Sweden avoiding lockdown

Deleted User wrote: »

Not when you are in an economic environment with deflationary pressures and have productive capacity to absorb the extra liquidity

Well Angela Merkel says no to eurobonds carry on.

I think she says no because there is no productive capacity to absorb any liquidity, not in Eurozone anyways.

Deleted User wrote: »

Not when you are in an economic environment with deflationary pressures and have productive capacity to absorb the extra liquidity

But the ECB hate printing money other than for loans. Loans have to be paid back. We can't even pay back our current loans. Nevermind new ones.

It would be great if the ECB paid off every countrys debts in Europe - I don't think this would create too much inflation as it wouldn't impact most people's spending power.

But there is no mechanism for them to do this.

Its just going to be another case of the people paying for the mistakes of governments. At least its not the banks at fault this time.

[Deleted User]

Ginger n Lemon wrote: »

You are correct. Sweden have their own currency, they understand that when you print money you drive inflation up, amongst other things that you will eventually have to face up to.

So while we may have saved up some money, in the long term we will pay higher prices for things and there is considerable talk of increases to income tax and USC in October, so we will pay even more in taxes.

PS businesses getting support from government now are on loan terms, have to be paid back, any potential pay increases to staff can be disregarded pretty quickly as businesses will HAVE TO repay loans obtained from the government first.

Not when you are in an economic environment with deflationary pressures and have productive capacity to absorb the extra liquidity

wakka12 wrote: »

No they do not, New York has 4.5x times as many deaths per capita, because it obviously has many factors as many number of infections too. Meaning Stockholm is not anywhere close to herd immunity, not that that is in any way surprising but some posters seem to want to defend the false claims of several Swedish authorities to the hilt despite there being so much proof to the contrary

Well its great that Stockholm have relatively low deaths and cases if true.

I'd imagine its a far less dense city than NYC so this might make a difference.

Obesity certainly does too.

But also their healthcare system which is very socialised.

They made some huge mistakes in NYC too, such as long queues with no social distancing at A&Es to get tested. Insanity. And their underground is probably the busiest in the world. While they are a huge air transport hub and also a massively multicultural city with people flying in from every covid 19 hotspot you could imagine.

As for Sweden, so far we have not seen the doomsday scenarios come true. So its worth examining at least what they are doing right.

We were told by some people on here that Sweden was heading for disaster and despite them being reasonably relaxed about it and us in lockdown for 8 full weeks, our deaths per million is very similar.

So yes we can learn from the Swedes how to live with covid 19 without sending our economy down the drain.

Ginger n Lemon wrote: »

New york city, average age 36 years of age.

Sweden average age, 41.

Much younger population? When you make such statements, it seems like 80% of new yorkers are under 30.

Tell me your thoughts though, what % of population in NY has had corona in your opinion? What % has had it in Sweden in your opinion bearing in mind that their capital has 30% of population already infected + recovered from covid?

Average of 5 years is a big difference mate. The way you talk about Americans, youd think they were all obese. When only 28% of New Yorkers are obese , vs 19% of Swedes. So you are one to talk about exaggeration. And you seriously think an 8% higher obesity rate explains a 4.5x times higher rate of deaths per capita in New York?

I think 20-25% of New Yorkers were infected, because thats what the antibody test said. What I think is entirely irrelevant, as is the opinion of the ambassador until an antibody test in Stockholm proves a percentage that high. But common sense would tell you it would obviously be far lower than infection rates in NYC, and this is further backed up by the comparatively low number of deaths

But anyway, you dont seem to want to discuss with logic or reason. Ok, 1 in 3 Swedes have it then!! but only a handful of deaths, they are just an outstanding exceptions, with no valid excuse as to why this situation would turn out so differento the rest of the world for them. Wow great job Sweden! I shall not question it any further, Ginger Lemon, whatever the Swedish authorities say is a fact

Cupatae

tobefrank321 wrote: »

Young people with underlying conditions. These people know if they are susceptible and are already cocooning.

Seriously, under what scenario do you think people with underlying conditions cannot cocoon while coronavirus exists?

Had we achieved what NZ did maybe. We didn't. So now we are stuck with covid 19 long term if not permanently. You think in that scenario those with underlying conditions can just go about their normal lives? They cannot until there is a vaccine or herd immunity. Take your pick.

Peddling the myth that all young people are susceptible and in danger of dying from covid 19 is one of the worst lies about this illness. A very small number are susceptible, mostly those with underlying conditions.

We know now this is not the arbitrary illness we were told it was in the early days. Its very specific. In Ireland something like 80% of deaths are in the over 80 age category. And 90% of those infected over 80 will make a full recovery.

It isnt a black and white issue, though if what you are peddling was feasible we d have done it already.. theirs no boogey man out there willfully trying to make this pandemic as devastating as possible to the country.

What works for NZ might not work for us here..people keep quoting sweden but give it another couple of weeks that wont be long stopping.

wakka12 wrote: »

How could Stockholm possibly, in any reality, have 30% more infections than New York city, one of the largest busiest and most densely populated cities on earth. Stockholm is comparatively a backwater

Youre massively overstating the important of obesity. Age is by far the largest risk factor, New York has a very young population compared to Sweden

1 in 4 New Yorkers are obese, 1 in 5 Swedes, not big enough a disparity to even slightly go to exmplain the gargantuan difference in number of deaths per capita

New york city, average age 36 years of age.

Sweden average age, 41.

Much younger population? When you make such statements, it seems like 80% of new yorkers are under 30.

Tell me your thoughts though, what % of population in NY has had corona in your opinion? What % has had it in Sweden in your opinion bearing in mind that their capital has 30% of population already infected + recovered from covid?

tobefrank321 wrote: »

Do Stockholm and NYC not have a similar deaths per capita?

There's a high death rate in both NY and Stockholm's nursing homes.

The nursing home issue will be a long term problem for every country, lockdown or no lockdown.

No they do not, New York has 4.5x times as many deaths per capita, because it obviously has many factors as many number of infections too. Meaning Stockholm is not anywhere close to herd immunity, not that that is in any way surprising but some posters seem to want to defend the false claims of several Swedish authorities to the hilt despite there being so much proof to the contrary

wakka12 wrote: »

How could Stockholm possibly, in any reality, have 30% more infections than New York city, one of the largest busiest and most densely populated cities on earth. Stockholm is comparatively a backwater

Youre massively overstating the important of obesity. Age is by far the largest risk factor, New York has a very young population compared to Sweden

1 in 4 New Yorkers are obese, 1 in 5 Swedes, not big enough a disparity to even slightly go to exmplain the gargantuan difference in number of deaths per capita

Do Stockholm and NYC not have a similar deaths per capita?

There's a high death rate in both NY and Stockholm's nursing homes.

The nursing home issue will be a long term problem for every country, lockdown or no lockdown.

Ginger n Lemon wrote: »

Herd immunity is being achieved in New York, and they have 15 000 + deaths there, 21% of NYC people already had covid.

Mortality about 0.65-0.8%. There is obesity factor you have to take into account too as US population is heavily obese, unfortunately.

UK has a lot of deaths too sadly and obesity is playing a role there too.

Their ambassador being wrong? I know we can speculate on these forums but er I would chose to trust their ambassador.

How could Stockholm possibly, in any reality, have 30% more infections than New York city, one of the largest busiest and most densely populated cities on earth. Stockholm is comparatively a backwater

Youre massively overstating the important of obesity. Age is by far the largest risk factor, New York has a very young population compared to Sweden

1 in 4 New Yorkers are obese, 1 in 5 Swedes, not big enough a disparity to even slightly go to exmplain the gargantuan difference in number of deaths per capita

biko wrote: »

An American living in Sweden discusses the Swedish experiment around the Coronavirus pandemic with his Swedish girlfriend.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yh8l2LlvdHk

Young couple speaking sense.

Refreshing.

No Neil Ferguson in sight with his imperial college models predicting death and destruction from Swine flu in UK.

Cupatae wrote: »

I cant tell if you are trolling or not... because alot of people seem to have the same genius idea.. imprison the elderly and return everyone else to normal with a click of the auld fingers.

One slight problem with this.. its not just the elderly that become critically ill with the disease, young people can aswell. So there goes your "it only affects the elderly we ll all be fine" theory down like a lead balloon.

Letting mass amounts of even young people contract it in the hope of ahhh it ll be grand only kills the auld... wont work so the spread has to be slowed significantly, then the lower risk groups can return...this might come as a shock but we arent in lockdown for the laugh, they didnt flip a coin on whether to go into lockdown or not.. there is a reason nearly every other country bar your sacred sweden are in lockdown

Remember when the UK gave the "ahh it ll be grand...herd immunity only kills the auld shur!" a crack? yeah...now they are decimated with it.

Young people with underlying conditions. These people know if they are susceptible and are already cocooning.

Seriously, under what scenario do you think people with underlying conditions cannot cocoon while coronavirus exists?

Had we achieved what NZ did maybe. We didn't. So now we are stuck with covid 19 long term if not permanently. You think in that scenario those with underlying conditions can just go about their normal lives? They cannot until there is a vaccine or herd immunity. Take your pick.

Peddling the myth that all young people are susceptible and in danger of dying from covid 19 is one of the worst lies about this illness. A very small number are susceptible, mostly those with underlying conditions.

We know now this is not the arbitrary illness we were told it was in the early days. Its very specific. In Ireland something like 80% of deaths are in the over 80 age category. And 90% of those infected over 80 will make a full recovery.

wakka12 wrote: »

So why has herd immunity not been achieved in any of the many other epicentres worldwide which have reported many times more deaths per capita? Is there something special about Swedish genes which protects them from this illness? Why does every other country have to experience so much more death than sweden to achieve herd immunity? Or much more likely, the ambassador is simply wrong

Herd immunity is being achieved in New York, and they have 15 000 + deaths there, 21% of NYC people already had covid.

Mortality about 0.65-0.8%. There is obesity factor you have to take into account too as US population is heavily obese, unfortunately.

UK has a lot of deaths too sadly and obesity is playing a role there too.

Their ambassador being wrong? I know we can speculate on these forums but er I would chose to trust their ambassador.

Mike3287

biko wrote: »

An American living in Sweden discusses the Swedish experiment around the Coronavirus pandemic with his Swedish girlfriend.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yh8l2LlvdHk

They will they take that down soon

Too positive

Good watch btw

Sounds like you've a better chance of being struck down by lightning than young persons like them dieing of Covid19

Cupatae

tobefrank321 wrote: »

I've said clearly. I couldn't have said it more times - at risk groups will need to continue to isolate until there is a vaccine. Lockdown, no lockdown, etc.

And that's actually not my advice, its experts and governments advice.

I cant tell if you are trolling or not... because alot of people seem to have the same genius idea.. imprison the elderly and return everyone else to normal with a click of the auld fingers.

One slight problem with this.. its not just the elderly that become critically ill with the disease, young people can aswell. So there goes your "it only affects the elderly we ll all be fine" theory down like a lead balloon.

Letting mass amounts of even young people contract it in the hope of ahhh it ll be grand only kills the auld... wont work so the spread has to be slowed significantly, then the lower risk groups can return...this might come as a shock but we arent in lockdown for the laugh, they didnt flip a coin on whether to go into lockdown or not.. there is a reason nearly every other country bar your sacred sweden are in lockdown

Remember when the UK gave the "ahh it ll be grand...herd immunity only kills the auld shur!" a crack? yeah...now they are decimated with it.

biko

An American living in Sweden discusses the Swedish experiment around the Coronavirus pandemic with his Swedish girlfriend.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yh8l2LlvdHk

Ginger n Lemon wrote: »

"According to the Swedish Ambassador to the U.S., Karin Ulrika Olofsdotter, Stockholm is on course to reach herd immunity in May.

“About 30% of people in Stockholm have reached a level of immunity,” said Olofsdotter in an interview with NPR. “We could reach herd immunity in the capital as early as next month May.”

tell me about Dublin, my friend?

death rates arent higher cus of 0.3% mortality, we talked about this. you will not see 50 000 dead swedes off covid, please forget about it.

So why has herd immunity not been achieved in any of the many other epicentres worldwide which have reported many times more deaths per capita? Is there something special about Swedish genes which protects them from this illness? Why does every other country have to experience so much more death than sweden to achieve herd immunity? Or much more likely, the ambassador is simply wrong

wakka12 wrote: »

They are not out there getting infected in any much greater number that the rest of Europe, otherwise it would be reflected in far higher death rates. Infection has been reduced greatly in Sweden due to social distancing measures

"According to the Swedish Ambassador to the U.S., Karin Ulrika Olofsdotter, Stockholm is on course to reach herd immunity in May.

“About 30% of people in Stockholm have reached a level of immunity,” said Olofsdotter in an interview with NPR. “We could reach herd immunity in the capital as early as next month May.”

tell me about Dublin, my friend?

death rates arent higher cus of 0.3% mortality, we talked about this. you will not see 50 000 dead swedes off covid, please forget about it.

Ginger n Lemon wrote: »

They are developing immunity as we speak. Public is out there getting infected and 80% don't even feel it.

Go on the Swedes

They are not out there getting infected in any much greater number that the rest of Europe, otherwise it would be reflected in far higher death rates. Infection has been reduced greatly in Sweden due to social distancing measures

PhoenixParker

tobefrank321 wrote: »

Sources for what? This is all common knowledge.

"Common" knowledge doesnt make it correct or accurate. Most of what you say seems to be you half understanding the latest research is pointing towards and massively overstating the case.

Mike3287

tobefrank321 wrote: »

The bovine coronavirus vaccine is a weakened live virus vaccine.

The problem with live virus vaccines is they cannot be given to pregnant women or those with weakened immune systems, which kind of invalidates the whole purpose of a coronavirus vaccine. You'd be dependent on herd immunity to do its job.

.

That's how farmers did it in the old days

They would get sick of milk etc being rejected by dairies over a few infected cattle

What they would do is get a swab with a live virus from one of the infected cattle and let everyone of the cattle have a lick of the swab, they would all get infected, get better, herd immunity and back to business selling milk to dairies

charlie14 wrote: »

As I and others have already pointed out to you a vaccine for cattle was developed because the market was there. There was no such market for it for humans until now.
There is no evidence of what if any immunity can result from being infected or how long it would last. If you let this virus run riot to your estimated 99% then a vaccine is a much better option for grandparents hugging their grandchildren than a Russian roulette immunity hope.

There are no intricacies involved in the Swedish strategy for the aged and vulnerable that differs from ours. Unless all other Swedes develop immunity to this and any future outbreaks, they are in the same boat and will still require a vaccine for their aged and vulnerable.

The bovine coronavirus vaccine is a weakened live virus vaccine.

The problem with live virus vaccines is they cannot be given to pregnant women or those with weakened immune systems, which kind of invalidates the whole purpose of a coronavirus vaccine. You'd be dependent on herd immunity to do its job.

A vaccine made from a virus that has been weakened so it does not cause the disease the virus usually causes. A live virus vaccine helps the body’s immune system recognize and fight infections caused by the non-weakened form of the virus. Examples of live virus vaccines are the chickenpox vaccine and the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine. It is not safe for pregnant women or people with weak immune systems to receive a live virus vaccine.

https://www.cancer.gov/publications/dictionaries/cancer-terms/def/live-virus-vaccine

So it might not be as straightforward as the bovine vaccine.

charlie14 wrote: »

As I and others have already pointed out to you a vaccine for cattle was developed because the market was there. There was no such market for it for humans until now.
There is no evidence of what if any immunity can result from being infected or how long it would last. If you let this virus run riot to your estimated 99% then a vaccine is a much better option for grandparents hugging their grandchildren than a Russian roulette immunity hope.

There are no intricacies involved in the Swedish strategy for the aged and vulnerable that differs from ours. Unless all other Swedes develop immunity to this and any future outbreaks, they are in the same boat and will still require a vaccine for their aged and vulnerable.

They are developing immunity as we speak. Public is out there getting infected and 80% don't even feel it.

Go on the Swedes

PhoenixParker wrote: »

Again sources?

Sources for what?

This is all common knowledge.

charlie14

Ginger n Lemon wrote: »

I am afraid as has been discussed earlier here, human race has not developed any vaccines against any human corona viruses in our history. So thinking covid will be different because Bill Gates says so is wishful thinking.

Any drug developed isnt going to prevent people from getting ill. Only way to proceed is to let healthy individuals contract it, recover from it and develop antibodies and immunity. You should ofcourse protect your elderly, but at some stage you really have to ask if elderly people at 85, 86, 87 want to wait 2 - 3 years in isolation or awkward social distancing without hugging their grandchildren?

Swedish model eliminates a lot of complications and intricacies and allows citizens to live life as they wish. Of course they recommend people to protect themselves but by no means do they impose house arrests/ separate people from each other. (and wont need to in the future)

As I and others have already pointed out to you a vaccine for cattle was developed because the market was there. There was no such market for it for humans until now.
There is no evidence of what if any immunity can result from being infected or how long it would last. If you let this virus run riot to your estimated 99% then a vaccine is a much better option for grandparents hugging their grandchildren than a Russian roulette immunity hope.

There are no intricacies involved in the Swedish strategy for the aged and vulnerable that differs from ours. Unless all other Swedes develop immunity to this and any future outbreaks, they are in the same boat and will still require a vaccine for their aged and vulnerable.

PhoenixParker

tobefrank321 wrote: »

Again a bit of intelligence would help here. Several hospitals worldwide already proved that ventilation is not the best approach. We also have new drugs coming on stream that lesson the length of time people remain in ICU if they go there.

Have the HSE been following these international developments and planning accordingly?

With proper social distancing and vulnerable groups continuing to isolate, we could get it to 0.05% is what I said. And if some end up hospitalised or in ICU, we can use latest research to improve their outcomes.

Eventually with huge improvements in treatment the fatality rate from covid19 should fall hugely. This is where our efforts should be. Not shutting everyone in their home like some medieval quarantine.

At this stage the scaremongers are a bigger danger than the actual disease.

Again sources?

ldy4mxonucwsq6

wakka12 wrote: »

Yes, I don't see what people could be spending money on other than food, as a lot of rents are frozen too. A couple who both lost jobs would be taking in 700 a week, I would assume by the end of lockdown they would have significant excess money to spend and circulate back into the economy

Mortgage, food, bills, insurance etc etc all still continuing for many many people who no longer have the security of an income and possibly no job at all at the end of it.

You won't have much change (if any) after €2800 a month to run a home with a couple of kids too.

Spending power will not be there add to that the fact that people will realise how much of their spending is not essential and impulsive, the stimulus won't be there.

PhoenixParker wrote: »

Half the people in ICUs are 62 are younger.

Only 133 of the 369 admitted to ICU here were over 65

https://www.hpsc.ie/a-z/respiratory/coronavirus/novelcoronavirus/casesinireland/epidemiologyofcovid-19inireland/COVID-19%20Epidemiology%20report%20for%20NPHET%2020200505_v1%20-Website.pdf

When ICU beds run out, and they're a scarce commodity, the death rates for younger people sky rocket. That is what the lockdown is trying to avoid.

Saying the death rate is 0.1% or less for the under 60s is missing a huge chunk of the picture.

Again a bit of intelligence would help here. Several hospitals worldwide already proved that ventilation is not the best approach. We also have new drugs coming on stream that lesson the length of time people remain in ICU if they go there.

Have the HSE been following these international developments and planning accordingly?

With proper social distancing and vulnerable groups continuing to isolate, we could get it to 0.05% is what I said. And if some end up hospitalised or in ICU, we can use latest research to improve their outcomes.

Eventually with huge improvements in treatment the fatality rate from covid19 should fall hugely. This is where our efforts should be. Not shutting everyone in their home like some medieval quarantine.

At this stage the scaremongers are a bigger danger than the actual disease.

jibber5000

PhoenixParker wrote: »

Half the people in ICUs are 62 are younger.

Only 133 of the 369 admitted to ICU here were over 65

https://www.hpsc.ie/a-z/respiratory/coronavirus/novelcoronavirus/casesinireland/epidemiologyofcovid-19inireland/COVID-19%20Epidemiology%20report%20for%20NPHET%2020200505_v1%20-Website.pdf

When ICU beds run out, and they're a scarce commodity, the death rates for younger people sky rocket. That is what the lockdown is trying to avoid.

Saying the death rate is 0.1% or less for the under 60s is missing a huge chunk of the picture.

That's the key point here. We are not admitting elderly patients to ICU.

It is one of the main things the HSE has got right.

Against that our ICU capacity is much greater than we were led to believe at the start of the outbreak.