedish government tells Sweden that they should self isolate, limit the amount they go out, wash their hands frequently and avoid touching their face, a swede thinks "I should keep a safe sistance, limit the times I go out and not touch my face with unwashed hands".
Oh, in hindsight, we should all be Sweden. (Score:2)
Trying to be rational about the Swedish model (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Here is a better( and recent) article comparing Sweden to the other Scandinavian countries.
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/0... [cnn.com]
Given the population density it kind of makes sense to try but but as niffydude pointed out, It is worst for their population. They have far more cases then any other Scandinavian by a long shot. They look bad compared to Demark that has 5x the population density.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, people will die, whether you do nothing or place half the continent in strict lock-down. However, it's not about eradicating the disease by those means, it's about minimizing casualties until a vaccine is found (which by most estimates is at least a year away) and/or prevention of overstrain of the medical system.
You are talking about political dysfunction and continued importation. But an even greater factor will be public awareness. Yes, more people in Sweden were infected and died in comparison to o
Re:Trying to be rational about the Swedish model (Score:5, Informative)
The "South Korea" option gets taken off the table if you don't choose it immediately. If you don't, your testing program ends up chasing expanding number of infections and never catching up.
We've now done almost 50% more test per capita than South Korea, but those tests are chasing numbers that are going up almost as fast. We have administered 5.8 tests for every case found, South Korea 57.8. So in a sense, South Korea's program is 10x larger than ours *relative to the size of their problem*.
You don't have to keep up the level of isolation they have in New York for a *year*; you have to do it until the problem is small enough to manage.
Re: (Score:2)
The biggest thing we are missing is a population that will comply with the measures. We have seen at every level people yelling about the virus being a hoax, it not being dangerous, etc. We have asked people to wear masks and I would say at minimum 25% of people are not wearing them. We have asked people to self-isolate and we have seen people diagnosed with the disease still going out. Beyond everything else, it sounds like Swedes as a whole are actually listening and complying with what is being asked. I
Re: (Score:3)
New Zealand... you really think New Zealand isn't riding on the coattails of being a freaking island in the sea? Australia probably less so but still...
So tell me, how would Switzerland emulate New Zeland's success? Digg a moat around the country?
Re: Trying to be rational about the Swedish model (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Right now it is usually hijacked by emotional outbursts about "people are dying".
The death rates for various countries are cold, hard statistics
If only that was true. Statistics on death rates make it into the media only if there are sudden, unusual spikes. Meanwhile, most avoidable causes of death do not even raise eye-brows, as they trickle in over time. Thousands more of people dying each year from sepsis in your country than your neighboring country? Not getting prime time on TV. And hey, it would cost money to improve hospital hygiene, so let's rather not do it for better profits. Many people dying each year because less nurses need to attend
You need a compliant nation to start with (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm led to believe that Swedes are one of the more compliant nations on earth when it comes to their society and their government. Different nations have different histories, different attitudes and one of the reason the Swedes may have made it work is that they already believe their government has their best interests at heart. The French and Americans are notable for very publicly protesting and simply asking them nicely to keep away from each other and stay home may not have worked.
Here in the UK during the early weeks of the pandemic we were asked to practice social distancing and stay home, we had the choice. The first weekend saw a huge number of people simply ignoring the advice and like naughty children, if we weren't going to do what we were told when asked nicely then "nanny" would have to step and make us do what we're told. 7 weeks into lockdown and still looking at another 4 weeks at home!
Re:You need a compliant nation to start with (Score:4)
It's not compliance, it's because they are invested in their society and willing to self sacrifice in the knowledge that it will ultimately benefit everyone, themselves included.
The UK is very much a "me first" country. Everyone thinks they are exceptional. So they do one of two things, they either ignore the lockdown or they try to enforce it on everyone else, usually by shaming them on social media or calling the police.
Call first (Score:3)
And now for something completely the same (Score:4, Interesting)
Again, this is about not overwhelming hospitals, causing needless deaths. It'a not about stopping spread per se.
Given economic dynamism is essential for progress, and long-term improvements to the quality and length of life depend on that, nations that achieve herd immunity fastest and get back to business are the best solution.
Preening, asslike* politicians of all nations attacking each other over total deaths, independent of the hospital problem, are the enemies of rationality and health.
* asinine
Hilarious (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't think it would work here (Score:5, Insightful)
As has been mentioned earlier, like their Nordic neighbors, Sweden appears to have a high percentage of the population who trust their government and believes that the government is acting in the best interests of the citizens.
Here in the United States, that is not the case. Many of us believe hat our government is full of lying amoral corporate whores who would pimp out their grandchildren if they thought they could get away with it. Many others seem to view our current President as a virtual deity incapable of error. Coupled with the national ethos of "rugged individualism," I for one am surprised that our current situation isn't much worse.
Re: (Score:3)
Also, wouldn't "rugged individualism" not only be entirely compatible with social distancing, but favor it?
Re:I don't think it would work here (Score:4, Interesting)
Also, wouldn't "rugged individualism" not only be entirely compatible with social distancing, but favor it?
And it does favor it, actually. People in farm country aren't having quite as much trouble staying 6+ feet apart.
Trying to figure out why people are trying to blame those dang gun-totin' bible thumping conservatives of ... NYC and Detroit?
Braking or "Hammer and Dance" (Score:2)
Are you guys still certain... (Score:2, Interesting)
...that WHO is worth funding?
I mean, literally, Sweden has the highest death rate across its peer-states. Their praising it is DEMONSTRABLY wrong.
Works with educated, level-headed people. (Score:2)
Sweden is good at the former. Plus heat and a lot of sunlight do very much work against the latter. So much so, that it infuences generations after it, as everyone who or whose parents moved to a country much hotter/sunnier or colder/darker than his birthplace / childhood home can attest to.
A cooler temprament has its advantages as well as disadvantages. (I like the social closeness of southerners and dislike the cold distanced nature of northerners, but also like the rational level-headedness of northerner
Coulda (Score:2)
The reality of Sweden (Score:4, Interesting)
I am a Swede who left the country a few months ago. The Swedish system is not well funded at all. The health care is not what it used to be either - the population has grown some 20% in just 15 years whereas the health care system most definitely has not grown 20%. The tax base also has not grown 20%.
The Swedish "model" is inaction. How so many have failed to grasp that is beyond me. Not doing anything is not a model for crying out loud.
Re: (Score:3)
According to OECD data from 2017 Sweden comes in 6:th when it comes spending money on healthcare, get 9:th place according to CIA when it comes to infant mortality, and 11:th place in life expectancy according to UNDP. The USA get first place when it comes to spending, 57:th in infant mortality, and 38:th in life expectancy. Germany comes in 5:th place in spending, 19:th in infant mortality and 27:th in life expectancy. Norway and Sweden are rather similar.
Re:What matters is the end result (Score:5, Informative)
Re:What matters is the end result (Score:4, Informative)
" If 100 people need ventilators than the fatality rate is about 3%. "
88% of people put on ventilators die, so a miracle-cure this is not.
Re: (Score:2)
Not in any of the nordic countries. Where does that 88% stat come from?
Re:What matters is the end result (Score:5, Informative)
HO Lauds Lockdown-Ignoring Sweden As a 'Model' (Score:3)
Well that's going to blow up a lot of talking points.
As far as ventilators go, ny the time you are put on one, regardless of the reason, you are in big trouble.
And even in the best of circumstances, they are pretty damned hard on the body.
Re: What matters is the end result (Score:4)
One was touted as a miracle cure with no proof, the other is a known quantity stop gap measure.
Analogy: 1. I have a miracle device that will teleport you to the moon, very few people have seen it work but trust me it works. 2. We can go to the moon with rockets, it's expensive and dangerous but it can get you there.
Which of these statements requires more corroborating evidence?
Re:What matters is the end result (Score:5, Interesting)
I guess once hospitalised, there's a big difference between 1 on 1 ICU care (even without the ventilator), and shared, stressed care from an overwhelmed health system. That's one major difference between the >3% death rates seen in some countries, and 1% in others. I'm going to assume that Sweden has a good health system to start with, so they decided they didn't need to be so harsh to flatten the curve to keep it manageable.
And people listened to the government, instead of piling into the pubs.
And they didn't hold major sporting events with huge crowds like Cheltenham Races in the UK, or importing infected fans from an already-critical Madrid for a football match. And London is a very public transport oriented city, and that is a major transmission vector - earlier lockdown in London would have helped greatly.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:What matters is the end result (Score:5, Insightful)
Sweden has a good health system, and more important, they have almost universal access to it, less of a problem with poverty, people that are able to stay home sick without losing their jobs or running out of money, and more social cohesion so that many people cooperate with distancing measures voluntarily instead of protesting them.
Sorry for replying to myself to fix the formatting. Should drink more coffee before hitting the submit button.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That's not a luxury for many countries....including the US.
Re:What matters is the end result (Score:5, Informative)
Where are you even getting that "homogeneous" talking point? I see that any time people are discussing socialist countries, "Oh, well they're HOMOGENEOUS so, you know, nobody worries about helping those other, bad sort of people. We could never do that here!"
But 24.1% of all Swedish citizens have a foreign background. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Sorry, if almost a quarter of your population is foreign, that's not particularly homogeneous.
Re: (Score:3)
God, isn't that just disgusting? I hope they fix their diversity problem quickly.
Re:What matters is the end result (Score:5, Informative)
You're talking about Sweden as if it's all roses and rainbows. Their deathrate is roughly 10x that of their neighbours Norway, Finland, Estonia, and 5x that of Denmark, all of which is atrocious since they are all very similar rich nations with great healthcare systems.
Re: (Score:3)
They decided to report as much of deaths as possible related to comorbidities. They've already excluded people over 70 years from the ICU so that it doesn't look like they've run out of ICU capacity. What they can't lie about (at least that easily) are the total deaths in the country, but since those will be reported with a delay of up to 2 weeks, they will have a chance to spread the disease further until people will have hard proof of that. And from that to any measures to work it will take at least a mon
Re: (Score:3)
That too (I am not sure by homogeneous). But there are other smaller countries with various types of political systems that haven't done so well.
However yes, it is easier to inform and better cohesion with a smaller population. As well make democracy more fair
I wasn't implying that the Swedish model will work for the United States on the whole. But it may work in many states.
Re:What matters is the end result (Score:5, Interesting)
24.1% of Swedish citizens are foreign. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
And Sweden has 10 million citizens. So you're saying any large American city, and many states, could easily go socialist? Good to know!
Re:What matters is the end result (Score:5, Insightful)
Do you think at all before you post?
North Dakota is 87 percent white, lol. And it has less than a million citizens. People's Democratic Socialist North Dakota, here we come!
https://worldpopulationreview.... [worldpopul...review.com]
South Dakota is 84% white. https://worldpopulationreview.... [worldpopul...review.com]
Wyoming is 91% white. https://worldpopulationreview.... [worldpopul...review.com]
Idaho is 90% white. https://worldpopulationreview.... [worldpopul...review.com]
I could go on, Oregon 84% white: https://worldpopulationreview.... [worldpopul...review.com], Kansas, same: https://worldpopulationreview.... [worldpopul...review.com]
Boy, I bet you feel dumb right about now! And yes, there are plenty more states with similar demographics. Idiot.
Re:What matters is the end result (Score:4, Informative)
What the hell does "white" have to do with "culture?" Swedes, Germans, French, Brits, Swiss, Italians... all the same thing, right? No differences at all.
Re:What matters is the end result (Score:5, Insightful)
Sorry, but "socialism" has a specific meaning, and it is not merely, "being nice to your fellow man." People misusing the word does not change what it means, any more than people misusing the word democracy changes what that really means.
Re: (Score:2)
closer to 100% of people not put on ventilators when they need them die, so having a ventilator available when you need one is a good idea.
Re: (Score:2)
no, but it means that over the threshold of available icus a 12% of critical cases will survive, whereas without enough ventilators it's certain death (just playing along with that simplistic 88% number). that flatly increases the death rate and depending on the fuck up could be a huge number of lives. we would also have to add the death count from all other causes apart from covid-19 that won't get treatment once hospitals are full with covid-19 patients.
also, delaying the curve means that new research, pr
Re: (Score:3)
Right, but also including deaths caused directly or indirectly by lockdown.
What deaths do you mean? I can't imagine that there would be anything on the scale of how many we are losing to the virus.
Also, if you want to add those deaths then you should subtract the lives saved from vehicle collisions involving injuries and fatalities dropping by 50% after the lockdown [latimes.com]. Then there is the obvious lowering of workplace deaths and injuries. Oh, and what about the other communicable diseases that are also being reduced by the social distancing and lockdowns. I'm sure if we put our heads
Re: (Score:3)
We're seeing plenty of hospitals with little to do, wards empty as treatment is cancelled due to the virus. So people with cancer, or other ailments are not being treated, most of them being cancelled or postponed.
Also places like accident are almost empty, as people are off work, not travelling, and not going out and getting so drunk they end up fighting or falling over.
But I suppose it has saved lives, maybe if we just killed everyone then there'd be no more deaths. It seems we're missing the whole point
Re:What matters is the end result (Score:4, Insightful)
Nobody has suggested banning cars. Please stay on topic.
But yes, "znrt" above wrotes: "states have the obligation to save as many people as possible, end of story" - and if that was true, and lives can be saved by banning cars, then this is exactly that suggestion.
People seem to voluntarily turn a blind eye on the many many decisions made every day that sacrifice lives for the benefit of other aspects - most prominently fun and profits. Every mildly risky leisure activity would need to be prohibited if "saving lives" was such an absolute goal to follow.
Re: (Score:3)
now i will postulate: states have the obligation to save as many people as possible, end of story.
Right, but also including deaths caused directly or indirectly by lockdown.
You missed the 'as many as possible' part I think...where possible isn't absolute, but relative.
Looking at the problem purely focusing on people who need a ventilator is also misleading. With CV19 (and most other diseases) there are degrees of sick between 'asymptomatic' and 'ICU on ventilator or die' which require medical care. If the medical industry is overwhelmed, those middle-ground cases and many otherwise treatable illnesses can be deadly.
While unfortunate, the number of lock-down related deaths n
Re: (Score:3)
Screaming expletives at people is not how you win a debate, and wishing death upon them just makes you look like a crazy person. You may wish to seek professional help-I hear lots of therapists are using telemedicine these days. That said, to answer your question with the voice of reason, "direct" deaths due to lockdown are probably minimal to non-existent. "Indirect" deaths are definitely a thing-from people who have non-emergent medical care postponed or the reported increase in domestic violence, for
Re:What matters is the end result (Score:4, Insightful)
By the time they are on ventilators they are in a bad place already. Because they are unable to breath on their own.
So if the first person is correct a fatality rate of 3% that is really good for the critical condition the person is in.
If you 88% rate is correct still that is better than 100%
No one in the medical community calls ventilators cure. It is a treatment to keep people alive while their lungs heal.
Re: What matters is the end result (Score:3)
So if you were one of those people who were so close to death that you had to be put on a ventilator, you would opt out because you only had a 1 in 10 chances of surviving? And you would think it's totally OK if the doc said they have one for you but are saving it for someone who might need it more?
If you think that, then kudos to you for possibly giving someone else that chance. But do you expect that others should do the same? Personally, I want the ventilator unless there is someone already right ther
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Unless you have a graduated approach to distancing that's extremely timing sensitive though ... do it too early and you'll just get stuck at the beginning of the curve.
The only good reason to use the extremely expensive lockdowns we have in place in most of the world, is as part of a total containment strategy. For instance to buy time to organize, increase RNA testing capability, making contact tracing apps available, get daily infections down to the point you have enough capacity to trace, etc. Which seem
Re: (Score:2)
Getting "stuck at the beginning of the curve" is what you want, knowing that you will inevitably end up with the majority of the population infected, no matter how much you try. Taking mitigation measures from the very beginning is what allows you to do testing, contact tracing, and isolation of actually infected people, which allows you to
Re: (Score:3)
If you're stuck at the beginning of the curve you don't get to the point where the majority has been infected in an meaningful time-frame.
Counting up to millions of population with thousands of infections a day takes too long. People will get tired of your social distancing and empty hospital wards.
Re: What matters is the end result (Score:3)
Achieving natural herd immunity while keeping the curve flat takes years. Do the math. The vaccine is your beter option.
You do want to be stuck at the beginnig if you have frew dozens/hundreds of cases to make contact tracing possible. Then you can do containment and still avoid a full-fledged lockdown.
Otherwise you're in mitigation mode, where a full lockdown is usually unavoidable.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That was the theory but in practice 'flatten the curve' does not seem to be a universally applicable concept.
Places like NYC were hit hard, but even they did not run out of hospital space, in fact much of the additional capacity put in place went unused. Now the system certainly was stressed there and its hard to say if not locking down would have made it worse. Probably would have, but we also know there is a possibility that because of the high reliance on public transit and decisions like possibly sendi
Re: (Score:3)
While you make some valid points, you then jump to comparing the US and Swedish medical systems which couldn't be more different.
You also dismiss Italy as an outlier instead of a case and point for how a lockdown failure DOES cause horrific results...from my experience it's EXACTLY why most big, dense cities implemented a lockdown.
There's a lag time between infection and hospitalization - so if you wait until the hospitals are almost overwhelmed and then implement a lockdown, you're going to be too late. T
Re: (Score:2)
The same number of people will die, whether it is all at once or spread over a year.
if the hospital is full then a different number of people will die.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And I'll bet that 1.4% of the hospitalized are very thankful that they didn't have to participate in a mortality lottery to continue being alive, because the rest of us could take on some hardship.
It's easy to talk in abstract numbers, but I'll bet that every single person that is advocating for the lifting of lockdowns "because it's only X people or Y percent we're talking about" would have a massive change of opinion if they are included in that number of X people, or Y percent.
Re: (Score:3)
And I'll bet that 1.4% of the hospitalized are very thankful that they didn't have to participate in a mortality lottery to continue being alive, because the rest of us could take on some hardship.
It's easy to talk in abstract numbers, but I'll bet that every single person that is advocating for the lifting of lockdowns "because it's only X people or Y percent we're talking about" would have a massive change of opinion if they are included in that number of X people, or Y percent.
If every single person counts as much as you imply, then there is no reason to not also shut down the economy every time a flu virus goes around.
When you look at it honestly, you will find that all the time decisions are made that _do_ weigh lost lives of some unlucky individuals lower than "hardships for the rest of us". Like when allowing cars to drive fast on a certain road.
Re: (Score:3)
dmay34 is right -- death rates go up if the number of active cases exceeds the capacity of the healthcare system to deliver.
There's also another point to shelter-in-place and other restrictions: they buy you time. Part of the calculus of keeping them on is a cost benefit trade off between the economic hit you're taking and the additional preparations you are making: stockpiling PPE test kits and other supplies; setting up tests stations and contact tracing.
Of course if you're *not* making effective use of
Re: (Score:2)
Can we really do mass testing in that area?
At least here in the US, the answer is still "absolutely not." Remember back in March when Trump was talking about the drive-up testing and how it was going to be wonderful for both workers and patients? Yeah, the biggest city in Ohio just got it's first one, and it's only operating on thursdays and fridays by appointment.
The capacity just isn't there, which means that we cannot do proper testing and tracing, which means we are heading for a second wave and worse
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
When comparing CoVID to the flu, understand that we (US) have more confirmed deaths from CoVID in a month than estimated deaths from flu in a typical season, and that's with the distancing measures in place.
If we get to a time where, like with the
Re: (Score:3)
Flu in the US is responsible for 2% of all deaths (figures for 2017). That's quite low, in 1957 there was a flu outbreak that killed between 1 and 2 million people.
Covid seems to be around 2% so far.
But the original covid strain (SARS) had a mortality rate of 10%. And MERS (remember that?) had 33%. Ebola was 50% in Africa, but they say itg would have been only (haha) 25% if it spread to the West.
So it could have been a lot, lot worse. Apocalyptic zombie future type worse. SARS and MERS didn't kill off the w
Re:What matters is the end result (Score:5, Interesting)
Sweden is currently at 256 deaths/1M which isn't great - especially for a low population density country - as the text says, it's poor compared to Norway and Finland. USA is under 200 at the moment, but is clearly going to double in the next month. Sweden's daily death rate per population isn't anything to sing about either.
The Swedish policy also required a good rapport and respect between the citizenry and the government, and a functioning health service. The fact the people are self isolation in general has probably saved a lot of people there.
At ~800 new cases a day, the new cases figures are also comparable to the UK on a per population basis, a place which is seen as having had a poor response and outcome, but obviously has some very dense urban areas. However the UK is having a death-party in care homes due to lack of PPE in these places, and testing has only just ramped up to reasonable amounts.
Seems Sweden's policy is a slow burn through the population, let those who will die, die, and wait for a vaccine, or at least better treatment practices.
Strong lockdowns are certainly for when it looks that cases will run riot, hence the lockdowns seen so far. If those places had put light restrictions in place earlier, they may have avoided the lockdowns, or at least such a long lockdown.
I think I'll side with the informed researchers on this one. I hope I'm wrong.
Re: What matters is the end result (Score:2)
I am not so sure about a "slow burn" through the population. Let's hope that happens, but plotting deaths/infections over time, not only is the first derivative positive (getting worse), the second derivative is also positive (accelerating at getting worse).
Re:What matters is the end result (Score:4, Insightful)
In sweden all dead are tested for COVID-19. Dead at hospitals, at nursing homes and that died at other location. If COVID-19 was in the system, they are accounted for.
In other countries it is different. Some count only people who died while they were beeing treated for COVID-19 for example.
And the timeline is also different depending on different countries.
And the current infection rate / capita
And the
So this in no way shows Swedens numbers as better then any other, just that it is hard to compare currently.
When this is over we will have a better understanding of how different countries handled this. And we should be able to compare apples to apples. My guess is that Sweden will have the same numbers as all other countries where the hospital system was not overloaded.
Re: (Score:3)
There are still a lot of statistical flukes, so I find it dubious that WHO draws any conclusions this early.
Looking at it from a neighbouring country (Denmark) Sweden's policy seems uncertain. Due to difference in testing the number of confirmed cases are not that helpful. I have been following the number of deaths since it roughly started.:
Sweden had ~2 times more deaths at the start (expected - the population is twice that of Denmark).
After a few weeks Sweden had 3 times more.
After a few weeks more Sweden
Re: (Score:3)
The UK is having a death-party in care homes, because that's where all the people who are about to die are. The lockdown approach implemented for care homes don't seem to have done much good - carehomes are as isolated as you can get, locked down as fully as you can get without laser defence towers, and still the patients are dying. I don't think its a lack of PPE for the carers that's the problem.
I don't think its as bad as reported on the media which seems tohave some axe to grind about everything the gov
Re: (Score:2)
There are some problems with your statement.
1. Helping the medical community to cope, will help save lives. As they have resources to better care for people. When the medical infrastructure is saturated, they have to fall into triage mode. That means some people get care and some do not. If this illness is treated and monitored early you have a better chance of making it out.
2. Distancing lowers the probability of catching the illness. So the more distance is like having more dice to roll all ones on. Let
Re:WHO is a joke (Score:5, Insightful)
If you want to compare Swede with its neighboring countries, do so when the pandemic is over - that is what ultimately counts.
Re:WHO is a joke (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Italy's health system is crap though and Sweden isn't as polluted as northern Italy... so comparing them is rather pointless.
Also considering the fact that mortality statistics are absoklute shit currently, I just don't see where Sweden is supposed to be going wrong.
I am still wating for someone to debunk (as opposed to defame it) Ioannidis' study.
Re:WHO is a joke (Score:4, Informative)
the area under a "flattened" curve can well be the same (or higher) than under a higher but shorter curve.
How could a flattened curve have higher total deaths? You'll have roughly the same number of total cases in either event (a given fraction of the population), and the same proportion of critical cases, but a flattened curve that avoids hitting healthcare limits is certainly going to have less deaths. And with luck, a treatment or vaccine may become available in time, cutting off the tail of longer curves completely. Whereas higher & shorter curves have less time to find a treatment, and much more likelihood of hitting ICU and PPE limits.
Re:WHO is a joke (Score:5, Interesting)
But what will the numbers be in 18 months time ? Sweden might have had more deaths now, some 6 weeks in, but I suspect that a greater percentage of the Swedish population is now immune -- assuming that catching & recovering from cv-19 gives some immunity. That will reduce the R rate so fewer will catch it. They will be able to keep their economy in better shape -- good as a poor economy is a health risk.
In 18 months time will other countries have caught up with today's the Swedish death rate ?
We will only know how well the Swedish 'experiment' compares to other countries when this is well over in a few years time.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
On the other hand it's a lot better than many countries that tried lockdown such as the UK and Italy. The UK is probably the worst in the world now.
More over it seems like lockdown isn't a very good option for some countries. The US is a notable example where people are simply refusing it do it, literally taking up arms to demand it is lifted. In the UK a lot of people are dying because of the lockdown itself, due to postponed medical treatment, suspended services that they rely on, isolation and poverty.
Be
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
On the other hand it's a lot better than many countries that tried lockdown such as the UK and Italy.
... or France or the US. All of these countries opted for "the worst of both approaches", meaning no measures in the very beginning when this could have bought time to prepare, but damaging lock-downs when it was to late already, now hitting the economy hard.
The US adds to that another stupidity, a crap health system which provides well only for a few wealthy and piss poor for everyone else, and this combination will ensure "America First" with regards to people dying from Covid-19.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course the death rate is much higher...at this point in time. I think we should talk about this again at the end of the year because it seems premature to compare these numbers at the moment. As far as I understand, the lockdowns are only meant to prevent the medical systems from collapsing like what happened in Italy and France causing people to die just because they couldn't be treated at all. Almost everyone will eventually get infected at some point and the people that would die from it are the ones
Re:WHO is a joke (Score:5, Insightful)
I was initially concerned, but I now start to see the point.
Other countries that have a strikt lockdown, will have to open up, and that will lead to a second wave.
There is also secondary effects from a lock down that will kill in the longer run, cancer patients not operated, poverty caused by economic failure etc.
The Swedes LockDown Light version will be able to work for a longer time, without totally wrecking havoc in the economy.
The fact that Swedes are following the recommendations voluntarily, is also a key factor.
What we are seeing is the difference of keeping your logical cool, or panicking.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Counterpoint: Anybody who talks about who's right and who's wrong at this stage of the pandemic is acting prematurely
We won't know what was better until 2021 or 2022
The piper hasn't been paid yet (Score:2)
Those death counts are incomplete. By shutting down the economy in unscientific ways nations have manufactured a crisis and willingly created unemployment. Mass unemployment quickly results in poverty. Poverty results in poor access to healthcare, healthy food and often inspires poor lifestyle choices. Poverty leads to despair which far too often leads to drugs, alcohol abuse and suicide. Poverty kills.
https://www.homelesshub.ca/res... [homelesshub.ca]
Direct link
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p... [nih.gov]
https://soapboxie.com/social- [soapboxie.com]
Re:The piper hasn't been paid yet (Score:4, Insightful)