How well do lockdowns and masks really work?
 

Attachment 85279

This chart plots deaths per million for New York (blue) and Sweden (green)

New York locked down on March 17 and recommended using masks April 2. You can see that these mitigation efforts did little to stop the rising death toll.

Sweden never locked down, did not recommend masks, kept schools open etc.

NY deaths per million = 1670 which is triple that of Sweden at 549

In both places, cases and deaths rose to a peak and then began falling. Currently both cases and deaths per million are going down in both places. Neither place has a new surge going on like Florida.

You can argue that New York State has a higher density per square mile, which it does, but Sweden is more than 3 times the size of New York with 50% of the population. In actuality, urban density is about the same in both places 85% (Sweden) and 87% New York State. You can also argue that New York City gets far more international travel than Stockholm, and thus was 'seeded" with more infected travelers.

The question is why did both places with totally different strategies see a very similar rise and fall of cases and deaths. Why are both places seeing no surge in new cases or deaths? It can't be lockdowns and masks because Sweden didn't use them.

Personally, I can think of only one answer, both places have achieved a level of herd immunity and the virus is running out of targets. Don't bother with stats on Norway, Finland etc because they have nothing to do with the similarity in charting NY and Sweden death rates. Try to explain why their deaths and cases followed a very similar curve and why both now have plummeting cases and death numbers.

You can always find other views.

Sweden’s coronavirus death rate suggests its response isn’t great - Vox

///

NY death rate would probably have been lower if they didnt send older folks to die.

This isn't about who did the best job.

Why did two places with totally different strategies show the same rise and fall of cases and deaths?

Why do both places have death rates approaching zero and no surge of new cases?

It appears that in both places, the virus has run out of targets. I am open to any other explanation that makes sense scientifically.

It seems the virus does its thing no matter what you do. You may slow it down with lockdowns and masks but then it comes roaring back. There must be some reason why it isn't in New York and Sweden.

Yes we all know this, question is why is rise and fall of cases/deaths so similar with totally different strategies.

Why do both places now have cases and deaths dropping to almost zero?

That is exactly what I was thinking. I am hoping for less of the same.

8. Since they are in a high risk category themselves, they want the whole world shut down until they personally feel safe.

Different demographics, better vs impossible distancing maybe? Why does TV have less occurrences then cities of similar size in other states. I'm not going to change your mind on any of this because you need to believe what you need to believe......I think you will be unsuccessful in changing others minds so these conversations are useless.

That's the conundrum,....... level thought gets thrown out the window because of perceived hysteria.

Steve

Have both NY and Sweden achieved herd immunity?

Good Life, it's obvious this is a HUGE issue for you. I mean profound to an extreme measure. It's obvious to me (and to everyone else) because you bring up this one instance, using the same outdated data, in every post that has anything to do with masks or the virus.

Sweden is this huge success story, and you are absolutely outraged that the USA refuses to just open up everything and let it all do what it does.

So why not move to Sweden? You will probably be much happier there with your freedom, and no corruption, and no government interference.

Coronavirus: Hard-hit Sweden admits it could have battled COVID-19 better | Euronews.