Nearly two (2) years after the first COVID-19 outbreak in China, the Fauci-led global lockdown nonsense seems more like a science experiment than a lawful exercise of government. Since we know that the overall difference between locked down and non-locked down economies is negligible...why are we still doing this? Other than the obvious....Democrats using the virus to promote a HUGE slate of social programs...I wonder if there are other motivations, too. I can envision a medical bureaucracy using the lockdown to investigate viral transmission patterns and, perhaps, discover a cure for the "common cold".
Without any lockdowns, Sweden's annual COVID-related death rate is 0.07%...that's it. Total Sweden Population: 10,230,000 Total Sweden COVID-related Deaths: 14,600 (over two years) https://www.statista.com/topics/6267/coronavirus-covid-19-in-sweden/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/525353/sweden-number-of-deaths/ So...if there's no statistical evidence that lockdowns and masks do any good, why are we still doing this? Not only do lockdowns shred the Constitution, they lead to way more negative health outcomes that they even "hope" to solve. Again...why do we continue this nonsense? Is this some crazy Fauci science experiment?
Sweden’s Covid-19 failures have exposed the myths of the lockdown-sceptics The “herd immunity” strategy that led to a disastrous Swedish death rate would have been even more dangerous in the UK. Many strange things happened in 2020, but one of the strangest was the romance between Britain’s Covid-sceptics and Sweden. It turned out to be an ill-fated one, ending in tragedy, but it was intense while it lasted. For much of this year, those who object to measures to control the virus have hailed Sweden as a libertarian paradise, supposedly showing us how Covid-19 could be kept under control without intrusive government restrictions. Of late, these champions have fallen silent. It’s not hard to explain why. Recent days have seen Sweden’s Nordic neighbours Finland and Norway offering emergency medical assistance as Stockholm’s hospitals have been overwhelmed, infections and deaths have spiked dramatically upward, and the King of Sweden has made an unprecedented criticism of the government’s bungled strategy. Unprecedented, but hardly surprising: Sweden has suffered a death rate that is roughly ten times that of neighbouring Norway and nine times that of Finland. A searing government report concluded the state had failed to protect the vulnerable. Mats Persson, a former UK government adviser, said of his home country: “For a social model largely designed around the state levelling the odds and caring for the vulnerable, this will leave a very difficult moral legacy.” Sweden was praised to the skies by Covid-sceptics. In May, Sherelle Jacobs wrote in the Daily Telegraph that “the more time goes on, the more Sweden looks like a success story… Sweden is in a much stronger long-term position than lockdown countries.” Meanwhile, Christopher Snowdon of the Institute of Economic Affairs told us that Sweden had demonstrated “a more sensible way to balance risk, liberty and the economy”. [See also: How Sweden is being forced to abandon its failing Covid-19 strategy] To understand the magnitude of what’s gone wrong, it’s worth noting that Sweden started the pandemic with several huge advantages. First, it’s a far less urban nation than the UK,for example, and the virus spreads much more rapidly in dense, built-up areas. While the UK has 273 people per square kilometre, Sweden has just 25. Second, Sweden has the highest rate of people living alone in the world: 42.5 per cent of households are single people, compared to just 29.9 per cent in the UK. Obviously, it’s much easier for the virus to spread within the home, and places with large, multigenerational households suffer most. To form an idea of the consequences that would have followed if the UK had followed the Swedish model, you would need to compare Sweden’s outcomes to its similar neighbours. Given the country’s death rate is ten times higher, imagine the chaos we’d have seen if we had multiplied the UK death rate by a factor of ten. Nor has there been an economic upside for Sweden: in fact, they saw a bigger hit to their economy than their neighbours, as well as much worse health outcomes. The Swedish virologist Lena Einhorn concluded: “Sweden’s strategy has proven to be a dramatic failure.” This matters, not only because health and lives are in danger, but also because the Swedish experiment reveals the failures of the underlying theories of Covid-sceptics. Sweden’s controversial state epidemiologist Anders Tegnell predicted in the summer that because the country had a high rate of infection in the spring, it would have “a high level of immunity and the number of cases [in the winter] will probably be quite low”. We now know he was disastrously wrong. But he wasn’t alone; his theory was exactly the same as that still relied upon by the UK’s Covid-sceptics. [See also: Sweden’s chief epidemiologist Anders Tegnell defends his strategy] Sunetra Gupta, a lead author of the “Great Barrington Declaration”, promised in May that, in the UK, “the epidemic has largely come and is on its way out in this country… due to the build-up of immunity”. One leading Covid-sceptic, Michael Yeadon, wrote that thanks to “prior immunity”, “the pandemic is effectively over.” It’s these same failed theories that still lead Covid-sceptics to argue it is safe to let the virus rip and attempt to shelter the old and vulnerable. One baffling feature of 2020 was that so much energy was wasted puffing up Sweden, while countries such as Australia, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and New Zealand revealed to us genuinely successful models based on hard suppression of the virus with decisive action: all suffered a fraction of the European average rate of coronavirus cases. There is, of course, no scope for triumphalism here. But when we look for models to learn from, it isn’t Swedish lessons we need. The better lesson is the simpler one, taught by our antipodean cousins: wallop the virus as hard as you can. https://www.newstatesman.com/world/...failures-have-exposed-myths-lockdown-sceptics
Try reading and digesting what you post. "The “herd immunity” strategy that led to a disastrous Swedish death rate" I just posted the statistical data. You're posting shill articles based on conjecture...not science. Don't you think Sweden would change course if anything you post were true?
One baffling feature of 2020 was that so much energy was wasted puffing up Sweden, while countries such as Australia, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and New Zealand revealed to us genuinely successful models based on hard suppression of the virus with decisive action: all suffered a fraction of the European average rate of coronavirus cases.
By April 2021, there were signs that Sweden’s approach had flaws. At that point, the New Yorker reported, Sweden’s per-capita case counts and death rates were many times higher than any of its Nordic neighbors, all of which imposed lockdowns, travel bans and limited gatherings early on. The latest figures show Sweden’s COVID-19 death rate is lower than in the European Union and the U.S. — but it has more than doubled in the past 10 months. Anders Tegnell, Sweden’s top epidemiologist, told PolitiFact that the death rate has risen in many countries. "We have had two severe waves. The excess mortality is comparably low," he said. Excess mortality, as defined by the World Health Organization, is the difference between the observed numbers of deaths and the expected number of deaths for a specific time period. Our World in Data’s measure of the seven-day rolling average of COVID-19 deaths per 1 million people shows that Sweden had higher spikes than those in the EU and the U.S. at several points during the pandemic, including early 2020 and early 2021. And for most of this year, its per capita confirmed cases have exceeded the figures for the U.S. and the EU.
From your link (that you didn't read)... "In the month of July, Sweden recorded a grand total of 9 deaths with Covid in a nation of over 10 million. Lowest mask compliance in EU, least locked down country in EU from beginning, and just 41% fully vaccinated. Also codes Covid deaths similar to how we do." Those aren't even COVID deaths...they're deaths of people who tested positive "with" COVID at their time of death. There are two different groups...people who die "of" COVID and people who die "with" COVID. In the U.S., if a person is deemed to be a COVID death if they test COVID-positive at time of death. My 94 year old uncle with kidney failure asked to go off dialysis. He died peacefully, at home surrounded by family. His death was listed as a COVID death. A person killed in an auto accident and tests positive for COVID, their death is counted as a COVID death. This is why people are losing trust in the medical community. It will take years to repair the damage Dr. Fauci has done to medicine around the world. https://wpde.com/news/nation-world/...s-covid-19-death-in-florida-report-07-18-2020
You completely ignore the negative health outcomes from the lockdown...delayed medical treatment, mental heath stresses, economic impact, etc. I don't know what to call this hot mess, but it's certainly not "science".
people with other health problems are dying because people won't vaccinate or wear masks. unvaccinated covid patients fill up the hospitals and ERs because they're ignorant and selfish.
The data is in: Sweden failed The quest for herd immunity resulted in too many infectious carriers, causing disastrous results for those over 80, who accounted for 66.6% of Sweden’s deaths. Over the past 3 months, a debate has raged over the wisdom of the Swedish approach to the COVID-19 pandemic. Critics of mitigation measures have extolled Sweden, the outlier among European nations for having not implemented stay-at-home measures, reckoning that Sweden’s unique approach will allow it to buck the trend of economic slowdown while avoiding the dramatic suffering from the pandemic that the likes of Italy or Spain have endured. On the other hand, those advocating the more cautious consensus have rebuked Sweden for what they consider to be a callous disregard for the lives of those who will perish because contagion was not restricted. Putting aside the Swedish Central Bank’s announcement that Sweden is expected to see an economic downturn equivalent to its neighbours that did implement lockdowns, how can we evaluate the decision of the epidemiologists advising the Swedish Government to allow contagion to spread in the hopes of reaching “herd immunity” before a vaccine becomes available sometime in 2021? Using the death rate in the overall population as a guiding metric (since the case rate depends upon how extensively a country has tested for the virus, which is obviously far from uniform,) we can see that originally Sweden had fared better than all of the more populous nations of western Europe who implemented lockdowns, with the exception of Germany. But little by little its proportional death toll eclipsed other nations: first Switzerland, then the US, then Ireland, then Netherlands and now even France. The peak in daily deaths occurred in Sweden on April 22. Those 185 deaths were proportionally about twice as deadly as the worst day in the United States, but lower than the most deadly days in France, Spain, or Belgium. Yet since its peak in the third week of April, Sweden’s curve has not slowed dramatically, meaning that it could even eclipse Italy and Spain if it doesn’t flatten. While this seems shocking, Sweden has not been a stranger to deadly viruses in the past; in 1988, the flu claimed 2,000 Swedish lives, and another 4,500 lives in the 1993-4 winter. In neighbouring Denmark, which did implement restrictions in early March, the pandemic is essentially over and normal life has almost resumed, while its death toll has not spiked again. Denmark has a bit more than half the population of Sweden, but so far about 1/8 the death toll. If the current trends continue, COVID-19 will be proportionally five or six times less deadly in Denmark than in Sweden. Advocates of Sweden’s “herd immunity” approach, who argue that a significant enough portion of the population will be exposed to the virus in order to prohibit the spread of new cases, claim that the country will never again have to think about COVID-19. But what of other nations, having limited exposure to their populations, that may have to deal with additional “waves” of infection? A glance at the graph tells us that Denmark, having essentially finished with the first “wave,” would have to go through 4 comparable waves to eclipse Sweden’s death toll. There is virtually zero likelihood of that happening. Ditto for Germany. Switzerland, right on the border of the mayhem of Lombardy, would have to repeat the same crisis to reach Sweden’s level of deadliness. Again, not likely. While it was premature to politicize a legitimate public health debate and vilify Sweden without a full enough consideration of the data, it is now becoming clear that short-term “lockdown” measures did save lives. The epidemic has run its course and most countries will be back on their feet with only a few months of disruption. By choosing to eschew those measures, Sweden ultimately made a bad choice in balancing public health with economic and social well-being, which has been acknowledged by its chief epidemiologist Anders Tegnell, who now laments his course of action. In particular, the quest for herd immunity resulted in too many infectious carriers, causing disastrous results for those over 80, which accounted for 66.6% of Sweden’s deaths, the highest of any country. Nursing homes were particularly devastated. Nevertheless, there is a silver lining to Sweden’s failure: in preparing for future pandemics, the high death toll among Swedes has debunked the fallacy that elderly or vulnerable populations can simply be isolated. Opportunities for contagion must be curtailed across the board, and early. COVID-19 has shown us that highly infectious viral pandemics can best be overcome in the manner of Austria, Denmark, and others: short-term measured restrictions that avoid both high death tolls and disastrous economic side effects. https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/can-europe-make-it/data-sweden-failed/
I was raised in the Christian Church. It's hard to understand what would inspire anyone to inflict so much damage on people they've never met. Since you obviously don't take the time to read or think about the articles you post, I would be very interested to understand what inspires you to post this nonsense...besides the $5.
While it was premature to politicize a legitimate public health debate and vilify Sweden without a full enough consideration of the data, it is now becoming clear that short-term “lockdown” measures did save lives. The epidemic has run its course and most countries will be back on their feet with only a few months of disruption. By choosing to eschew those measures, Sweden ultimately made a bad choice in balancing public health with economic and social well-being, which has been acknowledged by its chief epidemiologist Anders Tegnell, who now laments his course of action. In particular, the quest for herd immunity resulted in too many infectious carriers, causing disastrous results for those over 80, which accounted for 66.6% of Sweden’s deaths, the highest of any country. Nursing homes were particularly devastated.
"Large/Bold font is the weak man’s imitation of strength." ...Yakpoo. I would love to stay and argue, but I have a tee time.
