wakka12 wrote: » The largest community antibody testing to date which was in New York has determined a mortality rate of 0.8%. Which is considerably higher
charlie14 wrote: » You make it sound as if hospitals are refusing to treat anyone who is not infected or showing symptoms. That is not the case. Neither is visiting your doctor by appointment or a doctor visiting you in an emergency. If covid19 is out of control in a country then there may be no other option than the Swedish approach, but far as I recall from a video interview with one of Tegnell`s top advisors post here some time ago, when asked about the situation in Britain he appeared to be of the belief it was not a good idea. Personally, I favor attempting to control the spread rather than have it running out of control, and as he appeared to believe,then being left with no other options. No idea where Sweden is on obesity, but Scandinavian countries live a much healthier lifestyle than we do far as I know, so I imagine their obesity levels are much lower than ours.
Ginger n Lemon wrote: » California study has showed 0.12-0.2% death rate. German study has shown 0.36% but actual virologist said its more in the region of 0.24-0.26%. It varies population to population, unfortunately something that isnt in mainstream media is that a lot of people struggling with covid are obese. New york would have its fair share of obese unfortunately. UK is another country with obesity problem. However, even with 0.8%, the measures being implemented currently are completely disproportionate.
charlie14 wrote: » I did, and as another poster already pointed out there is a corona virus for cattle. Pharmaceutical companies follow the money like all businesses.It made it financially worth while to develop a vaccine for cattle so you can be assured this corona virus will get their full attention unlike other recent viruses. When representing statistics as percentages it can be easy to disregard the actual figures. As your German scientist said it is always best to err on the side of caution, so if we go with your 0.5% that we should not fear.That 0.5% would result in 25,000 deaths in Ireland from Covid19. The total deaths in Ireland last year prior to Covid19 were 32,000. 0.65%
niallo27 wrote: » Genuine question, how may of the 32k do you think would die anyway even if they had not contracted the virus.
tobefrank321 wrote: » You clearly didn't see Prime Time last night. A man waiting on a cataract operation despite paying health insurance for 50 years has been put to the back of a public queue. There is no such thing as private consultants now, they are all public, dealing with public queues. And yes consultations have gone down dramatically because of the lockdown. Is it right that young people's lives should be put at risk for an illness that primarily affects the over 80 category in this country? Those over 80s have had long lives. But if a young woman dies of cervical cancer or a young man of testicular cancer with their entire lives ahead of them because of a lockdown, this is unforgiveable. And there is no doubt many will because cancer doesn't go into lockdown.
charlie14 wrote: » In which case we would be looking at 40,000 deaths from Covid19 alone, in a country were deaths last year from all other causes were 32,000. But no need to fear Covid19 it seems!
growleaves wrote: » As I've been saying for seven weeks, mortality rates out of NYC, Lombardy, Madrid aren't going to be representative of the whole world. Reason: More people are dying in NYC, Lombardy etc. than the rest of the world. This basic error is why so many boardsies predicted death rates of 1-7% and one guy even claimed 21%.
tobefrank321 wrote: » We completely missed the boat in late February/early March to limit deaths to a NZ/Finland/Taiwan or even Portugal type situation. Because of that, there will be a large number of deaths regardless of what you do, lockdown or no lockdown. We could lockdown for 10 years and deaths in nursing homes would be almost exactly the same as with no lockdown, because all it takes is one infected person to infect an entire nursing home, especially if you have very poor infection controls. If a patient gets infected in a hospital and is then sent to a nursing home, they infect everyone there. The solution is to use intelligence to solve this problem. Patients should not be put in a nursing home without a negative test result. Staff should be tested often and should be isolated from the community as much as possible. Shutting everything down is a dumb lazymans approach favoured by our government because they are too lazy to come up with a plan. Unless they can copy someone else's plan they are not interested.
tobefrank321 wrote: » Shutting everything down is a dumb lazymans approach favoured by our government because they are too lazy to come up with a plan. Unless they can copy someone else's plan they are not interested.
Kermit.de.frog wrote: » Another 87 more deaths for Sweden, will move ahead of the Netherlands tomorrow for deaths per million.
Breezin wrote: » Same as us so. And, actually, that's a turn downwards in their curve.
PhoenixParker wrote: » Theyve had 1604 admitted to intensive care, 30-40 in the last day. Ireland has had 364 with numbers in single digits most days in the last 2 weeks. That's not tallying with Sweden's death rate or their outlook for me.
wakka12 wrote: » It is much higher than us. Their death figures the last 3 days have been 2x/3x higher than ours per capita
Breezin wrote: » That is too short a term for any reasonable assessment. They are at 2,854 total today; we are at 1,339. That is proportionally the same, meaning we have inflicted massive damage on our society with no gain.
jibber5000 wrote: » Our ICU figures were massively skewed. In Italy for example the vast majority of those who died were admitted to ICU. We decided to limit the amount of patient's who would be suitable for ICU. In effect the vast majority of patients admitted with Covid were immediately made for ward based management. Hence the extraordinary low numbers of deaths in ICU here (approx 60 at this stage.) Going by the numbers admitted to ICU is a really poor comparison to make.
wakka12 wrote: » Sweden's economy has been badly damaged as well, you know? No winners here
Hmmzis wrote: » The very best we can try to do until a miracle drug or vaccine comes around is to do our best to not get infected and not infect others around us, to the best our abilities. If with some collection of the measures we can get our unemployment down below the 20% marker, we should be able to limp it out till the drug or vaccine arrives. The real hard tasks is to find a set of measures that allow us to do that without keeling over the healthcare system and having nursing homes decimated. The lockdown we have doesn't do that, so we have to find a different way.
Widdensushi wrote: » not compared to ours bars,restaurants, businesses are still open in Sweden
wakka12 wrote: » 14%https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-warning-as-major-study-finds-most-elderly-victims-would-not-have-died-otherwise-11980675
niallo27 wrote: » Thought it would be higher myself.
