Sweden

[farmerm]

Disagree there. Lockdown measures reduce the effectiveness of herd immunity as you have a much higher naive population and you are relying on a prolonged period of immunity for those that do catch. As sickening as the current death total is all the lockdown measures are doing globally are increasing the mutations of the virus as it seeks to escape from a smaller population size, and increase the number of virus waves due to increased virus naivety in the population.

I am no virologist but I don't think virus "seek" to escape. Does time increase the prevalence of mutations within a virus or is simply a factor of the number of generations, is the prevalence of mutations occurring not pretty much the same regardless if a virus infections 1 million hosts over 6 weeks or over 6 months? If anything over time natural selection may select for less deadly strains of a virus, if a virus stain kills its host too readily it is less able to spread.

If the period of immunity turns out to short your rapid route to herd immunity end up being pretty useless if we are then exposed to the risk of re-importing the virus from elsewhere in a few months time unless are boarders are to stay locked down permanently...

From a political point of view, once we saw how Italy's health service was being overwhelmed and lockdowns occurred across Europe I don't believe our government had any alternative to impose lockdown restrictions here. Could Borris and Matt have stood at the briefing every day and said yes our deaths per day has doubled again today and again and again and again, we have by far the highest death toll in the world, sorry about the 250,000 deaths but it is OK we have dug some big holes for them folk, don't worry about it, the 99% who don't die will be though this and back to normal in 6-8 weeks and can then sit batch and watch the rest of the world struggle to try minimise their death tolls for the next 12 months.

I did state long before lockdown the only way to avoid widespread lockdown was to brick everyone over 60 and those with health conditions into their homes for a period, allow the virus to run rampant and accept some deaths in the 10's of thousands to avoid a death toll in the 100's of thousands

 

[oil barron]

I am no virologist but I don't think virus "seek" to escape. Does time increase the prevalence of mutations within a virus or is simply a factor of the number of generations, is the prevalence of mutations occurring not pretty much the same regardless if a virus infections 1 million hosts over 6 weeks or over 6 months?

if it happens over 6 weeks it was only 4 chains of spread. 1 person spread to 10 who spread to 10 who spread to 10. If it happens over 6 months it could be over 50 chains. 1 person spread to 2. One of them isolated and didn’t spread it any further. One spread to another 1 etc.

I agree with you that once the Italian news came through it would have been very hard for any government to go an alternative path.

 

[jendan]

More "facts" if you wish to believe them. Why is mass migration not hitting Sweden hard? They are always held up as paragons of virtue but not many people actually want to live there.

Their language is incomprehensible.

 

[arcobob]

Their language is incomprehensible.

And booze is extremely expensive.

 

[beardface]

I am no virologist but I don't think virus "seek" to escape. Does time increase the prevalence of mutations within a virus or is simply a factor of the number of generations, is the prevalence of mutations occurring not pretty much the same regardless if a virus infections 1 million hosts over 6 weeks or over 6 months? If anything over time natural selection may select for less deadly strains of a virus, if a virus stain kills its host too readily it is less able to spread.

If the period of immunity turns out to short your rapid route to herd immunity end up being pretty useless if we are then exposed to the risk of re-importing the virus from elsewhere in a few months time unless are boarders are to stay locked down permanently...

From a political point of view, once we saw how Italy's health service was being overwhelmed and lockdowns occurred across Europe I don't believe our government had any alternative to impose lockdown restrictions here. Could Borris and Matt have stood at the briefing every day and said yes our deaths per day has doubled again today and again and again and again, we have by far the highest death toll in the world, sorry about the 250,000 deaths but it is OK we have dug some big holes for them folk, don't worry about it, the 99% who don't die will be though this and back to normal in 6-8 weeks and can then sit batch and watch the rest of the world struggle to try minimise their death tolls for the next 12 months.

I did state long before lockdown the only way to avoid widespread lockdown was to brick everyone over 60 and those with health conditions into their homes for a period, allow the virus to run rampant and accept some deaths in the 10's of thousands to avoid a death toll in the 100's of thousands

I'm not disagreeing with the lockdown just pointing out the massive hole most countries have dug for themselves by entering one. Look at NZ they've had hardly any cases or deaths through a very strict lockdown. The majority of the population is still naive to the virus. There economy relies massively on tourism. How exactly will they be able to return to business as usual in regards to tourism and save the economy?
This isn't a question aimed at yourself.

Regarding virus. Most viruses seek to increase there transmission rate that's how they continue existing. Hence why you have an annual flu jab because each year the strain is different.

 

[PercyBlakeney]

BAME death toll is the way it is because a lot of them are deficient of Vitamin D and it has a strong immunomodular effect when converted into the right form (requiring sunlight). I would suggest a lot of doctors/nurses might not even be seeing the light of day at the minute regardless of their skin colour and any vegan ones must be on supplements or will in for a world of grief.

Is it not to do with the demographics in the worst hit areas as well? For instance, as a whole BAME make up around 15% of the population of England, but the death toll from c-19, last figure I saw was around 19% of are BAME, so over-represented for the country as a whole.

However if you look at some of the Epicentres like London, and Birmingham, the % of the population that are BAME is much higher, around 35-40% of the population are BAME, so this is bound to make a difference, just on how likely someone is to catch it in those areas, where also the viral load, which has been mentioned, is likely to be much higher than more sparsely populated areas which have less BAME population? Just an observation though, no scientific basis to it!

 

[hoff135]

Despite the differences between sweden and other countries, the experts were telling us that sweden was playing a dangerous game and that cases would rocket. I understand that social distancing is happening in sweden but if the figures being reported from sweden are right i think we will soon be asking questions.

 

[Exfarmer]

More "facts" if you wish to believe them. Why is mass migration not hitting Sweden hard? They are always held up as paragons of virtue but not many people actually want to live there.

Of course mass migration is not hitting Sweden, nobody outside the country can speak the langauge. Immigrants always try and find country where they have some knowledge of the langauge. Unfortunately the most widely spoken foreign langauge is English!

 

[Ncap]

Of course mass migration is not hitting Sweden, nobody outside the country can speak the langauge. Immigrants always try and find country where they have some knowledge of the langauge. Unfortunately the most widely spoken foreign langauge is English!

Actually, like most Nordic countries, Sweden arranges free language classes at various levels for people entering the country. Again, like most Nordic countries you find that most immigrants speak very fluent Swedish in no time. Helped perhaps by the fact that Swedish is considered the easiest of the Nordic languages to master.

 

[Chopsy Varmint]

Of course mass migration is not hitting Sweden, nobody outside the country can speak the langauge. Immigrants always try and find country where they have some knowledge of the langauge. Unfortunately the most widely spoken foreign langauge is English!

On the contrary, Sweden has a large migrant community in relation to the size of their native population. If I remember rightly, a couple of years ago 25% of the overall population were migrants.

English is widely spoken in Sweden these days but the language isn't that hard to learn - I spent a year living there a good few years ago and managed to learn enough to get by.

 

[hoff135]

A month old article from the guardian, one of many media outlets desperate to condemn what sweden did.

A month later still no "catastrophe", i read somewhere else there is still plenty icu capacity and deaths per million are a good bit less than the uk.

The experts said cases would rocket, despite swedens low population density. So far no take off

'They are leading us to catastrophe': Sweden's coronavirus stoicism begins to jar

There’s a surreal calm in the last country in Europe to hold out against lockdown. But the death toll is rising and some are voicing dissent

www.theguardian.com

 

[arcobob]

On the contrary, Sweden has a large migrant community in relation to the size of their native population. If I remember rightly, a couple of years ago 25% of the overall population were migrants.

English is widely spoken in Sweden these days but the language isn't that hard to learn - I spent a year living there a good few years ago and managed to learn enough to get by.

I have noticed that many Swedes learn to speak perfect English without a detectable accent. Any views?

 

[Chopsy Varmint]

I have noticed that many Swedes learn to speak perfect English without a detectable accent. Any views?

I found they had some Americanisms but kept the Swedish accent, having mostly learnt colloquial English by watching American and British tv and films. That was rural Sweden though where people didn't have experience of living or working abroad in English-speaking countries so perhaps that makes a difference. They were keen to practice their English on me although that may have been to try and stop me mangling their language like the 'Allo 'Allo policeman.

 

[The Agrarian]

I am no virologist but I don't think virus "seek" to escape. Does time increase the prevalence of mutations within a virus or is simply a factor of the number of generations, is the prevalence of mutations occurring not pretty much the same regardless if a virus infections 1 million hosts over 6 weeks or over 6 months? If anything over time natural selection may select for less deadly strains of a virus, if a virus stain kills its host too readily it is less able to spread.

If the period of immunity turns out to short your rapid route to herd immunity end up being pretty useless if we are then exposed to the risk of re-importing the virus from elsewhere in a few months time unless are boarders are to stay locked down permanently...

From a political point of view, once we saw how Italy's health service was being overwhelmed and lockdowns occurred across Europe I don't believe our government had any alternative to impose lockdown restrictions here. Could Borris and Matt have stood at the briefing every day and said yes our deaths per day has doubled again today and again and again and again, we have by far the highest death toll in the world, sorry about the 250,000 deaths but it is OK we have dug some big holes for them folk, don't worry about it, the 99% who don't die will be though this and back to normal in 6-8 weeks and can then sit batch and watch the rest of the world struggle to try minimise their death tolls for the next 12 months.

I did state long before lockdown the only way to avoid widespread lockdown was to brick everyone over 60 and those with health conditions into their homes for a period, allow the virus to run rampant and accept some deaths in the 10's of thousands to avoid a death toll in the 100's of thousands

Correct. Mutations are often random, though occasionally caused by some external factor, like radiation or chemical reaction.

I'm not disagreeing with the lockdown just pointing out the massive hole most countries have dug for themselves by entering one. Look at NZ they've had hardly any cases or deaths through a very strict lockdown. The majority of the population is still naive to the virus. There economy relies massively on tourism. How exactly will they be able to return to business as usual in regards to tourism and save the economy?
This isn't a question aimed at yourself.

Regarding virus. Most viruses seek to increase there transmission rate that's how they continue existing. Hence why you have an annual flu jab because each year the strain is different.

Viruses don't 'seek' to do anything. They don't think. They don't know they exist. Their only purpose is to survive. Those that are snuffed out by immune systems or the environment don't pass their genes on. The ones that have a genetic variation that allows them some means of evading capture get to spawn the future population of that type of virus. Its not deliberate on their part. It just is what it is.

 

[Old McDonald]

A month old article from the guardian, one of many media outlets desperate to condemn what sweden did.

A month later still no "catastrophe", i read somewhere else there is still plenty icu capacity and deaths per million are a good bit less than the uk.

The experts said cases would rocket, despite swedens low population density. So far no take off

'They are leading us to catastrophe': Sweden's coronavirus stoicism begins to jar

There’s a surreal calm in the last country in Europe to hold out against lockdown. But the death toll is rising and some are voicing dissent

www.theguardian.com

It depends on what you mean by "catastrophe". True there are a number of countries with higher death rates. Best to ignore those with very low populations - for example the highest in the world appears to be San Marino at 1208 per million. They have only had 41 deaths.

On the other hand, and I make no apology for continually referencing Portugal as being a similar country in both population, topography and spread of population, Sweden's death rate of 244 per million is well towards the top of any country and Portugal's is 95. Members should be aware that the unfortunate top of the league positions for countries of more than 10m population are Belgium, Spain, Italy, UK, France, Netherlands and Sweden in that order with 107 new deaths reported today in Sweden. 25 in Portugal.

I do not understand how any poster can claim Sweden is a good example of how to handle the virus. Its record of more deaths as a percentage of population, and the high death rate of those infected, together with the high number of daily new cases and high number of intensive care patients given its population show it to be failing in comparison with several other countries in mainland Europe.

Here is a link for anyone wanting to compare countries https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/#countries

 

[The Agrarian]

Simply because Sweden is having its death surge now. Remember that they expect to reach herd immunity in Stockholm in about a week's time. How many deaths will Portugal need to get in order to get to the same position of immunity as Sweden? We don't know, but possibly similar, over a much longer period.

As I see it, the gaining of natural immunity in the population has a cost. The cost is probably only altered by the number of lives the hospital system is not able to save, due to over subscription. And details like how well hygiene and isolation is handled in care homes and care in the community.

 

[Hindsight]

It depends on what you mean by "catastrophe". True there are a number of countries with higher death rates. Best to ignore those with very low populations - for example the highest in the world appears to be San Marino at 1208 per million. They have only had 41 deaths.

On the other hand, and I make no apology for continually referencing Portugal as being a similar country in both population, topography and spread of population, Sweden's death rate of 244 per million is well towards the top of any country and Portugal's is 95. Members should be aware that the unfortunate top of the league positions for countries of more than 10m population are Belgium, Spain, Italy, UK, France, Netherlands and Sweden in that order with 107 new deaths reported today in Sweden. 25 in Portugal.

I do not understand how any poster can claim Sweden is a good example of how to handle the virus. Its record of more deaths as a percentage of population, and the high death rate of those infected, together with the high number of daily new cases and high number of intensive care patients given its population show it to be failing in comparison with several other countries in mainland Europe.

Here is a link for anyone wanting to compare countries https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/#countries

But it is a longer game than the current few weeks. Let us compare numbers in a year or so.

Fortunately for all of the other countries that have gone down the containment route Sweden has taken a different policy. Thus should allow epidemiologist in a few weeks / months to test for antibody presence to assess how many of the population has had it. For comparison with UK et al with different policy.

I was chatting with a colleague earlier today saying Prof Gilbert should be testing here vaccine trial in Sweden where CV19 is widespread in the community.

 

[hoff135]

It depends on what you mean by "catastrophe". True there are a number of countries with higher death rates. Best to ignore those with very low populations - for example the highest in the world appears to be San Marino at 1208 per million. They have only had 41 deaths.

On the other hand, and I make no apology for continually referencing Portugal as being a similar country in both population, topography and spread of population, Sweden's death rate of 244 per million is well towards the top of any country and Portugal's is 95. Members should be aware that the unfortunate top of the league positions for countries of more than 10m population are Belgium, Spain, Italy, UK, France, Netherlands and Sweden in that order with 107 new deaths reported today in Sweden. 25 in Portugal.

I do not understand how any poster can claim Sweden is a good example of how to handle the virus. Its record of more deaths as a percentage of population, and the high death rate of those infected, together with the high number of daily new cases and high number of intensive care patients given its population show it to be failing in comparison with several other countries in mainland Europe.

Here is a link for anyone wanting to compare countries https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/#countries

Catastrophe to me would be people lying dead everywhere. A health system overwhelmed by many times more than it was able to cope with. Thats the sort of thing that comes to mind when words like these are used.

 

[Chopsy Varmint]

I do not understand how any poster can claim Sweden is a good example of how to handle the virus. Its record of more deaths as a percentage of population, and the high death rate of those infected, together with the high number of daily new cases and high number of intensive care patients given its population show it to be failing in comparison with several other countries in mainland Europe.

Here is a link for anyone wanting to compare countries https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/#countries

The harsh truth of cv19 is that successfully handling the virus is not just about preventing direct deaths but also mitigating its effects on the economy and society by protecting people's jobs, maintaining living standards, and managing widespread fear.

Far more people will suffer from poor mental health, alcoholism, domestic abuse and poverty thanks to lockdowns and economic collapse, including children and younger generations who are statistically least likely to die from cv19. Then you have to consider indirect deaths due to people being too fearful to seek medical treatment - I saw a figure yesterday saying there will be an extra 18,000 cancer-related deaths in the UK which could have been diagnosed and treated during the ongoing lockdown.

Comparing death rates at this stage in the pandemic is meaningless. You say yourself that you can't use deaths per millions of people as that skews the figures towards smaller countries like San Merino and Andorra. There's also no point in individual countries doing copycat lockdowns if that turns out to be the wrong response. It'll take a year or two to assess the statistics but it may well turn out that Sweden is doing the right thing for smoothing all the effects of cv19 and not wrecking the future for millions of its people.

 

[czechmate]

But it is a longer game than the current few weeks. Let us compare numbers in a year or so.

Fortunately for all of the other countries that have gone down the containment route Sweden has taken a different policy. Thus should allow epidemiologist in a few weeks / months to test for antibody presence to assess how many of the population has had it. For comparison with UK et al with different policy.

I was chatting with a colleague earlier today saying Prof Gilbert should be testing here vaccine trial in Sweden where CV19 is widespread in the community.

Isn’t Brazil taking a similar approach, mainly as they can’t afford a lockdown ?
Oh, plus they have a president more nuts than the usa