Covid 19 Part XXXV-956,720 ROI (5,952 deaths) 452,946 NI (3,002 deaths) (08/01) Read OP

Statement without foundation.

If you look at Sweden, which did not lockdown, it has a noticeably higher excess death than its peer neighbours (which did have restrictions and therefore to some extent buttressed Sweden) while still having same economic contraction.

England tried to follow the Swedish strategy - do you remember the parties at Cheltenham - and had to abandon it as hospitals filled up. Going into lockdown a week earlier could have saved thousands of lives.

Coronavirus: enforcing UK lockdown one week earlier 'could have saved 20,000 lives' | Coronavirus | The Guardian

The go to is always to compare Sweden with its peer Scandinavian countries, which most resemble it in density and culture. If we were discussing any topic (not just covid), they would be the first countries any intellectually honest person assessing Sweden's performance at X would compare them to.

One of lowest population density countries in Europe, surrounded by other lower end population density countries which did lockdown, compares well with high population density countries and countries with mega cities? When considering the spread of an infectious disease?

Country after country imposed measures for the same reason. They saw the deaths rising and they saw the hospitals filling up. This is not pure speculation, this is the declared and evidential reason documented for that decision. Anything else is "pure speculation" without foundation.

Therefore to suggest measures should be judged only on the profile of those that died is an incomplete if not disingenuous basis.

Untrue. Florida did lockdown, and had regional lockdowns on Miami region.

The Dakotas? Let me guess, low population density state surrounded by states which did impose lockdowns or measures?

Yeah, you might get away with that to an extent when you are a Dakota or a Sweden, it simply doesn't scale. Try it in London, New York, Paris or region wide and see what happens.

Are the figures age adjusted?

In 2015 there were 2.9 million people over 80 in the UK.

In 2021 there were 3.2 million.

https://www.mha.org.uk/get-involved/policy-influencing/facts-stats/

I'll repost what I wrote yesterday and other posters can judge for themselves whether you just have a poor recollection or are deliberately trying to be deceptive. So perhaps you should have that argument with yourself.

This is what I wrote:

There was a massive shift in behaviours e.g. working from home, economic activity dropped as much versus countries which did lockdown, detectable reductions in people's radius of travel. To a large extent they locked themselves down.

It was clear from my posts today it was in relation to government measures.

Do you ever actually read posts? I said against serious illness. I’ll repeat serious illness. The much less hospitalisations in this wave proves my point or do you have a better explanation? Look especially at the SA data.

All surges have been caused by travelin the first place. A new virus is one plane ride away from here. Anyway how can you 'nearly' catch it?

"If every country had done the same they would have had similar outcomes"

Statement without foundation. Already dealt with earlier with reference to their low population density disproven by comparison with their neighbours - but ignored by you.

"Fit and healthy people in no danger from COVID"

Statement without foundation. 15% of Covid deaths in the US were under 80 \ without other conditions. The ICU and hospitalisation admissions here also disprove your statement. If it can put you into ICU then yes it is a danger to you.

No I didn't say that at all. Not unless we wanted to have at least the same excess deaths Sweden did and have thousands more dead Irish citizens. Plus we share an open border with the UK. Perhaps read the entirety of the posts you are responding to instead of just the bits you want to quote out of context.

Another dishonest attempt at deliberate misrepresentation of what another poster has written.

This is what I wrote:

There was a massive shift in behaviours e.g. working from home, economic activity dropped as much versus countries which did lockdown, detectable reductions in people's radius of travel. To a large extent they locked themselves down.

Did the Sweden implement government mandated lockdown or restriction measures in wave 1? Nope. You know this, and I know this.

In the sentence I clearly drew the distinction between countries which did lockdown, and Sweden's voluntary action.

So either you are dishonestly misrepresenting what I posted OR if you genuinely think Ireland and Sweden had the same lockdown measures then you have ended your own internal debate.

I think this conversation is done if this is the route you're going down.