Sweden avoiding lockdown

joeysoap · 03-07-2020 12:24am

Am I missing something

5733 ( last night figure) + 12 = 5411 ( today’s figure)

I’m starting to think they’re making up figures

That’s 78

A shocking figure

mcsean2163 · 03-07-2020 1:53am

Charles Babbage wrote: »

Those cancer deaths have nothing to do with the lockdown. Why do people keep saying this?
Delays in treatment come about because hospitals are extremely busy and because you have to very careful not to give Covid to ill people. The lockdown reduces the pressure on hospitals.

It is shameful the way people use cancer patients as an excuse to open pubs.

What? You do realise surgeons were not very busy during peak covid19 in Ireland? I heard some great stories of them pitching in around the hospital but no, they were not very busy by what I heard. I can't imagine it was that different in Sweden?

the incredible pudding · 03-07-2020 8:34am

joeysoap wrote: »

Am I missing something

5733 ( last night figure) + 12 = 5411 ( today’s figure)

I’m starting to think they’re making up figures

That’s 78

A shocking figure

You're missing a day - 5,370 was the previous figure

biko · 03-07-2020 9:00am

On a general scale for deaths per 100k Sweden isn't doing too bad. Still much much worse than their neighbours of course.

Country Deaths per 100k
Belgium 853.35
UK 657.7
Spain 606.86
Italy 575.31
Sweden 523.71
France 444.52
USA 388.93
Ireland 357.68

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1104709/coronavirus-deaths-worldwide-per-million-inhabitants/

charlie14 · 03-07-2020 9:41am

joeysoap wrote: »

Am I missing something

5733 ( last night figure) + 12 = 5411 ( today’s figure)

I’m starting to think they’re making up figures

That’s 78

A shocking figure

As the incredible pudding said there are two days missing from Worldometers daily figures.

They give deaths for those two days on their graph but they do not account for the total so those deaths look to have been from earlier.
With holidays there does seem to be a lag of around a week in reporting in some cases.
It may be more accurate as to what the situation is to take the previous weeks figure to allow for the backlog. The daily average for the previous week was 23 deaths.

VillageIdiot71 · 03-07-2020 10:53am

Charles Babbage wrote: »

Hospitals have been busy

Can you substantiate that, as there have been many reports stating that hospitals have not been busy - including comments by the CMO himself.

Breezin · 03-07-2020 12:25pm

biko wrote: »

On a general scale for deaths per 100k Sweden isn't doing too bad. Still much much worse than their neighbours of course.

Country Deaths per 100k
Belgium 853.35
UK 657.7
Spain 606.86
Italy 575.31
Sweden 523.71
France 444.52
USA 388.93
Ireland 357.68https://www.statista.com/statistics/1104709/coronavirus-deaths-worldwide-per-million-inhabitants/

Good to have context like that when some are eager to have Sweden as pariahs.

Incidentally, a bit off-topic, but since you mention it, it's interesting to note the comparison between the US and Ireland. Very similar outcomes, with very different policy approaches, whereas their political leaders are vilified and ours are lionised.

So, which part of this picture is wrong? I would not be taking defending Trump as my starting point.

Bridge93 · 03-07-2020 12:51pm

Reports today suggest Ireland could be over reporting by as much as nearly 30%. The United States haven’t included numbers beyond those confirmed dead in a hospital environment for the most part, they’re massively understating. The numbers aren’t remotely comparable

greyday · 03-07-2020 1:47pm

If we accept todays news of over reporting Covid deaths in Ireland, it looks like Sweden has over twice as many deaths as Ireland, no doubt the Swedish fanboys will spin that as a good thing.

biko · 03-07-2020 1:51pm

71419 official cases
5420 officially dead
7.6% of known cases have passed

Numbers from FHMs own tracking page
https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/09f821667ce64bf7be6f9f87457ed9aa

hmmm · 03-07-2020 2:01pm

Bridge93 wrote: »

Reports today suggest Ireland could be over reporting by as much as nearly 30%. The United States haven’t included numbers beyond those confirmed dead in a hospital environment for the most part, they’re massively understating. The numbers aren’t remotely comparable

The stats are pretty useless at the moment, every country is reporting Covid deaths differently - it'll probably take a few years to get a clear picture.

E.g. Belgium are top of the charts for deaths, but they are recording large numbers of "suspected" deaths even where the person tested negative - in reality they are over-counting, and are doing much better than the stats would suggest. I suspect also from news reports that places like Sweden and certain US states are undercounting deaths.

VillageIdiot71 · 03-07-2020 2:23pm

Bridge93 wrote: »

Reports today suggest Ireland could be over reporting by as much as nearly 30%. The United States haven’t included numbers beyond those confirmed dead in a hospital environment for the most part, they’re massively understating. The numbers aren’t remotely comparable

Interesting. I expect there's a strong political interest in getting the Irish figures down. Otherwise, it looks like we banjaxed the economy for very little gain.

And, of course, no country is anywhere close to the scaremongering fake news "up to 85,000 deaths in Ireland" claimed originally by Leo. If that was true, Sweden should be well on the way to 170,000 deaths.

Its like that quote from the Vietnam War "we had to destroy the village in order to save it". We've destroyed our country. For what?

AlmightyCushion · 03-07-2020 2:27pm

VillageIdiot71 wrote: »

Interesting. I expect there's a strong political interest in getting the Irish figures down. Otherwise, it looks like we banjaxed the economy for very little gain.

And, of course, no country is anywhere close to the scaremongering fake news "up to 85,000 deaths in Ireland" claimed originally by Leo. If that was true, Sweden should be well on the way to 170,000 deaths.

Its like that quote from the Vietnam War "we had to destroy the village in order to save it". We've destroyed our country. For what?

The 85,000 deaths was based on us doing absolutely nothing and carrying on as normal. Whilst Sweden didn't lock down as much as us, they certainly didn't carry on as normal.

VillageIdiot71 · 03-07-2020 2:34pm

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

The 85,000 deaths was based on us doing absolutely nothing and carrying on as normal. Whilst Sweden didn't lock down as much as us, they certainly didn't carry on as normal.

Yeah, and didn't get anything like 170,000 deaths is the point - which, again, there's now a political imperative to justify.

So we have to pretend that Sweden possibly having a couple of thousand more deaths is the Big Deal we were trying to avoid.

Whereas, quite conceivably, it will be balanced by increased mortality from other ailments and many hundreds of thousands of lives damaged for many years to come.

Bit cynical · 03-07-2020 3:25pm

hmmm wrote: »

E.g. Belgium are top of the charts for deaths, but they are recording large numbers of "suspected" deaths even where the person tested negative - in reality they are over-counting, and are doing much better than the stats would suggest.

However Belgium are still very high on the excess mortality table from the research reported on RTE.

https://www.hiqa.ie/sites/default/files/2020-07/Analysis-of-excess-all-cause-mortality-in-Ireland-during-the-COVID-19-epidemic.pdf (Page 19).

Of the regions mentioned, only Spain and England are higher.

Bit cynical · 03-07-2020 3:34pm

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

The 85,000 deaths was based on us doing absolutely nothing and carrying on as normal. Whilst Sweden didn't lock down as much as us, they certainly didn't carry on as normal.

However similar quite dire predictions far in excess of what actually happened were made for Sweden if they carried on with their present course of minimal restrictions and voluntary measures. The predictions were based on the Imperial College model with parameters adjusted to Sweden (e.g. small household size, urban density etc.)

charlie14 · 03-07-2020 3:43pm

VillageIdiot71 wrote: »

Yeah, and didn't get anything like 170,000 deaths is the point - which, again, there's now a political imperative to justify.

So we have to pretend that Sweden possibly having a couple of thousand more deaths is the Big Deal we were trying to avoid.

Whereas, quite conceivably, it will be balanced by increased mortality from other ailments and many hundreds of thousands of lives damaged for many years to come.

You appear not to think so, but for myself I would look at a couple of thousand deaths as a "Big Deal".

The narrative from the let the virus run free advocates now appears to be speculation as to how many may die at some unknown date in the future where these deaths can be blamed on lockdown.
Yet strangely no speculation of how many lives were saved by using lockdown.

In the case of Sweden compared to its three Nordic neighbours Sweden`s deaths to date are 5411.
It`s three neighbours deaths to date are 1,186.
Taking into account their populations, on a like for like basis, that would equate to 710 deaths for their three Nordic neighbours.
So on a like for like basis lockdown 710 deaths, no lockdown 5,411 deaths.

VillageIdiot71 · 03-07-2020 4:55pm

charlie14 wrote: »

You appear not to think so, but for myself I would look at a couple of thousand deaths as a "Big Deal".

So do I, which is why I'm not one of the people trying to discount the significant immediate and long term damage to lives caused by the lockdown.

Can we at least agree "Up to 85,000" was fake news?

is_that_so · 03-07-2020 5:10pm

VillageIdiot71 wrote: »

So do I, which is why I'm not one of the people trying to discount the significant immediate and long term damage to lives caused by the lockdown.

Can we at least agree "Up to 85,000" was fake news?

That's too simplistic. It was a set of predictions based on an unmitigated 33% increase, a level that was prevalent at the beginning of this, but which fell away quite quickly. As a result that value was never going to be be reached but for a brief moment in time the possibility existed.

Breezin · 03-07-2020 5:12pm

Bridge93 wrote: »

Reports today suggest Ireland could be over reporting by as much as nearly 30%. The United States haven’t included numbers beyond those confirmed dead in a hospital environment for the most part, they’re massively understating. The numbers aren’t remotely comparable

So the data is entirely unreliable, and much of the comparative discussion is meaningless. We know nothing. So Trump and co may not be complete a-holes (controversial! -- we all know that they are anyway), but also our lot may not be complete heroes, in spite of the cult of personality mysteriously constructed around them.

Which also, of course, calls into question the ever more zealous certitude with which Sweden's approach is pilloried by lockdown hardliners.

VillageIdiot71 · 03-07-2020 5:16pm

is_that_so wrote: »

That's too simplistic. It was a set of predictions based on an unmitigated 33% increase, a level that was prevalent at the beginning of this, but which fell away quite quickly. As a result that value was never going to be be reached but for a brief moment in time the possibility existed.

I expect you know that the important part of that, for me and for many, is "that value was never going to be reached".

We have poll-axed our societies. Truly, we've destroyed the World while pretending to save it.

is_that_so · 03-07-2020 5:18pm

Breezin wrote: »

So the data is entirely unreliable, and much of the comparative discussion is meaningless. We know nothing. So Trump and co may not be complete a-holes (controversial! -- we all know that they are anyway), but also our lot may not be complete heroes, in spite of the cult of personality mysteriously constructed around them.

Which also, of course, calls into question the ever more zealous certitude with which Sweden's approach is pilloried by lockdown hardliners.

That's not what HIQA said.

https://www.rte.ie/news/health/2020/0703/1151127-virus-report/

Harry Palmr · 03-07-2020 5:22pm

Maybe it's now a case of the people who are likely to die being the ones who are avoiding contact to the greatest degree and the majority of new cases are of younger healthy people who are most likely to live.

If so the Swedes have got a new normal of a very stratified society.

is_that_so · 03-07-2020 5:23pm

VillageIdiot71 wrote: »

I expect you know that the important part of that, for me and for many, is "that value was never going to be reached".

We have poll-axed our societies. Truly, we've destroyed the World while pretending to save it.

Not sure where this is coming from. Are you a proponent of herd immunity and just letting the virus rip through of its own accord? Societies are built of sterner stuff than a pandemic that stops the world for 6 months. We'll recover and deal with it better into the future.

charlie14 · 03-07-2020 6:55pm

VillageIdiot71 wrote: »

So do I, which is why I'm not one of the people trying to discount the significant immediate and long term damage to lives caused by the lockdown.

Can we at least agree "Up to 85,000" was fake news?

Maybe not, but you do appear to be someone trying to discount that the lockdown saved lives in the present.

Was 85,000 fake news ?
I would see fake news being lies dressed up to appear truths, so no I don`t think it was fake news based on what was happening in the likes of Italy at the time and the little knowledge then available on the virus.

It was the same as Sweden`s predictions on immunity.
A mathematical model based on little knowledge at the time.

I really do not know what the significance the "Up to 85,000" is to you.

If it had been 80% lower at 17,000, do you believe we should not have had lockdown ?

charlie14 · 03-07-2020 7:15pm

Breezin wrote: »

So the data is entirely unreliable, and much of the comparative discussion is meaningless. We know nothing. So Trump and co may not be complete a-holes (controversial! -- we all know that they are anyway), but also our lot may not be complete heroes, in spite of the cult of personality mysteriously constructed around them.

Which also, of course, calls into question the ever more zealous certitude with which Sweden's approach is pilloried by lockdown hardliners.

If you read what HIQA said it is more likely that their report is entirely unreliable.
It is more speculative than scientific.

Sounds more like them taking a cut at the HSE for laying some blame at their door for nursing home deaths.
HIQA didn`t even do any research themselves.

Research by two universities using the same source as HIQA, RIP.ie found that for April at the height of our outbreak that for three counties deaths for April had doubled, and many others had deaths 50% and more higher.

It is as easy to speculate that the numbers of deaths from Covid-19 do not tally with excess death because lockdown saved deaths from other causes.

cnocbui · 03-07-2020 9:40pm

charlie14 wrote: »

If you read what HIQA said it is more likely that their report is entirely unreliable.
It is more speculative than scientific.

Sounds more like them taking a cut at the HSE for laying some blame at their door for nursing home deaths.
HIQA didn`t even do any research themselves.

Research by two universities using the same source as HIQA, RIP.ie found that for April at the height of our outbreak that for three counties deaths for April had doubled, and many others had deaths 50% and more higher.

It is as easy to speculate that the numbers of deaths from Covid-19 do not tally with excess death because lockdown saved deaths from other causes.

And just as easy to speculate lockdown caused a number of deaths, given some specialists pleading with the public to not ignore symptoms of stroke and heart attack, which likely was prompted by fewer such admissions presenting than normal.

charlie14 · 03-07-2020 10:13pm

cnocbui wrote: »

And just as easy to speculate lockdown caused a number of deaths, given some specialists pleading with the public to not ignore symptoms of stroke and heart attack, which likely was prompted by fewer such admissions presenting than normal.

I would not see that anyone seeing somebody suffered a severe stroke or a heart attack would act any differently, pandemic or no pandemic and not call emergency services.

Stress is a major contributor to both, Often work related. So who knows, perhaps less incidents of both were just down due to lockdown.

Arghus · 03-07-2020 10:18pm

cnocbui wrote: »

And just as easy to speculate lockdown caused a number of deaths, given some specialists pleading with the public to not ignore symptoms of stroke and heart attack, which likely was prompted by fewer such admissions presenting than normal.

But they were told to not ignore symptoms of stroke and heart attack and to contact GPs or seek treatment, all the time, everyday. It was made abundantly clear. Nobody said these people should avoid hospitals if they needed treatment. You can't blame them if people chose not to heed their advice.

cnocbui · 03-07-2020 10:59pm

Arghus wrote: »

But they were told to not ignore symptoms of stroke and heart attack and to contact GPs or seek treatment, all the time, everyday. It was made abundantly clear. Nobody said these people should avoid hospitals if they needed treatment. You can't blame them if people chose not to heed their advice.

How were they told?

HUNDREDS of strokes and heart attacks have gone untreated and thousands of cancer cases undiagnosed since the Covid-19 lockdown started, an Irish Sun investigation has revealed.

Amid global warnings that thousands of patients could die of other illnesses during lockdown, experts are urging people to get themselves checked.

The Irish Heart Foundation believes up to half of heart attack and stroke victims in Ireland could be avoiding seeking treatment.

It means that in the five weeks alone, approximately 350 strokes and 280 heart attacks have gone untreated.
...
The HSE’s Chief Medical Officer, Dr Tony Holohan, has spoken of his fears over secondary deaths after a non-virus related health scare saw him seek medical attention at Dublin’s St James’s Hospital.

The top doc was surprised to see the hospital so empty.

And he warned the public not to avoid going to hospital for conditions that are not Covid-19 related, as officials worry about an increase in “secondary deaths” in the coming months.

He said: “Many people are staying away from hospitals that should not stay away.

“I didn’t ignore symptoms I had and I’m advising the public to not ignore their symptoms.

In February, before the Covid-19 outbreak in Ireland, 21,713 on average attended hospitals across the country every week.

Since the boom in infection cases began in early March, this has plummeted to just 11,756 people last week.
...
A UK doctor warned that 50,000 cancer patients could die prematurely if lockdown lasts six months.

Oncologist Prof Karol Sikora fears thousands of people are today unknowingly living with symptoms of a disease that are going undiagnosed because of the pandemic - that will eventually kill them.

Prof Sikora, chief medical officer at Rutherford Health and former head of the World Health Organisation’s cancer programme, admitted: “If this continues for six months, I suspect that in the years to come there will be at least 50,000 excess cancer deaths. That is a terrifying number.

https://www.thesun.ie/news/5360394/coronavirus-in-ireland-stokes-heart-attacks-cancer-untreated-fears/

Arghus · 03-07-2020 11:05pm

cnocbui wrote: »

How were they told?

https://www.thesun.ie/news/5360394/coronavirus-in-ireland-stokes-heart-attacks-cancer-untreated-fears/

It was stated again and again in the media, by the HSE, the DoH, the CMO, every doctor or specialist I heard mentioned it. Frequently repeated in the press briefings. Even the link you provided proves what I'm saying - it has the CMO saying it again.

The message was loud and clear. If you are trying to argue different you are mistaken.

cnocbui · 03-07-2020 11:11pm

Arghus wrote: »

It was stated again and again in the media, by the HSE, the DoH, the CMO, every doctor or specialist I heard mentioned it. Frequently repeated in the press briefings. Even the link you provided proves what I'm saying - it has the CMO saying it again.

The message was loud and clear. If you are trying to argue different you are mistaken.

I wouldn't know, my TV won't decode anything RTE or other Irish stations transmit.

SeaBreezes · 03-07-2020 11:19pm

cnocbui wrote: »

And just as easy to speculate lockdown caused a number of deaths, given some specialists pleading with the public to not ignore symptoms of stroke and heart attack, which likely was prompted by fewer such admissions presenting than normal.

You know Covid19 causes strokes/heart attacks with blood clotting, right?

cnocbui · 03-07-2020 11:59pm

SeaBreezes wrote: »

You know Covid19 causes strokes/heart attacks with blood clotting, right?

Take an aspirin. Nice deflection.

mcsean2163 · 04-07-2020 12:28am

VillageIdiot71 wrote: »

I expect you know that the important part of that, for me and for many, is "that value was never going to be reached".

We have poll-axed our societies. Truly, we've destroyed the World while pretending to save it.

That's an exaggeration. Public sector workers, multinational workers, etc. have been fine by and large. ðŸ˜³

Breezin · 04-07-2020 10:38am

mcsean2163 wrote: »

That's an exaggeration. Public sector workers, multinational workers, etc. have been fine by and large. &#55357;&#56883;

So far.

VillageIdiot71 · 04-07-2020 7:22pm

charlie14 wrote: »

I really do not know what the significance the "Up to 85,000" is to you.

I think its because it was a fake figure, used to create public fear and acceptance.

charlie14 wrote: »

If it had been 80% lower at 17,000, do you believe we should not have had lockdown ?

You tell me. If it was "up to 2 people" do you believe we should not have had lockdown?

If someone said we can expect to have up to 150 road deaths every year for as long as we have road transport, would you ban private cars?

Arghus wrote: »

But they were told to not ignore symptoms of stroke and heart attack and to contact GPs or seek treatment, all the time, everyday. It was made abundantly clear. Nobody said these people should avoid hospitals if they needed treatment. You can't blame them if people chose not to heed their advice.

This is a very simplistic statement.

The fact of the matter is that the Government frightened old people in particular to stay at home. Having done that, it would obviously be hard to coax people out to be seen in hospital by folk in full PPE.

Can we please ground ourselves in life as it is lived.

charlie14 · 04-07-2020 8:17pm

VillageIdiot71 wrote: »

I think its because it was a fake figure, used to create public fear and acceptance.You tell me. If it was "up to 2 people" do you believe we should not have had lockdown?

If someone said we can expect to have up to 150 road deaths every year for as long as we have road transport, would you ban private cars?This is a very simplistic statement.

The fact of the matter is that the Government frightened old people in particular to stay at home. Having done that, it would obviously be hard to coax people out to be seen in hospital by folk in full PPE.

Can we please ground ourselves in life as it is lived.

Then can we assume you believe the the Swedish modelling figures were also fake for immunity to create public acceptance of the strategy ?

I believe lockdown was the right thing to do regardless of what the modelling fiqure was.
You are opposed to lockdown so it is up to you to give what you believe the figure would have been without it.
That is how it works here.

Your car accidents analogy makes little sense considering all the road traffic restrictions that have been imposed over years to lower deaths.

From deaths, not just here but worldwide, we know that the aged are the most vulnerable to this virus. If you believe older people are that timid that the would need to be coaxed out if there was a serious medical emergency, it doesn`t appear you know many.
Anything that didn`t require an emergency response, being cognisant of the danger to themselves from this virus by visiting A&E, they would have contacted their G.P. as was advised.

VillageIdiot71 · 04-07-2020 11:57pm

charlie14 wrote: »

I believe lockdown was the right thing to do regardless of what the modelling fiqure was.

Grand, and thanks for being so clear. It would be bonkers to shut down the world is the estimated mortality was less than three people, but at least we now understand that your view is that unrealistic.

charlie14 wrote: »

Your car accidents analogy makes little sense considering all the road traffic restrictions that have been imposed over years to lower deaths.

Makes lots of sense, as the approach didn't involve prohibition of any situation that might have any risk of a collision.

charlie14 wrote: »

If you believe older people are that timid that the would need to be coaxed out if there was a serious medical emergency, it doesn`t appear you know many.

? But we know hospital activity plummeted. You are arguing against reality.

charlie14 · 05-07-2020 12:54am

VillageIdiot71 wrote: »

Grand, and thanks for being so clear. It would be bonkers to shut down the world is the estimated mortality was less than three people, but at least we now understand that your view is that unrealistic.Makes lots of sense, as the approach didn't involve prohibition of any situation that might have any risk of a collision.? But we know hospital activity plummeted. You are arguing against reality.

I have been clear in my view. Unfortunately I cannot say the same for you.
Your posts are typical of many here who do not like lockdown.
Ranting and raving over modelling figures on death without lockdown being incorrect, but when asked what their figure for deaths would have been without it, nothing other than rambling evasion.

But then for you the modelling figures are not really a problem.
The`re just something you throw around because you personally do not like lockdown because it inconveniences you.
If it was just modelling figures, then why the evasion on Sweden`s immunity modelling figures being even further out than those of Imperial College on lockdown ?

Your analogy on cars made no sense before, nor does it now.
All the legal restrictions in relation to cars have been on the same lines as lockdown restrictions. Efforts to avoid making life endangering contacts.

We know hospital activity plummeted because the last place you want to be if you have any underlying condition is in contact with Covid-19 patients or staff caring for them.
Even with no lockdown Sweden recognised that.

The reality of your posts are that you do not like lockdown because it inconveniences you. Everything else is just noise.

VillageIdiot71 · 05-07-2020 10:35am

charlie14 wrote: »

The reality of your posts are that you do not like lockdown because it inconveniences you. Everything else is just noise.

How have I been inconvenienced? I'm working from home, on full pay, saving hours of commuting time.

The noise is the substantial case you can't answer. But then again, you've already stated your completely irrational position. You'd shut down the world if you thought even one person was at risk.

Bonkers. Go on talking to yourself.

charlie14 · 05-07-2020 12:28pm

VillageIdiot71 wrote: »

How have I been inconvenienced? I'm working from home, on full pay, saving hours of commuting time.

The noise is the substantial case you can't answer. But then again, you've already stated your completely irrational position. You'd shut down the world if you thought even one person was at risk.

Bonkers. Go on talking to yourself.

I might as well have been talking to myself as attempting to have any meaningful interaction with you.

You have a problem with the modelling figures of deaths without a lockdown because "That value was never going to be achieved".
Yet when asked, with the benefit of hindsight, what you believe the figure would have been it`s been nothing other than bluster and evasion.

You say you believe that the modelling figure was fake news used to scare people into compliance, yet you have no problem with Sweden`s modelling figures on immunity levels.
Figures that were even further out than those of Imperial College and can equally be classified under your fake news as they were used to encourage people to believe in Sweden`s no lockdown strategy.

Ginger n Lemon · 06-07-2020 2:17pm

charlie14 wrote: »

Then can we assume you believe the the Swedish modelling figures were also fake for immunity to create public acceptance of the strategy ?

I believe lockdown was the right thing to do regardless of what the modelling fiqure was.
You are opposed to lockdown so it is up to you to give what you believe the figure would have been without it.
That is how it works here.

Your car accidents analogy makes little sense considering all the road traffic restrictions that have been imposed over years to lower deaths.

From deaths, not just here but worldwide, we know that the aged are the most vulnerable to this virus. If you believe older people are that timid that the would need to be coaxed out if there was a serious medical emergency, it doesn`t appear you know many.
Anything that didn`t require an emergency response, being cognisant of the danger to themselves from this virus by visiting A&E, they would have contacted their G.P. as was advised.

Damn, you really said that :eek:

That explains few things.

Charles I am back, did I miss much? I see that over 25% of Swedish deaths with covid are people older than 90 years of age, do you think there is some over-counting of deaths with covid going on there? HIQA came out last week and said that Ireland has seriously over-counted covid deaths...

06-07-2020 2:32pm

Ginger n Lemon wrote: »

Damn, you really said that :eek:

That explains few things.

Charles I am back, did I miss much? I see that over 25% of Swedish deaths with covid are people older than 90 years of age, do you think there is some over-counting of deaths with covid going on there? HIQA came out last week and said that Ireland has seriously over-counted covid deaths...

It appears not given the excess deaths in Swedan at the end of May stood at 4,800 and the covid death rate stood at 4,600

tobefrank321 · 06-07-2020 4:32pm

Excess deaths might turn out to be a more accurate measure of deaths than guessing at probable deaths from covid 19.

Because someone dies in a nursing home at around the same time as a covid19 outbreak, and with similar symptoms, its been put down to covid 19 in most cases, even when it mightn't be. Just because someone struggles to breathe doesn't automatically mean they have covid 19. That and the fact many were unfortunately near death in any case and would have died, covid 19 or not.

bb1234567 · 06-07-2020 7:47pm

Deleted User wrote: »

It appears not given the excess deaths in Swedan at the end of May stood at 4,800 and the covid death rate stood at 4,600

Surprising it is that high given how old the deaths in Sweden have been!

charlie14 · 07-07-2020 12:38pm

Ginger n Lemon wrote: »

Damn, you really said that :eek:

That explains few things.

Charles I am back, did I miss much? I see that over 25% of Swedish deaths with covid are people older than 90 years of age, do you think there is some over-counting of deaths with covid going on there? HIQA came out last week and said that Ireland has seriously over-counted covid deaths...

I have no idea what the faux surprise is about.
Your latest in attention seeking perhaps ?

The question was to another poster, who like yourself is a supporter of no lockdown.No reply so far, but as it seems to have interested you so much perhaps you would care to answer.
How many Covid-19 related deaths do you believe we would have had without a lockdown ?

Total deaths in Sweden last year 88,766. Average total deaths for the previous 10 years 90,655.
Total deaths this year as of 18th June 49,586.
Using the average 10 year total that would equate to around 52,500 deaths by the end of June.The 6 month average over those ten year 45,328.
For the first 6 months of this year Sweden`s excess deaths are over 7,000 higher than average. (8,000 higher than 2019)

With Sweden`s Covid-19 deaths until the end of June 5420, then it would suggest under-counting rather than over-counting by 1,500 - 2,500.

charlie14 · 07-07-2020 2:47pm

Ginger n Lemon wrote: »

I see that over 25% of Swedish deaths with covid are people older than 90 years of age, do you think there is some over-counting of deaths with covid going on there? HIQA came out last week and said that Ireland has seriously over-counted covid deaths...

You posted this on another thread which I replied too.
You may have missed it. I said I didn`t agree with HIQA`s guesswork and why.

As you appear to believe HIQA are correct and we had 25% lower deaths, then comparing us to Sweden only emphasizes the effectiveness of using lockdown.
It would mean, relative to population size, Sweden`s deaths are over twice those of Ireland.

tobefrank321 · 07-07-2020 5:00pm

Sweden will end up like Ireland at year end, with a front loading of deaths of those who were already very ill in the first 6 months of 2020.

That's what covid 19 mostly does, it kills a majority who would already have died this year. One estimate in the UK was 75%.

One of the reasons why Sweden's death rate will start to drop is not because of greater social distancing but largely because those in care homes who were going to die have already died while others have become immune.

cnocbui · 07-07-2020 5:20pm

tobefrank321 wrote: »

Sweden will end up like Ireland at year end, with a front loading of deaths of those who were already very ill in the first 6 months of 2020.

That's what covid 19 mostly does, it kills a majority who would already have died this year. One estimate in the UK was 75%.

One of the reasons why Sweden's death rate will start to drop is not because of greater social distancing but largely because those in care homes who were going to die have already died while others have become immune.

This will not go down well with the bleeding hearts, at all, at all, at all.

Sweden avoiding lockdown

Comments