charlie14 wrote: » Your point was that our own antibodies would return us to health. Sweden went with that train of thought in their strategy. Based on modelling figures they assumed that those infected would develop antibodies in high enough numbers that should there be a recurrence those numbers would provide herd immunity. Sweden`s own tests have shown that not to be the case with just 6.1% nationally having developed antibodies where the absolute minimum for herd immunity is 60%. Tests by others such as Spain and France have shown the same national levels. Even with the small percentages that have tested positive for antibodies, it is unknown how effective their antibodies would be in the event of another wave. Or even how long that effectiveness will last for.
99nsr125 wrote: » How about a comparable virus spread in the same way not just other viruses. Rabies is present in saliva in sufficient concentration to transmit via inhalation of droplets and contact with your eyes. Hence the entire don't touch your face and wash your hands guidelines. We live with it but don't lockdown the half of the world that has it in circulation.
Bit cynical wrote: » Some countries however are likely to fare quite badly economically. France, for example, are forecast to shrink in GDP by about 12% (IMF), 10% (Banque de France). Spain's GDP is set to shrink by 13% (IMF). Even Germany's GDP will shrink by 8% (IMF) and they had a fairly mild coronavirus outbreak. In contrast, Sweden's central bank has revised their forecast from about -9% (is that right Charlie14?) to the latest of -4.1% as more information comes in about the actual impact. The IMF still has them at -6.8% however. The general trend in the forecasts seems to be that Sweden's gets more benign and other countries more severe as the information comes in.
99nsr125 wrote: » And your antibodies will return you to health this is undeniable. Your other choice is to runaway and that destroys everything, advocating for that kills everyone and everything. Life in a bunker is no more than waiting to die and forcing other people to do the same is bestowing a death sentence on everyone else.
charlie14 wrote: » Have you even read what I posted ? Only a tiny percentage have developed antibodies. Sweden put their faith in antibodies and are now edging ever closer to Italy as the 4th most deaths per capita of 51 European countries. Nobody is asking you to live in a bunker. Just to follow a few simple guidelines and have a bit of respect for your fellow human beings.
Lack of language skills in elderly care staff may have contributed to problems during the corona pandemic. The question of language competence is important for Lina Nordquist, a healthcare policy spokesperson and MP for the Liberals. She is certain that language bias has been a concern during the corona spring. - It would be strange if there is no longer a problem during the pandemic. It has been a problem for many years before, she says. - A lot of it is about understanding the hygiene routines and then the language is very important. She wants to see tougher language skills requirements. Today, the National Board of Health and Welfare has a recommendation that the elderly care staff should have "the ability to understand, speak, read and write Swedish". - The National Board of Health and Welfare needs to tighten its requirements when it comes to languages. To change from recommendations to requirements, she says.
The staff shortage in elderly care means that employers employ people who cannot speak Swedish well enough, according to KA's review. - There are no restrictions whatsoever on how little Swedish you speak, says Elisabeth Antfolk
tobefrank321 wrote: » I'm not sure there's been a recent widespread antibodies test in Sweden, ie mid June onwards. Stockholm would have the highest rate of infections so its pointless doing it for the entire country. I think there is one other area that has seen a significant spike lately. The latest tests in NYC show in some areas antibodies close to 70% of the population, enough to confer herd immunity in that community. These would be the less well off essential workers who work in transport and so on. The more affluent are still susceptible as they have lower infection rates. Herd immunity gives you mixed results, a lot of deaths in the short and medium term but it means you are reasonably protected for a second wave. There is no evidence Sweden have achieved it or that is even their strategy anymore. Their strategy appears to be to encourage people to voluntarily do their own thing, giving people the option to cocoon or else go about their daily business. Its not as if our own lockdown has been collateral free by the way - schools and universities closed or online only, Leaving Cert farce, creches closing daily, hotels at 25% capacity, B&Bs in trouble. Normal life has continued on better in Sweden than most countries and this has been their strategy.
charlie14 wrote: » 50,000 antibody tests carried out by Werlabs AB over a 6 week period up to 17th June showed just 14% for Stockholm and 6.1% nationally. Bergamo the epicenter of Italy`s infections showed 57%. Sweden claim their R number is below 1, so there is no way even Stockholm can reach herd immunity let alone the rest of Sweden. It has been an experiment with peoples lives that has caused unnecessary deaths. The comment of the Director General of their Public Health Authority Jahan Carlson, from a recent Biko post, of it being a "coincidence" was nothing short of shameful. If there is a second wave not only do we not know how effective those antibodies will be or for long, the percentages are so low as to be negligible anyway in halting the spread. Sweden may have kept shops, bars, restaurants, barbers, hairdressers, etc open but it is very questionable as too just how much business they did. Consumer spending in Sweden in a recent Danske Bank survey showed just 4% greater than Denmark under lockdown. There does seem to be a bit of a sea change in how those business`s are being allowed to operate of late though. Local authorities are now responsible for how they operate. These local authorities have warned proprietors that the enforcing of social distancing and other restrictions are the responsibility of the proprietors and they will shut down those that are not complying.
tobefrank321 wrote: » So you agree they are not pursuing herd immunity? If they admit their R is below 1. For herd immunity to happen it would need to be at least 2.
greyday wrote: » https://www.vice.com/en_au/article/xgqjyd/sweden-thinks-herd-immunity-is-the-answer-to-coronavirus The population didn't play ball thankfully, it would have been far worse than we are seeing at present if people did not curtail their activity.
Gatherings of more than 50 people are banned. Museums have closed, and sporting events have been cancelled. At the end of March, authorities banned visits to nursing homes.
charlie14 wrote: » The first antibody results were know before they claimed there R was below 1. But even after those results Tegnell was still talking up immunity, claiming the results were in line with their modelling figure even though it was clear they were not.
tobefrank321 wrote: » Nonsense. The Swedish government implemented a number of restrictions.https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/health-family/how-sweden-faced-the-virus-without-a-lockdown-1.4240944 Its not like they did nothing. We know mass gatherings were an issue. Our own government didn't see fit to advise against going to Cheltenham.
Bit cynical wrote: » Although herd immunity was never the official strategy, immunity, to the extent it is conferred by infection, will probably play a part in preventing a second wave.
charlie14 wrote: » Unlike Covid-19, there is a rabies vaccine that is 100% effective if given early and can still be effective up to 10 days after infection.
99nsr125 wrote: » Have you read what I posted ? Your faith lies in developing antibodies maybe this fact is what shapes your opinion and holds trepidation for you
99nsr125 wrote: » I know their is, however have you ever had it ? The answer of course is no because the risk is so low as to be negligible Do the countries it circulates in have a lockdown or do they continue on with life as normal. Again the answer is no because again the risk is low as to be negligible. Now why is there a difference in reaction to these two Is it because one is rational and the other is irrational
charlie14 wrote: » It was never acknowledges as the official strategy, but do not kid yourself it was the aim. Even Annika Linde the previous Swedish state epidemiologist has admitted she initially thought it would work, and everyone from Tegnell to the Swedish ambassador to the US, every time they opened their mouths, could not help themselves talking up their modelling numbers on it. Some posters here were no better.
mcsean2163 wrote: » Fwiw, t cells are the new thing.https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2020/07/07/more-on-t-cells-antibody-levels-and-our-ignorance It'll be interesting to see how that looks in Sweden. I was sure I got covid19 as lost sense of smell but Abbott serology test was negative. There seems to be more doubt on the effectiveness of antibody tests now. Swedish experiment seems to have resulted in a lot of deaths but what next for Ireland? I think at some point we too need individual responsibility. Not sure what will happen with schools...
Bit cynical wrote: » There's also been speculation that natural immunity pre-exists in a portion of the population possibly due to exposure to other non-covid-19 coronaviruses. This would have the effect of reducing the required herd immunity threshold. It is, of course, far too early to be sure, but it is interesting that countries that have had fairly severe outbreaks are not seeing any resurgence after lifting restrictions. The only countries that are seeing it (still only a few countries so far) have had very mild outbreaks.
charlie14 wrote: » You are the great believer that antibodies will restore health. Have you even seen the figures for the percentages that have developed antibodies ? In Sweden alone from 50,000 tests only 6.1% nationally have developed antibodies. In an even larger test group in Spain, the third worst affected country in Europe, the percentage was the same. And nobody has a clue of how effective they will be or for how long.
Bit cynical wrote: » I think it was a secondary aim. The primary aim was to flatten the curve using sustainable methods. While I think we can all agree that there have been failures in Sweden; in particular, like Ireland, Sweden failed to protect the elderly and vulnerable, on the other hand, it is still too early to say that other countries have succeeded. Some countries that have lifted lockdowns, like Romania and Portugal, are now seeing rising infections and deaths. Portugal's daily death rate is now only just below Sweden's and rising whereas Sweden's is falling. But continued lockdowns for these other countries is not feasible. For economic reasons they have to lift them. There's no proof of this as yet, but I suspect immunity playing a part in causing numbers to fall in Sweden, and lack of immunity partly causing numbers to rise in Portugal.
tobefrank321 wrote: » Do you understand how vaccines work? They stimulate antibodies Covid 19 cannot be defeated without antibodies.
