mcsean2163 wrote: » The graph shows that for those 23 EU countries the peak is expected for about 3rd or 4th week of January. This indicates more deaths should typically occur in the first 6 months of the year. This is really basic stuff that should be obvious to a child studying math in primary school or perhaps first year in secondary school. Simple statistics have shown us several things, perhaps we could move the debate forward and attempt to discover if there is some innate reason or adaptive immunity that Norway has over Sweden. Norway seemed to have a really low death rate despite initial high infection rates.
tobefrank321 wrote: » Things continuing to improve for Sweden.https://www.thelocal.se/20200310/timeline-how-the-coronavirus-has-developed-in-sweden 3 deaths today, 1 yesterday, 4 on friday, 7 on Thursday. Only 38 people in ICU. And new cases declining. Seems only a matter of time before Irelands daily new cases pass Swedens on current trends. Denmark have reopened the border with Sweden. And Sweden now predicted to suffer the least in Europe economically.https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-08-03/virus-hit-to-sweden-s-economy-seen-among-least-bad-in-europe Sweden and Italy now doing best against a second wave.https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-08-04/italy-and-sweden-are-taming-the-coronavirus-s-potential-second-wave
Ce he sin wrote: » You have rather more confidence that Sweden won't see a second wave than I do. Looking at the figures it seems that their cases peaked rather later than elsewhere and are still on their initial decline. The experience of many or indeed most other countries is that the decline to low case figures is maintained for a matter of weeks before numbers increase again. Not for a moment do I believe the Italian figures. They're claiming that their daily cases are still at a low level when France and Spain, places that are culturally similar,, are showing increases.
Ce he sin wrote: » You have rather more confidence that Sweden won't see a second wave than I do. Looking at the figures it seems that their cases peaked rather later than elsewhere and are still on their initial decline. The experience of many or indeed most other countries is that the decline to low case figures is maintained for a matter of weeks before numbers increase again.
ceadaoin. wrote: » Those other countries experienced a decline due to lockdown. The rise in cases then just continued where it left off upon loosening of restrictions. Sweden, without a lockdown could possibly be more due to the virus burning out or running its course and could be an indication of what will happen elsewhere without further restrictions. As far as I'm aware, not one of the places that experienced a large "first wave", which was already in full swing before lockdowns, (nyc, lombardy, parts of Spain) has had a resurgence as of yet, even with reopening? So shouldn't it follow that Sweden will also see a similar decline and no immediate surge of cases?
bb1234567 wrote: » Yeh there's not a lot of examples, only one I can think of is Louisianna which had a very bad first wave which was mostly stopped by lockdown and is now also having a bad second wave.
The New Orleans area has seen significant decreases in daily new cases since its peak during the first surge. Orleans Parish, for example, recorded 797 cases per 100,000 during the week of April 7. Its peak during the summer surge, during the week of July 16, brought only 181 cases per 100,000 – a decrease of 77%. The same was true for the other parishes that had high case numbers during the first wave. The recent peaks for Jefferson and St. John the Baptist Parishes were 53% and 55% lower, respectively, than in the worst April weeks in those parishes. But the parishes that were largely spared during the first wave are now recording more cases than they did in April. Calcasieu Parish – which includes one of Louisiana's most populous cities, Lake Charles – had a modest peak of new cases during the spring surge with 121 in the week ending April 7. Its peak in the summer surge, last week, was more than 900% higher, at 1,245
AlmightyCushion wrote: » The correct saying is 'correlation does not imply causation'.
The 'does not imply' bit is important there as it means it can imply.
Preventing people from mixing will affect the spread of a disease like Coronavirus. How you can argue otherwise is mind boggling. I would have agreed with this but always felt that lock down was pointless because the virus would just start off again once lock down was lifted. For that reason the Swedish approach was sustainable imo. However, the numbers and graphs presented in this thread by bit_cynical strongly suggest that lock down did not reduce deaths when you compare no lock down Sweden to Lock Down Ireland. I spent an hour examining those numbers myself and they look correct. You can try to muddy this with under reporting / Nordic neighbours but I don't believe that.
I would have agreed with this but always felt that lock down was pointless because the virus would just start off again once lock down was lifted. For that reason the Swedish approach was sustainable imo. However, the numbers and graphs presented in this thread by bit_cynical strongly suggest that lock down did not reduce deaths when you compare no lock down Sweden to Lock Down Ireland. I spent an hour examining those numbers myself and they look correct. You can try to muddy this with under reporting / Nordic neighbours but I don't believe that.
charlie14 wrote: » Is it not more a case that a mathematical theory is being forwarded to attempt to prove that lockdown has no effect in saving the lives of those over 65 years. A mathematical theory to hold true should do so in all similar circumstances should it not ?
charlie14 wrote: » Would all the above not have more in common as regards the Nordic countries than the likes of Ireland or Italy who certain posters here are determined to only compare Sweden too ?
FintanMcluskey wrote: » It could all be to do with the timing of the lockdown. If you dont lockdown at the right time, there is no point is entering a lockdown at all.
Maybe Norway, Finland and Denmark will see death rates rise once they reopen.
ittakestwo wrote: » But if we had followed the Swedish approach more elderly would have died. The two countries were not at the same starting position at the beginning of March when European countries first started lock downs. It seems Ireland was already more effected than Sweden in early March. All you can say. If from early March Ireland had followed Sweden's approach more elderly would have died with the peak deaths occurring in June instead of April. If Sweden had followed Ireland's from early March then less elderly would have died there with a peak in April. So from decisions taken from early March then yes we did do a better job at protecting the elderly.
FintanMcluskey wrote: » Lets follow the statistics for now. They show Sweden has protected its citizen's as well as Ireland. Ill use statistics, you can use some very iffy whataboutery
cnocbui wrote: » Sweden's second quarter GDP figures are out; -8.6% for the quarter and -8.1% yoy. The EU 2Q GDP was -12.1%, so Sweden did 50% better economically. I think the kicker would be in the number of small businesses that fail permanently and the fall in incomes of the self employed, which I suspect will be far fewer, and less, in Sweden than in lockdown EU countries.
greyday wrote: » It was known lockdowns would reduce deaths, no one said said a lockdown would not cost lives afaik. Could you provide a link to where any expert said the lockdown would not cost any lives?
tobefrank321 wrote: » While I think there will be post lockdown second waves in other countries its debatable how it can happen in Sweden as they never fully locked down. The countries on their green list such as Denmark have less cases than them. Its unlikely tourists from other countries will travel there given the recent bad press. Schools reopening might cause a spike so it will be interesting to watch.
ceadaoin. wrote: » I think its different areas affected this time though? New Orleans was the epicentre earlier in the year, and now its other cities and more rural areas where its is spreading, with New Orleans remaining stable. Same in New York -New York City seems to be done with this wave and its now moved more to upstate areas.https://www.usatoday.com/in-depth/news/2020/08/01/louisiana-second-covid-19-wave-worse-than-first-no-1-per-capita/5558862002/ As of now, I don't think there is any evidence of a true second wave. Rather a continuation of the first, which was basically paused by lockdowns in most places
sydthebeat wrote: » 8/12 = 0.666 so they did 33% better 50% of 12 is 6
SeaBreezes wrote: » Is today the day sweden economy numbers released? Anyone know when they are out? Edit: Nevermind found it. 8.6% contractionhttp://www.scb.se/en/finding-statistics/statistics-by-subject-area/national-accounts/national-accounts/national-accounts-quarterly-and-annual-estimates/pong/statistical-news/national-accounts-second-quarter-2020/
charlie14 wrote: » There was much being made here at the end of June on Sweden`s finance minister Magdalena Andersson prediction of a contraction of 6%. I did warn at the time that this figure should be viewed with caution coming from a minister who is part of a government responsible for Sweden`s coronavirus strategy, and pointed out that The Riksbank`s worst case scenario was a contraction of 9.7%. I was told that The Riksbank projections "are now quite out of date".
the incredible pudding wrote: » She was stating that for the year forecast, this contraction was that for the quarter.
Storm 10 wrote: » Coronavirus: Sweden's economy hit less hard by pandemic - BBC Newshttps://www.bbc.com/news/business-53664354