Who thinks this up?

[The Agrarian]

As @Muck Spreader posted, Sweden is not as good as some posters have been claiming since way back in April. You all know what you were posting in April – Swedish people have had greater exposure, so higher numbers of infections etc. etc... I showed you then you were wrong; and you still are.

To save going back to other threads, on 21 April Sweden had had 14777 cases of which 1580 unfortunate people had died. At the same time, and as I pointed out to you all, Portugal, with almost the same population had had 20863 cases, but only 735 deaths. This to me showed that Sweden had a lower quality of healthcare once hospitalised, but I accept others would disagree. The number continued in a similar vein for the next few weeks. I also made the point that Portugal was not in a heavy lockdown situation and considered this contributed to the higher number of cases.

To bring us up to date it should be noted that Sweden is not regularly reporting cases and deaths. I keep a close watch on numbers in a few countries in the world for various personal reasons. I think most people use the worldometers website for figures, because it is updated at midnight UK time every single day and I have not seen anyone dispute its accuracy. So, taking Sweden’s figures for the last few days – on 16th September they showed 87535 cases to date with 5860 deaths. Today, 22nd, it shows a total of 89436 cases and 5870 deaths. Very few deaths, but 2000 more cases in 6 days. The problem is that Sweden is not reporting cases and deaths every day. It appears to be updating overall figures from time to time, but not admitting to the number of new cases as they happen. Going back over previous days, the number reported in total is a lot more than admitted on a daily basis. Sweden appears to be complying with the aim of reporting total cases but reluctant to admit to high numbers on a particular day.

Current figures as at 22nd September are as shown above, whilst for Portugal they are about 20,000 less cases at 69,693 and 1,925 deaths. The death rate of confirmed cases is therefore about one in 36, whilst in Sweden the death rate is, as has been from the very beginning, much higher at more than a death for every 15 cases. We know, we know, death numbers are not the same in all countries, and the UK may have been over zealous in reporting Covid as the cause of death there, but there cannot be that much of a difference between Sweden and other countries.

Testing is another area where Sweden has claimed to be in the forefront. It is not. Current testing is 151,534 per million population, whilst Portugal is at 237,042 per million, so will be picking up a lot more positives per head of population than Sweden. Worth noting that the UK is close to 330,000 per million so well ahead of a lot of other places, especially those with comparable populations.

The number of cases in Portugal has increased quite a lot in the last few weeks. It has always been open for business to a lot of the world. Other countries had and have quarantine requirements for visitors returning home. The relaxation of some countries for quarantine coincided with a rise in numbers of visitors and a subsequent rise in cases in Portugal.

All in all, my view of Sweden, based entirely upon reported figures, is no different to 5 months ago. It has not handled the virus well, the risks of dying once affected are higher than in many other countries, and it is not reporting cases and deaths as frequently as it should.

They've reduced reporting to twice a week now I think. That means they are still reporting all the figures, but less frequently. I think twice weekly is perfectly adequate whenever their death rate is so low. It's still easy to pick out a trend at this interval. They've obviously decided to put the information in the public domain in a less obtrusive way.

As for case numbers. I don't believe it's a true reflection of the number of cases anyway. Bound to be vastly underreported in most countries, therefore the death rate I think is considerably lower than the mathematicians claim.

 

[Pasty]

I went to the Albert the other day for a few gallons of scrumpy. I signed in as Mike Hunt and my mate was Chris Peacock.

 

[Lowland1]

I woke up this morning thinking.
'I wonder how much money has been spent on trying to find a vaccine and if people were allowed to think that life could go back to normal a vaccine wouldn't be needed and all those pharmaceutical companies would be out of pocket'
But luckily I am a paranoid delusional.

 

[Lowland1]

As @Muck Spreader posted, Sweden is not as good as some posters have been claiming since way back in April. You all know what you were posting in April – Swedish people have had greater exposure, so higher numbers of infections etc. etc... I showed you then you were wrong; and you still are.

To save going back to other threads, on 21 April Sweden had had 14777 cases of which 1580 unfortunate people had died. At the same time, and as I pointed out to you all, Portugal, with almost the same population had had 20863 cases, but only 735 deaths. This to me showed that Sweden had a lower quality of healthcare once hospitalised, but I accept others would disagree. The number continued in a similar vein for the next few weeks. I also made the point that Portugal was not in a heavy lockdown situation and considered this contributed to the higher number of cases.

To bring us up to date it should be noted that Sweden is not regularly reporting cases and deaths. I keep a close watch on numbers in a few countries in the world for various personal reasons. I think most people use the worldometers website for figures, because it is updated at midnight UK time every single day and I have not seen anyone dispute its accuracy. So, taking Sweden’s figures for the last few days – on 16th September they showed 87535 cases to date with 5860 deaths. Today, 22nd, it shows a total of 89436 cases and 5870 deaths. Very few deaths, but 2000 more cases in 6 days. The problem is that Sweden is not reporting cases and deaths every day. It appears to be updating overall figures from time to time, but not admitting to the number of new cases as they happen. Going back over previous days, the number reported in total is a lot more than admitted on a daily basis. Sweden appears to be complying with the aim of reporting total cases but reluctant to admit to high numbers on a particular day.

Current figures as at 22nd September are as shown above, whilst for Portugal they are about 20,000 less cases at 69,693 and 1,925 deaths. The death rate of confirmed cases is therefore about one in 36, whilst in Sweden the death rate is, as has been from the very beginning, much higher at more than a death for every 15 cases. We know, we know, death numbers are not the same in all countries, and the UK may have been over zealous in reporting Covid as the cause of death there, but there cannot be that much of a difference between Sweden and other countries.

Testing is another area where Sweden has claimed to be in the forefront. It is not. Current testing is 151,534 per million population, whilst Portugal is at 237,042 per million, so will be picking up a lot more positives per head of population than Sweden. Worth noting that the UK is close to 330,000 per million so well ahead of a lot of other places, especially those with comparable populations.

The number of cases in Portugal has increased quite a lot in the last few weeks. It has always been open for business to a lot of the world. Other countries had and have quarantine requirements for visitors returning home. The relaxation of some countries for quarantine coincided with a rise in numbers of visitors and a subsequent rise in cases in Portugal.

All in all, my view of Sweden, based entirely upon reported figures, is no different to 5 months ago. It has not handled the virus well, the risks of dying once affected are higher than in many other countries, and it is not reporting cases and deaths as frequently as it should.

Again the point with Sweden is the fact that they are prepared to accept deaths in return for a form of normalcy. As in most countries deaths came early on before much was understood and have reduced up to the present. The U.K policy was to avoid deaths at all costs even if it meant destroying the economy. Obviously the Swedish economy has suffered because no matter what you do at home if your trading partners are hiding away then they aren’t buying what you make.

 

[arcobob]

As a porker myself, can I just point out that you need a heavy hammer to drive in a long nail?

Screw?

 

[arcobob]

Not much talk about Russia lately. Either the Sputnik vaccine is a roaring success or they are massaging the figures. Either way I would not take a jab of their stuff in case it was a "bad batch"

 

[Lowland1]

Not much talk about Russia lately. Either the Sputnik vaccine is a roaring success or they are massaging the figures. Either way I would not take a jab of their stuff in case it was a "bad batch"

We’ve just had a horse die from African Horse Sickness something we vaccinate for every year. Makes you think a bit about vaccines.

 

[Exfarmer]

We’ve just had a horse die from African Horse Sickness something we vaccinate for every year. Makes you think a bit about vaccines.

No vaccine is 100%, Some like the TB vaccine is only 30-50% most though 80-95% , they nearly all rely on herd immunity, and with a large unvaccinated wild reservoir of disease spread by mosquitoes you will have some cases.

 

[Lowland1]

No vaccine is 100%, Some like the TB vaccine is only 30-50% most though 80-95% , they nearly all rely on herd immunity, and with a large unvaccinated wild reservoir of disease spread by mosquitoes you will have some cases.

Yes all that is true plus the fact it was an old horse so less able to fight off the virus even though vaccinated against it.

 

[Hindsight]

Dominic Raab just now radio 4. Unable to provide clarification. Seemed unsure - a cabinet minister.

Confused with definition of Table Service. McDonalds this morning seeking clarification whether there in shop model of customers queuing then sitting down will be legal. This will affect similar coffee shops etc.

Serious effect on the service sector if McDonalds and similar have to change the business model. Big user of potatoes - chips. Uncertain time ahead.

 

[Exfarmer]

Not much talk about Russia lately. Either the Sputnik vaccine is a roaring success or they are massaging the figures. Either way I would not take a jab of their stuff in case it was a "bad batch"

All countries have different methods and are not strictly speaking, in a statistical fashion comparable. Some such as India will not be analysing more than a very few per cent of deaths, and many you can be certain will be grossly adjusting their figures for political reasons.
The Russian vaccine is still not through the trial stages and is at similar stages to many western developments. They may have advantages not available to their western counterparts in testing. All Western companies will be extremely reluctant to deliberately infect any thing but a miniscule number of volunteers after vaccinating. A process we used to do with lab animals and then often condemned prisoners. The number of lab animals particularly Rhesus macaques allowed for such use today is extremely limited, and where do you find condemned prisoners in Europe?
Scientists have been seriously concerned at this shortage for several years and Covid has brought home the problem. A thousand Rhesus monkeys could have shortened trials by several months, now they will be using possibly fewer than ten people for direct infection trials and this is a fraction of what is needed, but if there were serious issues the implications could be devastating for a drug company. Instead after initial trials , we have to go into natural exposure trials and this may take months to give any kind of results and even then the results are nowhere near as solid as you will have no idea of the level of exposure each individual has had.
we know that health workers who have been exposed toheavy doses by direct contact have been far more likely to have a bad dose of Covid than others in the community , which it is assumed have had low exposure. So a vaccine may appear good until used widely only to discover it gives no protection to heavy exposure.

 

[The Agrarian]

Again the point with Sweden is the fact that they are prepared to accept deaths in return for a form of normalcy. As in most countries deaths came early on before much was understood and have reduced up to the present. The U.K policy was to avoid deaths at all costs even if it meant destroying the economy. Obviously the Swedish economy has suffered because no matter what you do at home if your trading partners are hiding away then they aren’t buying what you make.

You and I are on the same page. But I don't think the UK plan was to avoid deaths at all costs. I think they became pressured in to a lockdown, simply because (virtually) every other country was doing it. And if we didn't, the government would be for the chop if deaths were high. Much easier to do what everybody else did and suffer the economic consequences, because 'it seemed like the best thing to do at the time'.

 

[Exfarmer]

You and I are on the same page. But I don't think the UK plan was to avoid deaths at all costs. I think they became pressured in to a lockdown, simply because (virtually) every other country was doing it. And if we didn't, the government would be for the chop if deaths were high. Much easier to do what everybody else did and suffer the economic consequences, because 'it seemed like the best thing to do at the time'.

Some countries the populace do what is right and Sweden is one. As a Swedish commentator said today on the anouncement of a relaxation of the 2 metre distancing rule. ” thankfully we can return to 5 metres”
Sweden has consistently had a higher rate of mask wearing than we have , even though it is not compulsory.

 

[Old McDonald]

The posts quoted below were not flagged to me in the normal way, so I was not aware of them until a short time ago. I have taken a few minutes to check the updated figures prior to posting.

They've reduced reporting to twice a week now I think. That means they are still reporting all the figures, but less frequently. I think twice weekly is perfectly adequate whenever their death rate is so low. It's still easy to pick out a trend at this interval. They've obviously decided to put the information in the public domain in a less obtrusive way.

As for case numbers. I don't believe it's a true reflection of the number of cases anyway. Bound to be vastly underreported in most countries, therefore the death rate I think is considerably lower than the mathematicians claim.

No, they are reporting daily – but not reporting on the day that they have the results. I apologise that part of my previous post might suggest that they are not reporting daily, although I did explain what they are doing. Reporting in retrospect certainly is a less obtrusive way when cases and deaths are reported so that to a casual observer they do not show when they occur. It is necessary go back over earlier days' figures. The final figures on a daily basis are missed by most people – including you I suspect, otherwise you would not be so keen to have held Sweden in such high esteem all this time.

I gave you figures at 22nd Sept. Those for 23rd show an increase of 320 new infections and 6 more deaths, yet no new cases are reported. As at 24th the new total figure for cases is 90289 an increase of 853 cases in two days and an increase of 533 since yesterday’s 89756. Yet the number of new cases for today shows no new cases. The daily death figures are being similarly altered, but show extremely few deaths each day, sometimes none.

What Sweden is doing is altering previously reported daily figures. I am sure they are not the only country doing this because that way there is no alarming increase being reported “live” as it were. The figures for previous days are eventually shown, but the vast majority of the people still believe that Sweden is not as badly affected as it actually is because they see many days with no new cases and others with no deaths. They do not look at previous numbers, only the current reporting. I can understand there being several days delay in reports being received in some underdeveloped countries, but not one in Western Europe. As I previously posted, I am keeping a check on a small number of countries for personal reasons, and I see what is happening about daily reporting and overall numbers in these countries.

If as you say the number of cases is “vastly underreported” then Sweden has had a “vastly higher” number of cases than the already high number reported. Excluding tiny Luxembourg which has conducted enough tests to have done two for each head of population, in Europe only Spain and Belgium have a higher number of cases on a population basis. Both countries have conducted over 250,000 tests per million of population and Sweden only 150,000+ so as a consequence one would expect them to have found a lot more cases per million population than Sweden has. Irrespective of whether the number of cases is accurate, the simple fact is that the death rate from reported cases is also very high in comparison to most other countries.

Again the point with Sweden is the fact that they are prepared to accept deaths in return for a form of normalcy. As in most countries deaths came early on before much was understood and have reduced up to the present. The U.K policy was to avoid deaths at all costs even if it meant destroying the economy. Obviously the Swedish economy has suffered because no matter what you do at home if your trading partners are hiding away then they aren’t buying what you make.

This is the same argument you were using in April. Deaths are acceptable to you if “normalcy” is permitted. How many deaths? Beginning with yourself, how many of your immediate family are you willing to sacrifice for “normalcy”? I am not prepared to accept any. Money is meaningless to the dead. So what if we have to suffer years of going back to the pubs closing at 10 as they did when I was a young adult, or being limited in what is available by way of consumer goods and even food. Most food items and some other things were rationed until I was about 10 years old. I would rather see that again than have people die, any people (including you), so that “normalcy” may prevail.

In the early stage the deaths in Sweden were in line with and even lower than other countries which did not take strong measures about lockdowns, and not as you imply, higher. They have continued to rise at too high a rate. As I pointed out in my previous post, referencing my contribution to the forum in April, as at 21 April the number of deaths in Sweden was slightly more than double that of Portugal. It is now 3 times that of Portugal. That clearly means that your claim about higher numbers of deaths early, but reduced latterly, is totally wrong. Additionally at that same date Sweden had only three-quarters the number of case which Portugal had, yet now (rough figures in 000s) it is 90 to 70.

All economies have suffered. This is to be expected when so many, including the UK, receive a lot of tourist income, and especially in countries like here where ex-pat family members return in their droves at Easter (religious reasons) and summer leading to the inevitable extra expenditure of accommodating and regaling them as well as going out for bigger family meals etc.

 

[Lowland1]

The posts quoted below were not flagged to me in the normal way, so I was not aware of them until a short time ago. I have taken a few minutes to check the updated figures prior to posting.



No, they are reporting daily – but not reporting on the day that they have the results. I apologise that part of my previous post might suggest that they are not reporting daily, although I did explain what they are doing. Reporting in retrospect certainly is a less obtrusive way when cases and deaths are reported so that to a casual observer they do not show when they occur. It is necessary go back over earlier days' figures. The final figures on a daily basis are missed by most people – including you I suspect, otherwise you would not be so keen to have held Sweden in such high esteem all this time.

I gave you figures at 22nd Sept. Those for 23rd show an increase of 320 new infections and 6 more deaths, yet no new cases are reported. As at 24th the new total figure for cases is 90289 an increase of 853 cases in two days and an increase of 533 since yesterday’s 89756. Yet the number of new cases for today shows no new cases. The daily death figures are being similarly altered, but show extremely few deaths each day, sometimes none.

What Sweden is doing is altering previously reported daily figures. I am sure they are not the only country doing this because that way there is no alarming increase being reported “live” as it were. The figures for previous days are eventually shown, but the vast majority of the people still believe that Sweden is not as badly affected as it actually is because they see many days with no new cases and others with no deaths. They do not look at previous numbers, only the current reporting. I can understand there being several days delay in reports being received in some underdeveloped countries, but not one in Western Europe. As I previously posted, I am keeping a check on a small number of countries for personal reasons, and I see what is happening about daily reporting and overall numbers in these countries.

If as you say the number of cases is “vastly underreported” then Sweden has had a “vastly higher” number of cases than the already high number reported. Excluding tiny Luxembourg which has conducted enough tests to have done two for each head of population, in Europe only Spain and Belgium have a higher number of cases on a population basis. Both countries have conducted over 250,000 tests per million of population and Sweden only 150,000+ so as a consequence one would expect them to have found a lot more cases per million population than Sweden has. Irrespective of whether the number of cases is accurate, the simple fact is that the death rate from reported cases is also very high in comparison to most other countries.



This is the same argument you were using in April. Deaths are acceptable to you if “normalcy” is permitted. How many deaths? Beginning with yourself, how many of your immediate family are you willing to sacrifice for “normalcy”? I am not prepared to accept any. Money is meaningless to the dead. So what if we have to suffer years of going back to the pubs closing at 10 as they did when I was a young adult, or being limited in what is available by way of consumer goods and even food. Most food items and some other things were rationed until I was about 10 years old. I would rather see that again than have people die, any people (including you), so that “normalcy” may prevail.

In the early stage the deaths in Sweden were in line with and even lower than other countries which did not take strong measures about lockdowns, and not as you imply, higher. They have continued to rise at too high a rate. As I pointed out in my previous post, referencing my contribution to the forum in April, as at 21 April the number of deaths in Sweden was slightly more than double that of Portugal. It is now 3 times that of Portugal. That clearly means that your claim about higher numbers of deaths early, but reduced latterly, is totally wrong. Additionally at that same date Sweden had only three-quarters the number of case which Portugal had, yet now (rough figures in 000s) it is 90 to 70.

All economies have suffered. This is to be expected when so many, including the UK, receive a lot of tourist income, and especially in countries like here where ex-pat family members return in their droves at Easter (religious reasons) and summer leading to the inevitable extra expenditure of accommodating and regaling them as well as going out for bigger family meals etc.

Death is a natural part of life.From your earlier posts if I remember correctly you and your wife are in your 70's and have health issues as such you need to take care obviously, my kids do not. My wife has cancer as such she needs to be careful and I would do whatever I can for her but neither of us think that the world should stop so she can live that's just downright selfish. Life is for living and you have to make the most of it. We understand enough to know the risks of this virus and as I have repeatedly said those at risk should take the necessary precautions. My claim for numbers of deaths for Sweden being higher early on and reducing to date is correct( 5 deaths from 15/9-22/9).You ask me how many deaths is acceptable I don't have a figure but we are nowhere near what i would consider unacceptable but my Dad is 80 and as such is probably going to die sometime soon anyway so is it sensible to destroy our economy to give him another couple of years I'd say not. At present decisions are being made by very scared and i'm starting to think corrupt people. If we were at war these people would have no compunction about sacrificing the young for the greater good of the population unfortunately the older members of our society are not prepared to take precautions alone they want to make the whole of society suffer too

 

[Old McDonald]

Death is a natural part of life.From your earlier posts if I remember correctly you and your wife are in your 70's and have health issues as such you need to take care obviously, my kids do not. My wife has cancer as such she needs to be careful and I would do whatever I can for her but neither of us think that the world should stop so she can live that's just downright selfish. Life is for living and you have to make the most of it. We understand enough to know the risks of this virus and as I have repeatedly said those at risk should take the necessary precautions. My claim for numbers of deaths for Sweden being higher early on and reducing to date is correct( 5 deaths from 15/9-22/9).You ask me how many deaths is acceptable I don't have a figure but we are nowhere near what i would consider unacceptable but my Dad is 80 and as such is probably going to die sometime soon anyway so is it sensible to destroy our economy to give him another couple of years I'd say not. At present decisions are being made by very scared and i'm starting to think corrupt people. If we were at war these people would have no compunction about sacrificing the young for the greater good of the population unfortunately the older members of our society are not prepared to take precautions alone they want to make the whole of society suffer too

Unnecessary death from a preventable cause is not a natural part of life. Your approach to this whole issue has nothing whatsoever to do with my age and health, or yours and that of your family. I am 76 and had a heart operation. My wife is a few years younger but never seen a doctor for several decades – literally. We are still actively running a farming business. Currently my wife and I are harvesting almonds. In a few weeks it will be olives, and that will run through into the New Year. I am sorry about your wife’s cancer. As I posted I do not wish death upon anyone. Your claim that your kids do not need to take care is stupidity. This is precisely why there has been a worldwide spike in cases, and subsequent deaths, in recent weeks. People think they are immune.

You have singularly avoided the question of how many of your own family you would be prepared to let die. It would seem at least your father though. Have you asked him? Why is he “probably going to die sometime soon anyway”? He might well live for another 20 years. I know a number of people in their 90s who are still active, including some relatives and many more that are a few years older than me. The big problem is that you think the majority of your family are immune. Despite your claim of understanding, you seem not to understand enough to know that everybody is at risk, so everybody should take care. If the virus is left unchecked then most people will become infected. That probably includes you and your family. Some will die. It is not only the old and already chronically sick who are dying, youngsters die of it too, and who is to say how it might mutate before it ends. What if it develops into the position of killing off under 40s in preference to other age groups? Or targets young children? What lifelong effects does it have on those who have been infected? More than half a million kids in USA have tested positive. I suppose you have not seen where earlier in the month the UN reported that young child deaths have risen this year, and attributed that to lower health care attendance for pregnancies, birth and soon after, as well as a fall off in immunisations.

Your claim about deaths and timescales in Sweden is totally wrong as I have already pointed out. The graph of deaths on a daily basis shows a very similar pattern to most other European countries. There have been, according to Swedish official figures, 10 deaths from 16 Sept to 22 Sept, not the 5 you claim. At least get your facts correct from the figures Sweden is putting out. There were a further 8 reported in the two subsequent days. Expect retrospective adjustments. The number of cases has, again according to official Swedish figures, increased by 2714 in the 7 days you mention. Given that the death rate in Sweden is 1 in 15 of those officially recognised as infected, that means you are prepared to let 180 of these cases die in this one small country purely to retain “normalcy”.

You refuse to give a figure of the number of deaths which is acceptable to you, except to say it is “nowhere near what I would consider unacceptable”. To take such an attitude has to mean you have a figure in mind which is acceptable. If one in 15 is quite acceptable to you in Sweden, how about 1 in 10 that die in UK or 1 in every 8 cases in Italy. One person out of every eight who is infected must still be too low a number for you. How about if I suggest you are willing to accept 20 or 25% of those infected can be sacrificed? Or maybe even a higher percentage? Of course life is for living, but what if “normalcy” stops because people with your attitude are willing to expend so many lives that the world cannot function because there are insufficient trained people to do all that is necessary? Reduce the trained people in every job you can think of by say a quarter - and probably higher according to what you have posted over the last few months, and convince us all that the world can still have “normalcy”.

Why do you think decision makers in relation to the virus are corrupt? Your last sentence is ludicrous. You cannot possibly know what other people think. I would never previously have thought that someone would be like you and be willing to have a significant proportion of the population die in the hope that you can have “normalcy” in your life. Is that not being selfish as you claim other people are being?

 

[Chopsy Varmint]

Unnecessary death from a preventable cause is not a natural part of life.

No, people die from preventable causes all the time due to being in the wrong place at the wrong time or making the wrong decision. It is very much part of life.

Assuming you mean that people shouldn't be dying from cv19 when we can shut down everything to prevent it spreading what about all the people who will die from the effects of the measures to control the virus? Their deaths are most definitely unnecessary and due to a man-made, unnatural and preventable cause.

As things stand there will be more people who are 'collateral damage' to the virus controls than cv19 victims. An estimated 173,000 cancers have been undiagnosed since March in the UK. An extra 10,000 people have unexpectedly died at home in three months since June.

The government should be governing the whole of society for the greater good of the greatest numbers, and for the long-term future of the country. That is not happening.

 

[Henarar]

Unnecessary death from a preventable cause is not a natural part of life. Your approach to this whole issue has nothing whatsoever to do with my age and health, or yours and that of your family. I am 76 and had a heart operation. My wife is a few years younger but never seen a doctor for several decades – literally.

Nothing to do with the thread Old Mac but not seeing a doctor for decades is not always a good thing, my uncle would say how he hadn't see the doc for years and he went to sleep on the sofa one night and never woke up, when they found out the cause it was something with an easy fix that could have easy been picked up on, so perhaps an MOT every now and then is not such a bad idea ?
Just a thought

 

[Lowland1]

Unnecessary death from a preventable cause is not a natural part of life. Your approach to this whole issue has nothing whatsoever to do with my age and health, or yours and that of your family. I am 76 and had a heart operation. My wife is a few years younger but never seen a doctor for several decades – literally. We are still actively running a farming business. Currently my wife and I are harvesting almonds. In a few weeks it will be olives, and that will run through into the New Year. I am sorry about your wife’s cancer. As I posted I do not wish death upon anyone. Your claim that your kids do not need to take care is stupidity. This is precisely why there has been a worldwide spike in cases, and subsequent deaths, in recent weeks. People think they are immune.

You have singularly avoided the question of how many of your own family you would be prepared to let die. It would seem at least your father though. Have you asked him? Why is he “probably going to die sometime soon anyway”? He might well live for another 20 years. I know a number of people in their 90s who are still active, including some relatives and many more that are a few years older than me. The big problem is that you think the majority of your family are immune. Despite your claim of understanding, you seem not to understand enough to know that everybody is at risk, so everybody should take care. If the virus is left unchecked then most people will become infected. That probably includes you and your family. Some will die. It is not only the old and already chronically sick who are dying, youngsters die of it too, and who is to say how it might mutate before it ends. What if it develops into the position of killing off under 40s in preference to other age groups? Or targets young children? What lifelong effects does it have on those who have been infected? More than half a million kids in USA have tested positive. I suppose you have not seen where earlier in the month the UN reported that young child deaths have risen this year, and attributed that to lower health care attendance for pregnancies, birth and soon after, as well as a fall off in immunisations.

Your claim about deaths and timescales in Sweden is totally wrong as I have already pointed out. The graph of deaths on a daily basis shows a very similar pattern to most other European countries. There have been, according to Swedish official figures, 10 deaths from 16 Sept to 22 Sept, not the 5 you claim. At least get your facts correct from the figures Sweden is putting out. There were a further 8 reported in the two subsequent days. Expect retrospective adjustments. The number of cases has, again according to official Swedish figures, increased by 2714 in the 7 days you mention. Given that the death rate in Sweden is 1 in 15 of those officially recognised as infected, that means you are prepared to let 180 of these cases die in this one small country purely to retain “normalcy”.

You refuse to give a figure of the number of deaths which is acceptable to you, except to say it is “nowhere near what I would consider unacceptable”. To take such an attitude has to mean you have a figure in mind which is acceptable. If one in 15 is quite acceptable to you in Sweden, how about 1 in 10 that die in UK or 1 in every 8 cases in Italy. One person out of every eight who is infected must still be too low a number for you. How about if I suggest you are willing to accept 20 or 25% of those infected can be sacrificed? Or maybe even a higher percentage? Of course life is for living, but what if “normalcy” stops because people with your attitude are willing to expend so many lives that the world cannot function because there are insufficient trained people to do all that is necessary? Reduce the trained people in every job you can think of by say a quarter - and probably higher according to what you have posted over the last few months, and convince us all that the world can still have “normalcy”.

Why do you think decision makers in relation to the virus are corrupt? Your last sentence is ludicrous. You cannot possibly know what other people think. I would never previously have thought that someone would be like you and be willing to have a significant proportion of the population die in the hope that you can have “normalcy” in your life. Is that not being selfish as you claim other people are being?

You are very angry and worried so whatever I say will upset you. I just wrote a big long reply and then thought this argument will never end so I have my views and your have yours and as such the two like us will never meet.

 

[Old McDonald]

You are very angry and worried so whatever I say will upset you. I just wrote a big long reply and then thought this argument will never end so I have my views and your have yours and as such the two like us will never meet.

Wrong. I have already told you that you cannot know what people think. I am neither angry nor worried and I am too old to be upset by what anyone writes on a forum - with the exception that I do most strongly object to the several posters who from time to time suggest that I have been drinking too much when I post something they do not like.

Do what you want in regard to thinking you are immune. You are the one risking your life and that of your family, possibly just a lifetime of health problems, or you might be lucky and never be infected.

I am quite happy to go along with your suggestion that we will never agree and let the matter end here.