Yes but can't you see the dangers of how Sweden let people live free? - MI cannot allow such recklessness. People might die!

Oh wait. ..

Remember when the shut-down and anti-social distancing was so our hospitals wouldn't get over-run...

I said this in the other thread, when all is said and done, science always wins.

Now I “don’t want to find anything good there”...:confused:

I can find plenty of good things in Sweden but their response to Covid ain’t one of them. They are a relatively tiny country that could have squashed the outbreak almost completely with a short, total lock down. Instead, they let it spread unchecked and they thinned out their population a little.

Clearly, the thing to do next time, (there will be a next time), is to reinstate the pandemic task force based in China that the current administration dismantled and maybe even beef it up a little. You know, the one tasked with identifying, tracing and containing new dangerous viruses? That one.

Did you bother reading the article? They reached herd immunity without societal lock down and still posted lower per capita death rates than many jurisdictions that are admired for having done a great job [of violating people's rights and destroying many businesses].

I'm thinking that I can start some classy threads of my own:

New York Did It Wrong

New Jersey Did It Wrong

Massachusetts Did It Wrong

Connecticut Did It Wrong

Spain Did It Wrong

England Did It Wrong

Belgium Did It Wrong

Italy Did It Wrong

I wonder why no one is starting such threads.

I mean they all seem very concerned about Sweden doing it wrong.

Yet SOME HOW NOT concerned about the other places that had more death per population.

hmmm...

Could it be that they are royally butt-hurt that Sweden didn't follow along with masking and closing schools and businesses, like good little followers?

It seems like we might not have done so bad after all. Lockdown-states that were having very few cases in the beginning are now exposed to same issues after lifting the lockdowns.

Even Australia, heralded as "good example" has problems with contagion flaring up.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8613559/Swedens-daily-coronavirus-case-increases-lower-Victoria-theres-Stage-4-lockdown.html

That being said, I still stand that Swedish approach would not be applicable in US due to massive differences in mentality, health care, obesity etc. I am able to work from home and you are able to stay at home with 90% pay if you have slightest symptoms, no questions asked. People do distance and there are very very few Karens debating whether distancing is wrong or not.

We did very wrong when it comes to nursing homes though.

Has it been established that there is herd immunity for cv19?

Herd immunity or not, something is definitely having effect. Number of cases are bottoming despite no lockdowns, no face masks and lots of people out in the summer heat.

Daily deaths are averaging about 1 (one) person for last two weeks:

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

^^^ what he said ^^^

With no lock down and near zero death rate, they appear to have reached herd immunity until otherwise proven to not be the case.

I'll just leave this here:

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-08-11/san-quentin-coronavirus-herd-immunity-covid-19

Funny, the example they use for their argument against "herd immunity" can simultaneously be used as an argument against mandated "lock downs", lol...

Yep.

methinks the author does not understand that herd immunity is also a function... Let me put it this way; the percentage of population needing immunity goes up as the population is pushed together. (like in a prison)

The whole model is based on opportunity (or lack thereof) for the virus to find a new host. Proximity to infectable is key to the speed of the virus spreading.

According to San Quentin mortality rate (767 people dying out of every 100,000 persons), Sweden should have around 76 thousand dead by now. We have 5000.
And average age is 82 years. Most of dead are elderly in nursing homes and african immigrants who perhaps had hard time understanding preventive measures.

Our damned masks, social distancing, working from home, constantly wiping your hands with sanitizer, and shutting down all social events has prolonged the effects of this virus. It MAY have kept a spike from happening, but overall, there will probably be more deaths from all these safety measures over a much longer period.

They flattened the curve, but the curve is still very active, and will continue .

Perhaps. But it is keeping hospitals from being overwhelmed to the point of refusing admissions and will keep more of us alive when a vaccine is available

With the great inconvenience of doing the right thing, masks and being sanitary, it’s good you didn’t choose to become a surgeon because your life would be hell.

:rolleyes:

Just because something is greatly inconvenient does not make it the right thing.

Clearly Sweden has demonstrated that here.

During the 1918 pandemic people believed the inconvenient science of dogs spreading the virus. If families didn't With the great inconvenience of doing the right thing, kill their pet dog(s) someone else would. ...With the great inconvenience of doing the right thing,

And no, dogs were not the spreaders of the virus any more than a door handle.

Sweden's GDP still dropped 8.6% in the second quarter. Lower than many others bit still a significant drop.

We succeeded in flattening the curve. Hospital admissions are up once again because, well, we are once again allowing elective surgeries. There is now room in our hospitals to do that. In other words, we have achieved the originally stated goals of all of the lockdowns. I think too many people have lost sight of that as the narrative has been constantly changing. We are now using far different justifications for the continued lockdowns. So, yes, while I agree with the original premise - that of flattening the curve, the seriousness of this virus, and all of the medically justifiable reasons for our initial lockdown strategies - we are now past all of that. It's becoming obvious that here in the U.S., at least, we are well past those medical justifications and have now moved on to other motivations for keeping the fear alive.

It's time to move on, put this behind us - understanding that we are no longer in any danger of overwhelming our medical system - and let the chips fall where they may. We will almost definitely see one last surge, but that surge will be well within the capacity of our medical system to absorb, especially if we put another hold on elective surgeries to do so.

I agree. The initial goal is no longer the goal. We still need to be diligent and watch for areas that could be overwhelmed but those should be localized restrictions and not huge areas.