PhoenixParker wrote: » Source for any of that?
niallo27 wrote: » How do you mean excess money over covid payments, do you mean after 350 a week.
wakka12 wrote: » And nobody is in them, they are failing. Do you think our economy would be doing better if we opened up all our businesses and they didnt make any money because nobody is leaving their home? When the lockdown is over, people will have a lot of excess money because of covid payments. Those business owners in Sweden are just operating a business making no money, and because of that are not being assisted finanically by the governmenthttps://www.reuters.com/article/health-coronavirus-sweden-retail/swedish-apparel-sales-tumble-even-as-stores-spared-coronavirus-lockdown-idUSL5N2BX1EK
tobefrank321 wrote: » Nursing homes account for half of deaths across Europe. Because of this the death rate is artificially high. Outside of a nursing ome the death rate for the general population is likely about 0.1 - 0.2%. If you are under 60, the death rate is very likely 0.1%. Out of 6000 infected healthcare workers here, 5 passed away, a death rate of less than 0.1%. Its probably the most realistic sample of the 20-60 population we are going to have, in the absence of other sampling. And 6000 is a large sample.
charlie14 wrote: » Some here have even predicted 0.1%. The simple answer is we do not know. What we do know is that when health services get overrun the percentage goes up.
niallo27 wrote: » Thought it would be higher myself.
wakka12 wrote: » 14%https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-warning-as-major-study-finds-most-elderly-victims-would-not-have-died-otherwise-11980675
Widdensushi wrote: » not compared to ours bars,restaurants, businesses are still open in Sweden
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.
wakka12 wrote: » Sweden's economy has been badly damaged as well, you know? No winners here
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.
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.
wakka12 wrote: » It is much higher than us. Their death figures the last 3 days have been 2x/3x higher than ours per capita
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.
Breezin wrote: » Same as us so. And, actually, that's a turn downwards in their curve.
Kermit.de.frog wrote: » Another 87 more deaths for Sweden, will move ahead of the Netherlands tomorrow for deaths per million.
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.
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.
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%.
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!
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: » 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%
