Not much on Sweden lately with their unique hands off approach to Covid. I found this:
"Sweden set to begin easing coronavirus restrictions"
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/wor...asing-coronavirus-restrictions-1.4579797
OK, so what else?
"Sweden will on Tuesday become the last Nordic country to begin easing coronavirus restrictions, even though the Scandinavian nation continues to have one of the highest infection rates in Europe."
But!
"Sweden has the second-highest number of Covid-19 cases per capita in the EU, having previously been the worst-affected country, although it is much better placed on hospitalizations and deaths"
So, buried at the bottom of the article is the significant truth: Swedes might have gotten the virus at a rate higher than neighboring countries, but they didn't require hospitalization or have the % of deaths as other countries.
I went to the WHO site to confirm, and sure enough, it's true. Sweden has claimed 1.1 million cases, and 14,400 deaths. Belgium has claimed 1 million cases and 25,000 deaths.The Netherlands claim 1.6 million cases and 17,600 deaths. Naturally, UK, France, and Germany have many more cases and deaths due to larger population. Interestingly, I can find no numbers for neighboring Norway or Finland.
What does this tell us? If you followed Sweden at all, they had an early outbreak that got into nursing homes and elderly care facilities in and around Stockholm at the start of the pandemic. They had a spike in deaths early on. After they got that under control, hospitalizations and deaths dropped to numbers at or below other European countries that fully locked down. Testing revealed the virus did spread in Sweden, but at a rate seen in neighboring countries. This did not correlate to an increased rate of hospitalizations or deaths.
Conclusion? Pretty easy to say that discounting the early surge in the elderly population that was contained as soon as they got a handle on it, Sweden's approach got the same results as the lock down neighbors. Even the neighboring countries that fully locked down had variations in infections numbers percentageand deaths.
Before I turn this over to the peanut gallery, full disclosure, I have lost several relatives including my Stepmother and first cousin to Covid, as well as several friends. Had my lifelong best friend hospitalized for more than a week with it last month including. My wife and son had it. Respiratory viruses can be brutal on some people. I'm not a denier. OTOH, knowing how viruses work and spread, I am not surprised one bit by these findings. I am sure the MSM will never draw the same conclusion as I have:
1.) Lockdowns and masks did virtually nothing to stop the spread of the virus. It merely prolonged the pandemic until a combination of natural immunity and vaccinations limited the number of hosts available for the virus, and the result is a precipitous drop in new cases. That is where we seem to be now on the curve.
2.) Island nations fared better because they could isolate themselves, and isolate infected individuals early and contain the virus in their countries. Japan, and New Zealand for example.
3.) The numbers that The WHO posts for China are farcical. (91,000 cases and 4,400 deaths? Don't insult our intelligence! ) Unless China vaccinated their entire population before the virus got loose, OR the virus genetically doesn't like Asians, there is NO WAY those numbers are accurate. Multiply by 100 at a minimum.
4.) Politicians took the early hospital crisis and focus on hospitalizations and deaths and morphed it into this huge concern about the number of cases, and not about the number the deaths or health care's ability to manage and treat cases. That was misguided, because (see #5)
5.) Once the virus got out of Wuhan, there was no containing it (except in island countries like Japan or New Zealand)
6.) Viruses do what viruses do. They seek vulnerable hosts to invade and replicate. They continue until they run out of hosts.
7.) The US response was political, and media driven. We criticize Faucci (with good reason) but let's be honest, the US still turns to Europe for example and approval in almost any crisis. If Europe hadn't mostly locked down, the US would not have had this level of shutdown. If Italy hadn't botched the initial stage, the West probably wouldn't have overreacted as badly.
8.) I predict that Sweden's approach will continue to be misrepresented because of their early deaths in the elderly, and the focus on number of positive tests. The MSM will ignore that Sweden fared about the same as the rest of Europe in hospitalizations and deaths. Sweden tested everybody they could. Tanzania has low numbers reported because they did almost NO testing. That's the correlation. Look harder = find more. Test more than neighbors, find more than neighbors.
Let us all be aware that these are based on WHO numbers that are reported to them by the various countries. Nobody says the number are accurate or have been verified or that all countries us the same criteria for infection, hospitalizations and mortalities.
I will be interested to see what the US and World does the next time we have a serious flu season. Masks? Shutdowns? If we have them, it will not be because those things were proven effective, it will be because they were accepted.
(moved from ar forum)
"Sweden set to begin easing coronavirus restrictions"
https:/
OK, so what else?
"Sweden will on Tuesday become the last Nordic country to begin easing coronavirus restrictions, even though the Scandinavian nation continues to have one of the highest infection rates in Europe."
But!
"Sweden has the second-highest number of Covid-19 cases per capita in the EU, having previously been the worst-affected country, although it is much better placed on hospitalizations and deaths"
So, buried at the bottom of the article is the significant truth: Swedes might have gotten the virus at a rate higher than neighboring countries, but they didn't require hospitalization or have the % of deaths as other countries.
I went to the WHO site to confirm, and sure enough, it's true. Sweden has claimed 1.1 million cases, and 14,400 deaths. Belgium has claimed 1 million cases and 25,000 deaths.The Netherlands claim 1.6 million cases and 17,600 deaths. Naturally, UK, France, and Germany have many more cases and deaths due to larger population. Interestingly, I can find no numbers for neighboring Norway or Finland.
What does this tell us? If you followed Sweden at all, they had an early outbreak that got into nursing homes and elderly care facilities in and around Stockholm at the start of the pandemic. They had a spike in deaths early on. After they got that under control, hospitalizations and deaths dropped to numbers at or below other European countries that fully locked down. Testing revealed the virus did spread in Sweden, but at a rate seen in neighboring countries. This did not correlate to an increased rate of hospitalizations or deaths.
Conclusion? Pretty easy to say that discounting the early surge in the elderly population that was contained as soon as they got a handle on it, Sweden's approach got the same results as the lock down neighbors. Even the neighboring countries that fully locked down had variations in infections numbers percentageand deaths.
Before I turn this over to the peanut gallery, full disclosure, I have lost several relatives including my Stepmother and first cousin to Covid, as well as several friends. Had my lifelong best friend hospitalized for more than a week with it last month including. My wife and son had it. Respiratory viruses can be brutal on some people. I'm not a denier. OTOH, knowing how viruses work and spread, I am not surprised one bit by these findings. I am sure the MSM will never draw the same conclusion as I have:
1.) Lockdowns and masks did virtually nothing to stop the spread of the virus. It merely prolonged the pandemic until a combination of natural immunity and vaccinations limited the number of hosts available for the virus, and the result is a precipitous drop in new cases. That is where we seem to be now on the curve.
2.) Island nations fared better because they could isolate themselves, and isolate infected individuals early and contain the virus in their countries. Japan, and New Zealand for example.
3.) The numbers that The WHO posts for China are farcical. (91,000 cases and 4,400 deaths? Don't insult our intelligence! ) Unless China vaccinated their entire population before the virus got loose, OR the virus genetically doesn't like Asians, there is NO WAY those numbers are accurate. Multiply by 100 at a minimum.
4.) Politicians took the early hospital crisis and focus on hospitalizations and deaths and morphed it into this huge concern about the number of cases, and not about the number the deaths or health care's ability to manage and treat cases. That was misguided, because (see #5)
5.) Once the virus got out of Wuhan, there was no containing it (except in island countries like Japan or New Zealand)
6.) Viruses do what viruses do. They seek vulnerable hosts to invade and replicate. They continue until they run out of hosts.
7.) The US response was political, and media driven. We criticize Faucci (with good reason) but let's be honest, the US still turns to Europe for example and approval in almost any crisis. If Europe hadn't mostly locked down, the US would not have had this level of shutdown. If Italy hadn't botched the initial stage, the West probably wouldn't have overreacted as badly.
8.) I predict that Sweden's approach will continue to be misrepresented because of their early deaths in the elderly, and the focus on number of positive tests. The MSM will ignore that Sweden fared about the same as the rest of Europe in hospitalizations and deaths. Sweden tested everybody they could. Tanzania has low numbers reported because they did almost NO testing. That's the correlation. Look harder = find more. Test more than neighbors, find more than neighbors.
Let us all be aware that these are based on WHO numbers that are reported to them by the various countries. Nobody says the number are accurate or have been verified or that all countries us the same criteria for infection, hospitalizations and mortalities.
I will be interested to see what the US and World does the next time we have a serious flu season. Masks? Shutdowns? If we have them, it will not be because those things were proven effective, it will be because they were accepted.
(moved from ar forum)