Sweden's Controversial COVID-19 Plan Begin To Show Result

[Whispering 18,865]

https://m.imgur.com/a/o4Ifl8r

Sweden is higher than US on per capital deaths.

 

[Franz Ferdinand 2,359]

14 minutes ago, Florin said:

Thank you for the information. 

I assumed it is something closer to seasonal flu, but those informations about sars are interesting and new. 

I understand that we should take into consideration all the possibilities, but I dont get why we have to turn every development into something negative.

Yes, tomorrow this can get a mutation and be something else, but that can happen with everything. 

Some antibodies can be short lived, but that also happens with the flu. 

We should of course continue to learn about this, try to create vaccines and treatments, but I dont see the use of promoting worst case scenarios without scientific evidence and I can only see bad intentions when the same worst case scenarios are used as a reason for strict measures.

Precautionary principle.

Basically, it's a paradigm of decision-making and policy-making that stressed that when there's a lack of scientific knowledge on a subject, we ought to proceed with a lot of caution. Obviously, this is open to interpretation (and, many would argue, cost-effectiveness), but overall that's the measures are so strict. It's going to be a while until we collect enough data to make big data-driven decisions.

[Debithius 6,056]

On 4/27/2020 at 6:16 PM, Morphine Prince said:

Different strategies will work for different regions of the world. I'm glad their situation isn't that bad, but I don't think Sweden should be praised for their response. They decided to potentially sacrifice many lives to mitigate the economic impact of the pandemic. New Zealand on the other hand has basically eradicated the virus from their country with tougher restrictions. 

It's also funny that you mostly see conservatives praising Sweden, when before this they would all say Sweden is destroying their society with migrants, etc.  

If you want to compare Sweden with neighboring countries: 

Sweden: Cases, 18,926, Deaths, 2,274

Finland: Cases, 4,695, Deaths, 193

Norway: Cases, 7,554, Deaths, 205

Denmark: Cases, 8,698, Deaths, 427

 

While 50% of the deaths in Sweden are from elderly homes. If a second wave of corona hits then we get the protection we need until we got a vaccine. While the rest of Europe or the world will have it even worse than now because they decided to lock themselves in. Corona is here to stay. Better get that immunity while you can.

[Morphine Prince 109,729]

1 minute ago, Debithius said:

While 50% of the deaths in Sweden are from elderly homes. If a second wave of corona hits then we get the protection we need until we got a vaccine. While the rest of Europe or the world will have it even worse than now because they decided to lock themselves in. Corona is here to stay. Better get that immunity while you can.

There is no proof yet in immunity to this. Good luck. 

[Debithius 6,056]

2 minutes ago, Morphine Prince said:

There is no proof yet in immunity to this. Good luck. 

But there is though. The immunity has literally been found in Sweden. Not longterm but long enough until we get that vaccine. Read lol.

Also like somebody else said. Comparing Sweden’s deaths is meaningless since the neighbouring countries arent even counting deaths in nursing homes. The virus is centered around Stockholm, not the entire country.

[Bt1 5,213]

4 minutes ago, Franz Ferdinand said:

Precautionary principle.

Basically, it's a paradigm of decision-making and policy-making that stressed that when there's a lack of scientific knowledge on a subject, we ought to proceed with a lot of caution. Obviously, this is open to interpretation (and, many would argue, cost-effectiveness), but overall that's the measures are so strict. It's going to be a while until we collect enough data to make big data-driven decisions.

I think many people understood the initial caution. But this is panic. If we would have used worst case scenarios for everything, we would still be in caves, in the dark. 

Until we collect that big data, let's use the data we have.  The antibodies tests show us that this isnt as deathly as we believed.

Let's use that, until we learn everything.  

[Bt1 5,213]

2 minutes ago, Morphine Prince said:

There is no proof yet in immunity to this. Good luck. 

There is no proof either for no immunity antibodies. 

[Morphine Prince 109,729]

1 minute ago, Debithius said:

But there is though. The immunity has literally been found in Sweden. Not longterm but long enough until we get that vaccine. Read lol.

Link me to a report that has determined how effective the COVID-19 antibodies are in helping someone not get infected a second time. 

[Morphine Prince 109,729]

Just now, Florin said:

There is no proof either for no immunity antibodies. 

Which is why you take the most precautionary route... common sense. 

[Bt1 5,213]

1 minute ago, Morphine Prince said:

Which is why you take the most precautionary route... common sense. 

Common sense is that antibodies give protection. Thats what they do. 

[Morphine Prince 109,729]

Just now, Florin said:

Common sense is that antibodies give protection. That what they do. 

Someone already explained this to you in here so I won't waste my time. Continue with your death wish. 

[Bt1 5,213]

1 minute ago, Morphine Prince said:

Someone already explained this to you in here so I won't waste my time. Continue with your death wish. 

And what u understood from his explanation? That antibodies dont give protection? 

It is a question on how big the protection is and for how long. Read his comment again. 

You can stay how much you want in your house. 

[Whispering 18,865]

6 minutes ago, Florin said:

Common sense is that antibodies give protection. Thats what they do. 

Not based on science. Did you even read what Franz explained to you?

Those who are asymptomatic or have shown mild symptoms are the most likely to be at risk during the second, or third wave. 

Every expert has explained that we know very little about what will happen with reinfection rates. This isn’t the common cold, or even the flu, that’s why people are treading carefully. 

“Looking on the bright side” may not be the smartest option here. When dealing with deadly viruses, a careful approach is usually favored over a “YOLO” approach...unless you don’t care about your life or the lives and well-being of others.

[Whispering 18,865]

8 minutes ago, Florin said:

And what u understood from his explanation? That antibodies dont give protection? 

It is a question on how big the protection is and for how long. Read his comment again. 

You can stay how much you want in your house. 

Then go out, meet up with random people, do whatever you want. Go lick some door handles! 

[Bt1 5,213]

Just now, Whispering said:

Not based on science. Did you even read what Franz explained to you?

Those who are asymptomatic or have shown mild symptoms are the most likely to be at risk during the second, or third wave. 

Every expert has explained that we know very little about what will happen with reinfection rates. This isn’t the common cold, or even the flu, that’s why people are treading carefully. 

“Looking on the bright side” may not be the smartest option here. When dealing with deadly viruses, a careful approach is usually favored over a “YOLO” approach...unless you don’t care about your life or the lives and well-being of others.

Did u even read what Frank explained in his comment? 

So u interpret that people who didnt have a serious case would be at a higher risk the second time, when they didnt feel it the first time? but why? 

Again, if u want u can think at worst of the worst, end of the world situations. U can do it with everything. It's your choice. 

This isnt a situation when we are looking at "the bright side". We are making the assumptions that a is a, 1 is 1 and antibodies are antibodies. U are the one that insists that 1 can into to 9. Maybe it can, but let that happen first.