It is really too soon to say. It is not too soon to say, "Sweden did it wrong" is a foolish thing to say.

Ah ya... No. :rolleyes:

Foolish is as foolish does. Or lacks comprehension.

If you had read my follow up post, you would have understood why I came up with the title. Must be asking too much. Need to keep it more simplistic in the future. Know you audience.

Why you came up with the title?

Here is what you said:
Bolded the operative part for ya

IOW, Tobra is spot on.

The differences in outcomes are much larger than what can be attributed to what Sweden did (or didn't do).

Concluding that Sweden's approach has been an utter failure was/is ridiculous.

Sure, you can cherry pick and compare Sweden's death per million to Norway's (564 vs 47 per million)

But then we can compare NY State to Vermont (1679 vs 90 per million) -they border each other like Norway and Sweden,

Are you seeing the point? New York and Vermont had pretty much the same shut down policies, yet a huge difference in outcomes.

There is no correlation to mask wearing or shut-downs. Hell, even Norway reopened their schools after a couple of weeks.

No, Norway didn’t reopen schools after a couple of weeks. It was May 11th. Right now Sweden is «hoping» for a large second wave in Norway to prove themselves right. Well, they have a head start at about 5400 corpses more than us.

While their economy has taken just as large a hit as the rest of the Nordic, they have been pleading that Norwegians can enter the border territories so they can sell cheap alcohol, tobacco, soda and meat to Norwegians. And now one of those areas was opened - so let’s see how it goes. Also, thousands of Norwegians have been vacationing in Spain, which was tagged as a Red zone, so I’m a little worried too about that second wave too...

Norway reopened schools after a couple of months then. The larger point being that there is no correlation... Schools in the States have been shuttered indefinitely and our Covid numbers are much higher.

By the way, Why would so many Norwegians be vacationing in Spain in the summer? Summers are stunning in Norway.

You’re right, Spain in the winter makes a lot more sense.

Yeah, summer is nice in Norway, but the weather is extremely unstable and unpredictable. You could get 30 degrees and sun, or you can get 10 degrees and rain. Almost in the same day.

About 1 of 5 Norwegians go to Spain during the year. Most in the summer/fall.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/sweden/

Sweden is looking good.

And so is Wyoming.

Yes, comparing Wyoming to Sweden is dumb. Same as trying to compare Sweden to other countries.

For the record....
https://twitter.com/malkusm/status/1289553999968874498

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EeVqhxXX...g&name=900x900

"Slowing" the spread insures more people get infected and the economic pain lasts much longer. Not to mention the methods used violate everyone's constitutional rights.

Sweden did the right thing AND preserved civil rights. We now live in an unaccountable technocracy.

So true. So sad.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Appreciate the bold but in your haste to prove how wrong I am you failed to read above
“If you had read my follow up post, you would have understood why I came up with the title.”

I did not say, In my original post, but in my follow-up post. Hence thank you for proving my point my about comprehension.

So here is my follow-up post since looking it up was evidently too much effort...

Post #80, “The purpose of this thread was a counterpoint to the initial equally dubious assertion that Sweden’s approach was a great success. All we really know is that Sweden’s initial appearance of success was a mirage. How they ultimately fair compared to like Scandinavia countries, only time will tell.”

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1596430728.jpg

If you compute death rate in Sweden compared to infections, Sweden has over a 7% Mortality rate compared to a world mortality rate of around 4%. Sweden is doing it right if it means effectively killing off a higher proportion of those infected. If you are talking about the US economy being down the tubes because we didn’t ignore the virus when it first appeared here, 150,000 dead would have been peanuts in comparison. If we don’t hit 200,000 by October using half-@$$ed controls I’ll be very surprised. So what is a fair level of GDP savings compared to ignoring the virus and say having theoretically 500,000 dead now as a result?

If usa has same death rate as Sweden, we would have 200,000 dead now.

I suppose in theory, but not likely in reality.

Sweden, in round numbers, has had 5700 deaths.

But around 4,700 of those deaths were of people who were strictly “sheltering in place” (stuck in nursing homes).

So of the 10 million others, who were not under lockdown or “shelter in place” order (i.e., the vast majority of their population), there were only 1,000 deaths.

Like NYC, Sweden had an issue with how they handled their nursing home situation. Part of it is natural, because those in nursing homes naturally have a lot of comorbidities, and also are very elderly and statistically close to death (I saw a stat that said even before Covid the chance of surviving in a nursing home for 1 year was something like 20%).

But in any event, maybe Sweden could have done better with their nursing homes (but maybe not, or not much better?). But outside of nursing homes, which represents the vast majority of society, they seem to have done quite well.

So using just math with no context, Sweden would show that sheltering in place kills.

4700 of the dead in Sweden were sheltering in place.
1000 of the dead were not sheltering in place.
Therefore sheltering in place kills, you’re almost 5 times likely to die from Covid if you shelter in place.

No, infecting elderly with existing co-morbidities kills. Sheltering or not.
Re: Swedish approach. It might have worked or might not, we will know in few years when all excess deaths are counted and eventual second wave have passed.

Whether Swedish approach would work in US is another topic. Probably not.