Albion Dan
Banned
- Thread starter
- #41
Yep. They’re totally screwed long term in my opinion.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Sweden’s Coronovirus strategy will soon be the worlds
- Thread starter Albion Dan
- Start date
Yep. They’re totally screwed long term in my opinion.
Stockholm Syndrome
Member
- Jan 5, 2011
- 37
Just read the results from a major antibody study in Sweden. Major disapointment. Only 7.3% of Stockholms population had developed antibodies three weeks ago. Not going into lockdown appears to have been the right descision. Hardy anybody appears to have been infected even though restaurants have remained open, etc. Is the virus not as infectious as believed? Or are the people of Stockholm just good att social distancing and washing their hands?
Stockholm Syndrome
Member
- Jan 5, 2011
- 37
New news, acording to the authorities 7,3% antibodies a coupe of weeks ago probably means that 20-25% of Stockholms population is or has been infected at present. So if you belive them the swedish strategy is working. The population is slowly becoming infected but the health service is has not yet been overwhelmed.
I read something on another forum that suggested elderly people reaching hospital with covid symptoms were going straight to palliative morphine based care. I cant find anything to confirm that as true though. Have you heard anything along those lines ?
Stockholm Syndrome
Member
- Jan 5, 2011
- 37
No I havn`t heard anything like that.
Machiavelli
Well-known member
Machiavelli
Well-known member
From what I can see, if this is the case, the case % in Sweden is an outlier. Most recent reports are suggesting that, globally, the % case rate is far lower than previously thought.
Went home to my mom two weeks ago to celebrate my birthday etc.
Train trip went well - no one (except familys) are allowed to sit next to eachother. But then I went to a (the club itself was so-so regulated) after party with 300 students in a very tight dorm kitchen. Few days later first covid-cases was detected at the care home where my mother is working, and that same day she was coughing and sneezing a lot.
I think it had nothing to do with me as I'm perfectly fine and my mom wasnt involved in that particular person (already close to dying for a long time btw) who got the virus, but it still made me think about the downside of our strategy... its really difficult to protect the vulnerable.
I mean quite a few of the 300 I was partying with is probably working extra in the elderly care, compared to i.e. Norway where the staff is mainly experienced, full-time professionals. The way our elderly care and our strategy is set up, its going to result in a lot of deaths. Unquestionable.
That said... I still like our strategy. It sounds dirty, immoral and raw but if people die at 85 instead of 86, its sad but not worth stopping society for.
Our strategy (or experiment, really) has shown the following;
* If you dont do lockdown + have shit elderly care, people will die at care homes. Many people. This virus is probably more of a killer in those circumstances than you'd like to imagine.
* Young people are either very resistant against this or just very unlikely to get seriously ill. Arguably the virus is a lesser threat than "expected" to young people. It would be apparent otherwise since a lot of young people here arent following any advice.
Its up to governments and populations in different countries to do what they want with that experience. Personally I think that most will look at us and think "alright, they did ok" and that there wont be as many harsh lockdowns during the second wave, though some more family oriented cultures will probably cope with it the same way.
Train trip went well - no one (except familys) are allowed to sit next to eachother. But then I went to a (the club itself was so-so regulated) after party with 300 students in a very tight dorm kitchen. Few days later first covid-cases was detected at the care home where my mother is working, and that same day she was coughing and sneezing a lot.
I think it had nothing to do with me as I'm perfectly fine and my mom wasnt involved in that particular person (already close to dying for a long time btw) who got the virus, but it still made me think about the downside of our strategy... its really difficult to protect the vulnerable.
I mean quite a few of the 300 I was partying with is probably working extra in the elderly care, compared to i.e. Norway where the staff is mainly experienced, full-time professionals. The way our elderly care and our strategy is set up, its going to result in a lot of deaths. Unquestionable.
That said... I still like our strategy. It sounds dirty, immoral and raw but if people die at 85 instead of 86, its sad but not worth stopping society for.
Our strategy (or experiment, really) has shown the following;
* If you dont do lockdown + have shit elderly care, people will die at care homes. Many people. This virus is probably more of a killer in those circumstances than you'd like to imagine.
* Young people are either very resistant against this or just very unlikely to get seriously ill. Arguably the virus is a lesser threat than "expected" to young people. It would be apparent otherwise since a lot of young people here arent following any advice.
Its up to governments and populations in different countries to do what they want with that experience. Personally I think that most will look at us and think "alright, they did ok" and that there wont be as many harsh lockdowns during the second wave, though some more family oriented cultures will probably cope with it the same way.
Of all the nations with a reasonable chance of relatively consistent measurement of cases and deaths over time, as captured by Johns Hopkins, Sweden has the worst trajectory, and is the only nation where there isn't even a hint the number of new cases is falling. Your data are worse even than Americas.
I dont care about new cases, I care about the number dying or going into ICU. We were extremely slow in testing at the beginning and only started to test health care workers in mid-late April, and most still dont get tested even if its significantly more now. Because of the poor testing, "new cases" really dont say anything.
What says something is the number of covid patients in the ICUs, and this number is decreasing (slowly) and the peak was a month ago.
Could be that this number will increase again though, as our geographical shape makes it pretty weird. Stockholm are way past their peak, but Gothenburg area is in the middle of it and in Malmö there's barely any serious cases at all with the only significant increase coming from the same significant increase in testing health care personnel.
I expect us to have more cases all summer than the countries that went into lockdown. I really hope so, the spread needs to continue. We need to have a constant small outbreak rather than large spikes, because we have only less than 600 ventilators.
Weststander
Well-known member
Deaths per million:
A very limited and belated lockdown:
Sweden 396
A full and early lockdown:
Denmark 97
Finland 55
Norway 43
It is interesting that a sophisticated and wealthy nation went for an entirely different approach to its neighbours. But not if your someone who's lost a loved one. If their scientist is proven correct in the long game, then Denmark should suffer in later covid19 waves, whilst Sweden won't.
A very limited and belated lockdown:
Sweden 396
A full and early lockdown:
Denmark 97
Finland 55
Norway 43
It is interesting that a sophisticated and wealthy nation went for an entirely different approach to its neighbours. But not if your someone who's lost a loved one. If their scientist is proven correct in the long game, then Denmark should suffer in later covid19 waves, whilst Sweden won't.
Sweden is not a sophisticated and wealthy nation, its a leaking ship and one more hole would make it sink. The rest I agree with. The (probable) second wave is going to show if it was the right strategy or not, but it was our only option so either way it would be difficult to say "we should have done it likes the Danes or Norwegians".
Why is it that we want to be like Sweden, as opposed to Norway or Finland?
Sweden: 33,459 cases, 3,998 deaths. 396 deaths per 1m population
Norway: 8,349 cases, 235 deaths. 43 deaths per 1m population
Finland: 6,579 cases, 307 deaths. 55 deaths per 1m population
Sweden: 33,459 cases, 3,998 deaths. 396 deaths per 1m population
Norway: 8,349 cases, 235 deaths. 43 deaths per 1m population
Finland: 6,579 cases, 307 deaths. 55 deaths per 1m population
Sweden's strategy hasn't shown that, we've already known that for a long time. And even with decent elderly care, people will die in care homes.
Weststander
Well-known member
True.
The highly centralised French care home system is highly regarded, often with medical facilities normally associated with hospitals. Yet 40% of French covid deaths have occurred in care homes.
Machiavelli
Well-known member
Finland all the way for me. Followed by Denmark. Then Sweden (although they've screwed up big time on CV19) and, finally, Norway.
Because maybe these numbers arent telling the entire story?
These numbers say nothing about the effects on the economy and the economys effect on health. They say nothing about the health effects of less opportunity to go outdoors and get "everyday" excercise. They say nothing about domestic violence. They say nothing about the effects of kids and young adults dropping their normal life and getting a new isolated lifestyle - computer games and betting and other bullshit. They say nothing about the consequences of a second wave, potentially lasting longer.
Yes lockdown is fantastic if you want to decrease numbers of deaths today but if there's a tomorrow the story gets different. We have a long traditions of being pseudo commies here, we wont ruin our society just because it looks better on the immediate "scoresheet".
Also, unlike most, we had no option.
They also suggest that Norway and Finland will be able to return to full normality much quicker than Sweden because they will have the virus under control before you do.
No they dont suggest anything like that.
No one is returning to full normality for a long, long time and a lot will happen before that. Most likely, the virus will return and we are likely to have more immunity than they do. Chances are big that we will be able to keep going with our low curve while they need to lockdown again as their population have little immunity.