[Mumbles]

Originally Posted by Silver Streak

Hindsight is always 20/20. We still don't know nearly enough about this virus but we know a whole lot more than we did when the various types of lockdowns began. The longer people, especially vulnerable people, self-isolate, the better the chance that when/if they eventually DO get infected, enough will be known to allow for much more effective treatment. Seems worth the wait and inconvenience to me.

Don't know if you are "old" (over 55) or vulnerable, but if I were U, I'd volunteer to wait and accept any inconvenience to me.

[GoodLife]

Originally Posted by fdpaq0580

The person I responded to had measured Sweden (no lockdown) against their immediate neighbors that did lockdown and fared much better. Compare like to like. Comparing Sweden to the USA is ,IMHO, like comparing NYC to some tiny town in the mid-west.

NO, you are not comparing like to like. Just because countries are neighbors does not mean they were seeded with the same amount of virus carriers. The coronavirus spread globally by travelers, and each country does not get an equal dose.

For instance, the five worst hit in terms of deaths per million European countries are Spain, Italy, France, UK, and Belgium are also some of the most visited countries in the world, except for Belgium, not sure why they got hit so hard. So they got seeded with lots of virus carrying travelers.

Sweden gets 50% more visitors than Norway and 200% more visitors than Finland, so it's obvious they got more travelers with virus than those countries that so many people like to use to "debunk" Sweden's strategy. And comparing Sweden to countries halfway around the world like South Korea and New Zealand is insane, the virus mutated as it traveled and the most contagious strain developed in Europe, which then seeded New York City and then the rest of the USA.

So if you want to compare "similar countries" in Europe to Sweden, you might pick Belgium and Ireland, which have similar travel levels to Sweden. Belgium has a little more, Ireland a little less.

Belgium 794 deaths per million
Sweden 388 deaths per million
Ireland 322 deaths per million

Also, if we do have a second wave, Sweden will have reached herd immunity while other countries in Europe that locked down will see their deaths go up. The only thing that stops a virus is herd immunity or a effective vaccine.

[LiverpoolWalrus]

Originally Posted by GoodLife
"Yes, but Sweden did not lockdown, did not overwhelm their hospitals, does not have vaccine and yet they show a similar rise and fall in deaths,"

Originally Posted by Two Bills

But their immediate neighbors did lock down, and had a lot less cases and deaths.
Germany, Austria, New Zealand, Australia etc. locked down early, and compared to many, had far lower instances of the virus, and minimal deaths per head of population.
Here in UK our 'experts' dithered over lockdown or herd immunity, and look what that did for us, and our hospitals were not overwhelmed either.
The curve may be nearly the same, but the numbers show that early lockdown reduced cases substancially.

I did a quick analysis myself the other day because I had been coming across reports that social distancing may not be effective. So I looked at death rates in Sweden, which hasn't locked down, and compared them with Sweden's Scandinavian neighbors. I concluded that social distancing may indeed be worthwhile. If this analysis is flawed, I'm all ears.

Population / Number of Covid deaths / Deaths per capita

Norway - 5.32M / 235 / .000044

Sweden - 9.96M / 3871/ .00039

Finland - 5.52M / 306/ .000055

Denmark - 5.62M / 561/ .00001

[roscoguy]

Originally Posted by Don Ferguson

I doubt anyone even still reading this thread, but gotta say it anyway. IT WAS THE ANNUAL FLU. It killed a lot of people and is a true tragedy for those families and friends. Let me make that point with a few examples: (1) Just two years ago the US lost 81,000 plus to the annual flu. (2) If not for the gross inflation of this year's deaths we would be under that! (2) Look up the on line CDC instructions for death certificates. They clearly state if it is even possible that the victim had corona virus, count it. No test or autopsy required! (3) Hospitals are struggling and will be paid $19,000 per Covid-19 classification admission. They are capped at $6,000 for other admissions....which code would you use? (4) Look at US numbers versus world-wide. Do you really believe we have 30% of all world wide deaths?

Sir? Welcome back! I know you're confused, but you've been asleep for 2 months and things have changed. (Somebody must have left the tv on an 'alternate facts' channel all that time and you've been dreaming...)

[GoodLife]

Originally Posted by LiverpoolWalrus

Originally Posted by GoodLife
"Yes, but Sweden did not lockdown, did not overwhelm their hospitals, does not have vaccine and yet they show a similar rise and fall in deaths,"



I did a quick analysis myself the other day because I had been coming across reports that social distancing may not be effective. So I looked at death rates in Sweden, which hasn't locked down, and compared them with Sweden's Scandinavian neighbors. I concluded that social distancing may indeed be worthwhile. If this analysis is flawed, I'm all ears.

Population / Number of Covid deaths / Deaths per capita

Norway - 5.32M / 235 / .000044

Sweden - 9.96M / 3871/ .00039

Finland - 5.52M / 306/ .000055

Denmark - 5.62M / 561/ .00001

see post #47

[LiverpoolWalrus]

...

[LiverpoolWalrus]

Originally Posted by GoodLife

see post #47

Thanks GoodLife. I'm sure your analysis has merit regarding travel. I saw it after I posted my Scandinavian death rates.

I remember from doing regressions in statistics class that you can never explain cause by one variable only (social distancing in this case). After I did my calculations, I wondered what other variables might be at play.

Travel is certainly one of them. There are probably others, e.g., older population, a population with more co-morbidity, mass transport, population density, etc.

[GoodLife]

Originally Posted by LiverpoolWalrus

Thanks GoodLife. I'm sure your analysis has merit regarding travel. I saw it after I posted my Scandinavian death rates.

I remember from doing regressions in statistics class that you can never explain cause by one variable only (social distancing in this case). After I did my calculations, I wondered what other variables might be at play.

Travel is certainly one of them. There are probably others, e.g., older population, a population with more co-morbidity, mass transport, population density, etc.

Yes 100s of variables at play, it's why simple calculations of statistics comparing countries don't tell the whole story.

[fdpaq0580]

Originally Posted by Win1894

I was appropriately responding to someone else's comment. Secondly, your comparison is absurd, but you have every right to make it. Thirdly, here are the numbers you suggest regarding the effect of no lockdown in Sweden.
Death rate per 1 million in population:
Sweden - 3213
Denmark - 1939
Norway - 1554
Finland - 1188

I apologize. Some where we have ended up at cross purposes.
My original post was in regard to the comparing Sweden against US covid numbers as a justification for "no lockdown". I was in support of the person comparing Sweden with its neighbors as being more appropriate and meaningful than than a comparison between Sweden and the US. The numbers shown above in your quote, I believe, show that the "lockdown" was successful in reducing the number of potential fatalities significantly.
I stand by my opinion of comparing "like with like" in order to get a more realistic picture of current covid conditions. And, I sincerely thank you for pointing out to me that I don't always make myself clear.
Hopefully I'll do better next time.

[fdpaq0580]

Originally Posted by GoodLife

NO, you are not comparing like to like. Just because countries are neighbors does not mean they were seeded with the same amount of virus carriers. The coronavirus spread globally by travelers, and each country does not get an equal dose.

For instance, the five worst hit in terms of deaths per million European countries are Spain, Italy, France, UK, and Belgium are also some of the most visited countries in the world, except for Belgium, not sure why they got hit so hard. So they got seeded with lots of virus carrying travelers.

Sweden gets 50% more visitors than Norway and 200% more visitors than Finland, so it's obvious they got more travelers with virus than those countries that so many people like to use to "debunk" Sweden's strategy. And comparing Sweden to countries halfway around the world like South Korea and New Zealand is insane, the virus mutated as it traveled and the most contagious strain developed in Europe, which then seeded New York City and then the rest of the USA.

So if you want to compare "similar countries" in Europe to Sweden, you might pick Belgium and Ireland, which have similar travel levels to Sweden. Belgium has a little more, Ireland a little less.

Belgium 794 deaths per million
Sweden 388 deaths per million
Ireland 322 deaths per million

Also, if we do have a second wave, Sweden will have reached herd immunity while other countries in Europe that locked down will see their deaths go up. The only thing that stops a virus is herd immunity or a effective vaccine.

Always willing to learn.
I accept the comparing of Belgium, Sweden, Ireland as reasonable based on the points you made. In the middle of your post, remarking on high travelled European countries, you inserted the statement "don't know why they got hit so hard" in regard to Belgium. I don't think anyone does, yet. In the comparing the death rates, you said," Belgium a little more". Using the numbers you provided it was more than double. Personally I consider that substantial. More research required to find the reason. And Ireland a little less. Again, more research required to discover contributing and mitigating factors.
Since we are all still in the learning phase, please forgive my poor communication skills. I, like most, are trying to learn while we do the best we can to protect ourselves and loved ones.

[LiverpoolWalrus]

Originally Posted by fdpaq0580

Always willing to learn.
I accept the comparing of Belgium, Sweden, Ireland as reasonable based on the points you made. In the middle of your post, remarking on high travelled European countries, you inserted the statement "don't know why they got hit so hard" in regard to Belgium. I don't think anyone does, yet. In the comparing the death rates, you said," Belgium a little more". Using the numbers you provided it was more than double. Personally I consider that substantial. More research required to find the reason. And Ireland a little less. Again, more research required to discover contributing and mitigating factors.
Since we are all still in the learning phase, please forgive my poor communication skills.

In my humble opinion, your communication skills are exemplary!

[Gerald]

I hate to put a damper on all those that know so much about curves and stat. But we are in an area that has older people who should just think about their health first and talk to their doctor. You only can die once.