quote:

Originally posted by Lt CHEG:
Based upon the last paragraph I’m pretty sure you’re joking but I’m just going to double check- you are joking right? Rationing health care based solely upon age is wrong regardless of who is doing it. When the talks of death panels came about during the enactment of Obamacare everyone was up in arms. I would hope that people would be equally up in arms if some “authority” were to begin making decisions with respect to treatment and policies towards the elderly. Letting old folks die without treatment just because they’re old and we can keep the Ponzi scheme of social security and Medicare going a little longer is repugnant.

quote:

Originally posted by bigdeal:
Would it be inappropriate to suggest this person be burned at the stake.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/6-ROL...6:g:SoEAAOSwcBleatI3

quote:

Originally posted by sjtill:
Here's a graph of new deaths by date, per million population, for each state with cumulative deaths > 100. I'll update next week if people are interested.

quote:

It shows, for one thing, that NY and NJ are still catastrophes, and CA not nearly as scary as our Leftist governor makes out--so far.

quote:

Originally posted by TXJIM:

quote:

Originally posted by PowerSurge:

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:
It will be interesting to see what happens in Sweden over the next few weeks...
What if it doesn't progress any faster than places (like the US) that have voluntarily collapsed their own economy?

If that happens then obviously everyone overreacted.

How do you figure that? Good or bad, their results will tell us almost nothing of what would happen in our country of 325 million with a 40% obesity rate and a 10% diabetes rate.

quote:

Originally posted by PowerSurge:

quote:

Originally posted by TXJIM:

quote:

Originally posted by PowerSurge:

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:
It will be interesting to see what happens in Sweden over the next few weeks...
What if it doesn't progress any faster than places (like the US) that have voluntarily collapsed their own economy?

If that happens then obviously everyone overreacted.

How do you figure that? Good or bad, their results will tell us almost nothing of what would happen in our country of 325 million with a 40% obesity rate and a 10% diabetes rate.

Almost nothing? You can’t say that with any accuracy at all. If this virus is as bad as people like you fear it is, Sweden should be a hot bed of infections, hospitalizations and deaths in the very near future. We will see.

quote:

Originally posted by Doc H.:
Sweden's fatality rate per identified cases today is 5.5%. In the US we would have had over 13,000 fatalities at this point with the same data, more than double the current number. We couldn't have asked a country to do this, but it will be important data in the final analysis. Their strategy appears to be costing them, and there is now some substantial questioning of their government's decision by the public.

quote:

Why Sweden Is Going Rogue In Its Response To COVID-19

Antoinette Lattouf

10 daily senior reporter

Fri 03 Apr 2020 5.50 AM

Sweden has taken a conspicuously different response to the pandemic, with life largely continuing as normal and the government trusting in the public to adopt softer, voluntary measures.

Unlike its Nordic neighbours Denmark, Finland and Norway, Sweden has chosen not to close its borders or its schools.

Non-essential businesses continue to stay open, and the Swedish government also hasn't put an end to gatherings of more than two people, unlike the U.K. and Germany.

To What Extent Has Sweden Been Impacted?

Some may assume that Sweden is taking a more relaxed approach to the coronavirus outbreak because the nation does not have many confirmed cases, but this is not so.

There are currently more than 5500 confirmed cases of coronavirus in Sweden and 308 deaths, according to Johns Hopkins University. Sweden also has the fifth highest death rate per capita, following Italy, Spain, France and the UK.

Yet Sweden's chief epidemiologist Anders Tegnell says the country's relatively permissive policies are more sustainable in protecting people's health amid the pandemic.
What Are Swedes Still Allowed To Do?

The streets of Stockholm are quiet but not deserted. People still sit at outdoor cafes in the centre of Sweden's capital and vendors still sell flowers.

Although the government has now banned gatherings of more than 50 people, this excludes places like primary schools, restaurants and gyms which remain open. Restaurants, bars, cafés and nightclubs have been told to offer seated table service only.

Sweden’s government has advised working from home if at all possible, avoiding non-essential travel and the elderly are advised to stay home.

How Do Experts Justify This Approach?

Prime Minister Stefan Löfven has said: "We all, as individuals, have to take responsibility. We can’t legislate and ban everything. It is also a question of common sense."

Chief epidemiologist Tegnell said that while Sweden's strategy to tackle the virus was different, the end goal is the same.

“Sweden has gone mostly for voluntary measures because that’s how we’re used to working,” Tegnell said.

Tegnell said the country has a long tradition with the 'voluntary approach' and "that it works rather well”.

He argued that Sweden's policies are more sustainable and effective in protecting the public's health rather than "drastic" moves like closing schools for four or five months.

"Sweden is an outlier on the European scene, at least," the country's former chief epidemiologist Johan Giesecke said.

"And I think that's good."

Is There Much For Support For A More Relaxed Approach?

Sweden has amassed criticism for what some experts say is too “relaxed” a response to COVID-19.

In late March, more than 2,000 Swedish university researchers published an open letter questioning the government’s response.

"We’re not testing enough, we’re not tracking, we’re not isolating enough -- we have let the virus loose," virus immunology expert Professor Cecilia Soderberg-Naucler said.

"They are leading us to catastrophe," she said.

This week, epidemiologists highlighted the growing concern among Swedish medical experts over the government's laissez-faire approach.

"People now are taking sides, with some arguing that publicly criticising the authorities only serves to undermine public trust at a time when this is so badly needed," Professor Paul Franks and Professor Peter Nilsson from Lund University wrote.

"Others are convinced that Sweden is hurtling toward a disaster of biblical proportions and that the direction of travel must change."

BUT... Is It Working?

Sweden has a considerably higher number of COVID-19 fatalities than neighbours Denmark and Norway, despite having a similar number of confirmed cases. Using this data as a measure, it would suggest that it is not working to date.

However Franks and Nilsson argued that a long-term lockdown will have major economic implications and could cause even greater death and suffering in the longer term.

"Ultimately, given the uneven and relatively modest spread of the virus in Sweden at the moment, its initial strategy may not turn out to be reckless," they wrote.

Swedish authorities also say they know the worst is yet to come.

"Of course, we’re going into a phase in the epidemic where we’ll see a lot more cases in the next few weeks, more people in the ICU, but that’s just like any other country -- nowhere has been able to slow down the spread considerably,” Tegnell said.

Tegnall has said the authorities had explained to the population why voluntary social distancing was needed, “and so far, it’s been working reasonably well”.

In terms of fear and panic, Swedes are coping the best in a poll of 26 nations around the world. Less than one third of Swedes say they are “very” or “somewhat” scared that they will contract COVID-19. This is in stark contrast to other countries where fear is much higher.

While Sweden is doing an outstanding job in terms of managing fear, it is yet to be known whether its health outcomes will be as successful.

"So when we probe the lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic in the future, there will likely be a lot of focus on the success or failure of Sweden’s relatively relaxed initial approach.

This would take into account not just the loss of lives from the pandemic, but also longer-term social and economic negative consequences and the deaths they may cause," Franks and Nilsson said.

quote:

Letter from Sweden: ‘We are heading into the storm’

It is one of the few countries not to lock down in response to coronavirus. Historian Peter Englund explains why

Peter Englund 4 hours ago

The late March sun is shining, but the impression of warmth is deceptive. As I glance out through the windows of my writer’s den, the street below looks pretty much as it always has. Sweden has not followed its neighbours in imposing a lockdown, and people are still moving about, on bikes or on foot. I can’t see any face masks. There are fewer customers than usual in the shops, the restaurants are empty and the streams of commuters are visibly thinning out. But it is almost business as usual. On the face of it.

Uppsala, where I live, is an old university town north of Stockholm, the current epicentre of the pandemic here. TV, radio and the papers discuss almost nothing but this topic, and when I talk to other people it’s the same. A recurring phrase: “We are heading into the storm.”

That evening, a Wednesday, the soundscape of the town changes. These often ebullient streets are more or less empty, silent. The university’s teaching facilities have just closed down.

Some effects of the pandemic are obvious, particularly the economic ones. On Thursday, yet another crisis package is announced, this time focusing on small businesses, which are being wiped out. It is a setback for globalisation, and yet another recession will surely lead to a populist surge. Other effects will be harder to measure. Will we continue with all these trips and all these bloody meetings?

I have a number of engagements that have been called off, but I can certainly use that time for other things. Like writing. (As a writer, you are a sort of semi-recluse anyway, so I find the self-isolation part a piece of cake.) The Swedish Academy, of which I am a member, has been convening on Thursday afternoons in Stockholm ever since 1786, but now that is cancelled as well — quite unprecedented. We have a meeting of sorts, via the internet. There are jokes — “But how will we now get our traditional schnapps?” and so on — but it turns out rather well.

On Friday I have lunch at my regular place, Café Linné close to the Linnaeus Garden, and chat with the owner, Yannis. He is getting quite desperate. The number of customers has plummeted, and he has been forced to lay off all his staff. “I can stick it out for perhaps two months,” he says, “then I’m going bust.”

And yet the regulations here in Sweden are lenient. Swedes are often described as the Prussians of Scandinavia — not least by the Danes — but now our neighbours are flabbergasted by us not closing schools, not cutting back public transport and not stopping people from meeting. Perhaps we are a bit flabbergasted as well. But “expert” is not yet a four-letter word in this country. The ones we see daily in the media come across as rather gruff but unflappable, and people do seem to trust them. The policies of Sweden and the UK were almost identical at the outset, but the Swedish epidemiologists stuck to their guns and calculations when their British counterparts switched track. And the Swedish politicians follow their experts, to a tee.

The Swedish prime minister Stefan Löfven, social democrat, ex-union leader, ex-welder, made a speech on TV to the nation, a rare occurrence in this country, and came across as rather Churchillian, with the national flag behind him and on his lapel, talking about duty and sacrifice. His approval rating has almost doubled. At the same time, much of the political dissent has died down. There has even been talk about forming a grand coalition government — something not seen in Sweden since the second world war.

The more lenient Swedish restrictions feel like a bit of a gamble, but only time will tell if they actually work. We are back with the old adage: nobody knows what is going to happen, but afterwards everyone can explain it.

I wake on Saturday after an uneasy dream about my mother. She is elderly and frail and suffering from dementia, living in my old home town more than 1,000km from here. A smoker since her teenage years, she also has lung cancer. If infected, her chances of survival are probably slim. I see her far too seldom, and that has been on my conscience for quite a while now.

As a rule, elderly people live alone here, mostly in nursing homes, and not with their children. But perhaps this less admirable side of the Swedish mentality and welfare state now has some benign unintended consequences. In both Italy and Spain, the generations are much closer, also in a physical sense, and that has obviously taken its toll. This mechanism can be seen here as well. Earlier this week it was reported that a disproportionate part of the coronavirus dead in Stockholm were elderly Somali immigrants.

A crisis such as this always brings out the best and the worst in people. On Sunday there are reports about scams, thefts of alcohol gel from hospitals, and people selling face masks at exorbitant prices. At the same time, a call for help at the hospitals, issued to people who have left the profession or who are studying it, has produced some 5,000 volunteers just in Stockholm, more than can be employed. What did she say, the Polish Nobel laureate Wislawa Szymborska? “We know ourselves only as far as we’ve been tested.”

What is it all about, this seemingly odd Swedish behaviour? Part of it is about the old trust that Swedes still have in the state, for historical reasons, and the principles that underpin that state. (There is a rule in the constitution that forbids ministers from intervening in cases handled by their agencies; the heads of state institutions are ruled by the government as a whole rather than by individual ministers. This makes these institutions difficult to override.)

But some of it probably has to do with Sweden’s undramatic contemporary history, by fluke untouched by wars since the early 19th century. This experience, or rather lack thereof, has fostered something that indeed is complacency. But that can only go so far. All the people I talk to take the coronavirus threat seriously — an escape into reality, perhaps? It looks as if the Swedes have discovered a stiff upper lip they didn’t know they had. Someone working at a hospital tells me they have installed refrigerator containers to be used as makeshift morgues. By the end of Monday, 146 have died nationwide.

On Tuesday I make contact with an old friend, and discover that we both have considered the “Decameron option” — leaving the plague-ridden city and holing up in our summer houses (a move, by the way, that has just been expressly forbidden in Norway).

But not for now. We are still bracing ourselves for “the storm”. But this, too, shall pass.

Peter Englund is a historian and author of ‘The Beauty and the Sorrow: An Intimate History of the First World War’

quote:

No lockdown, please, we’re Swedish

It’s a question of liberty, not epidemiology

Fredrik Erixon

Who would have thought that Sweden would end up being the last place in Europe where you could go for a beer? We have, in our normalcy, suddenly become an exotic place. Other countries are closing their cities, schools and economies, but life in our corner of the world is surprisingly ordinary. Last weekend I went to the gym, met up with friends, and sat in the spring sun at outdoor cafés.

My foreign friends are stunned. They can’t fathom that there are still people enjoying the fruits of civilization, as if the natural reaction to pandemics is to embrace totalitarianism. And they wrestle with another conundrum: how on earth did Sweden end up being the final bastion of liberty? How did this country of mild-mannered conformists end up rebelling against lockdown culture?

In the past, most Swedes felt comfortable with the nanny state giving us orders — telling us how many slices of bread to eat per day, for instance. We still close liquor stores at 3 p.m. on a Saturday. The general idea is that if people were given the freedom and responsibility to figure out these things on their own, anarchy might follow.

We worry about COVID-19 a lot. Many people work from home. Restaurants are open, but not bustling. Keeping two meters apart at bus stops is something Swedes were pretty good at before the crisis: we don’t need much encouragement now. We’re careful. But our approach to fighting the pandemic starts from something more fundamental: in a liberal democracy you have to convince and not command people into action. If you lose that principle, you will lose your soul.

Stefan Löfven, Sweden’s center-left premier, has dismissed calls for a lockdown, saying ‘we can’t legislate and ban everything’. He’s no evangelist for libertarian principles, and may yet bring in harder measures. But so far he’s been saying that ‘we all, as individuals, have to take responsibility’ and not just wait for the government to lock us up.

At the center of our debate is Anders Tegnell, the ‘state epidemiologist’, and Johan Giesecke — an epidemiology don (and one of Tegnell’s predecessors) who has captured the country’s attention with his no-messing attitude. Both advise caution — and common sense. As in Britain and the US, many scientists have appealed to the government to close schools and impose curfews. Unlike in Britain and the US, the authorities have calmly responded by explaining how this wouldn’t really help. They publish their own models of the virus spread. It shows how many people will need hospital care: the system, they say, can cope. And when asked, they say they don’t think Imperial College has made a better call.

Perhaps Tegnell and his team will turn out to be wrong. But their point is that the people deserve policies that work for longer than a month. Managing the virus is a long game, and while herd immunity is not the Swedish strategy, it may well be where we all end up. The theory of lockdown, after all, is pretty niche, deeply illiberal — and, until now, untested. It’s not Sweden that’s conducting a mass experiment. It’s everyone else.

The main advice from Tegnell et al is repeated like a mantra ten times a day: be sensible. Stay at home if you feel sick. Oh, and wash your hands. But individuals, companies, schools and others are trusted to figure out on their own what precautions to take.

This Swedish exceptionalism is about principle, not epidemiology. It’s true that we’re perhaps less at risk due to our high rate of single-person households and low number of smokers. Closing the schools would, as well, have a bigger impact in a country where almost all mums are working mums. But frankly, all these explanations miss the point: yes, they make us different to Italy and Spain, but not to Denmark, Finland and Norway. Sweden simply made the call to take measures that don’t destroy the free society.

Isn’t the real question why other countries aren’t doing the same? Viktor Orbán has just grabbed power from Hungary’s parliament and can run the country by decree — indefinitely. Protests against this ring hollow, because Boris Johnson, Emmanuel Macron and Angela Merkel have suspended core freedoms and rights in their own countries. Yes, I know they are different from Orbán, but he’ll ask: how different? Doesn’t Derbyshire now have police drones chasing those who go for a walk?

It’s the first time in my adult life when it is possible to imagine totalitarianism in the West. Equally frightening is the strength of the panic-ridden ‘totalitarian outlook’. There is growing intolerance of dissent; and — as Orwell wrote in ‘The Prevention of Literature’ — people censure themselves because of ‘the dangerous proposition…that intellectual honesty is a form of anti-social selfishness’.

There are many experts in epidemiology and virology who are highly critical of the lockdown strategy. Few are willing to talk on record. There are public health experts arguing that suppression methods will kill more people than the virus. But they struggle to speak plainly, mostly out of fear of the social media mob. Many economists think it is mad to close down entire national production. But they tiptoe around their message because such opinions are threatening the mood of national cohesion.

How long will Sweden hold out for? It’s unclear. We can expect our COVID-19 death figures to rise faster than our neighbors’ — still all within the confines of a bad winter flu, but these graphs can scare people. A fifth of the population wishes us to become like the rest of Europe, with a full lockdown. But the vast majority, for now, want Sweden to keep its cool. We don’t want to remember 2020 as the time when we caused irreparable harm to our liberties — or lost them entirely.

quote:

Originally posted by TXJIM:
People like me, I think if you look back over my post in this thread I have been pretty moderate. But since we are drawing sides....people like you, and I am pretty sure you specially, were adamant that nothing could be drawn at all from the disaster in Italy with regard to US outcomes because they are old, have bad healthcare, etc..... Now though, if Sweden comes out smelling like a rose they are the perfect canary in the coal mine since that would support your argument?

As for Sweden, they are nothing like the US in terms of demographics. They have a minute fraction of the health issues we have here. The US has over 100 million people, 10 times the population of Sweden, who are obese. That alone is enough to skew the numbers beyond comparison. Now throw in diabetes rates, cardiovascular disease, hypertension all an order of magnitude higher than Sweden. All issues that have proven to greatly increase risk. If they skate with a great outcome it says more about the health of their citizens going into this than anything else. Hell, I hope it's just the flu for them as that will be a great sign for relatively healthy people everywhere.

If they do die in droves however, given their relatively small percentage of "vulnerable population", the average fat ass American living on Lipitor and Big Macs (My fat ass included ) is probably fucked.

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
In defense of Cuomo ...

quote:

Originally posted by bigdeal:
Government just cannot and will not be honest in dealing with this issue. Somebody needs to ask a few of these morons to answer the following question. "If you had 1,000 people needing a vaccine that you only had 100 doses of, what would you do? A) Refuse to administer the vaccine as it would insure the deaths of 900 people, or B) Administer the vaccine to the best candidates of the group and accept the decision isn't perfect." I guarantee you, if this question were asked of 100 politicians in Washington, you'd be lucky to find even a small handful that would even attempt to answer it. We are represented by utter cowards who refuse to be honest while assuming all of us are simply too stupid to see them for who and what they are.

quote:

Originally posted by Pipe Smoker:
Will be here soon, I fear.

quote:

Originally posted by Micropterus:
I am sick of the whole thing.

I'm sick of seeing doctors and nurses on TV giving speeches about being "lambs led to the slaughter" every time they go to work. Quit. Just quit.

I'm sick of hearing about NY being overwhelmed and then hearing the fact that in NY there are over a thousand unoccupied ICU wards throughout the state.

I'm sick of "medical experts" telling us that this disease will kill no fewer than 100,000 people in the US alone. Really?

I'm sick of hearing medical experts tell us this is way worse than the flu and that the flu never even reaches epidemic levels much less Covid-19s pandemic level. Really? In the US alone, 45,000,000+ case of the flu, 800,000 flu hospitalizations, up to 60,000 flu deaths - every year, year in and year out.

Stay home. It will keep you safe. Okay, maybe they got this right, but for the wrong reason. Every year 30,000-50,000 people are killed in traffic accidents every year, without exception since 1930. For the last 90 years, without missing a single year, at least 30,000 people are killed in the US in traffic crashes, with many years being above 50,000. With millions more hospitalized each year.

This COVID-19 thing is the best thing that has ever happened to a narcissistic, instagram-driven, self-aggrandizing society who wants your attention from the bunker in their basement.

The pussification of the US makes me want to vomit.