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

[Morphine Prince 109,683]

For anyone interested in what Sweden's chief epidemiologist has to say about their approach and rationale, I found an interview with him: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2020/04/28/coronavirus-covid-19-sweden-anders-tegnell-herd-immunity/3031536001/

It's interesting and I guess only time will tell if their approach was effective for their country.

Different places have dealt with it differently and it's interesting to see the results of each. 

[Bt1 5,213]

5 minutes ago, Whispering said:

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

U are the ones who act like u will do that when the lockdown is over. 

I certainly wont do that, but good luck with the licking. 

 

[Whispering 18,865]

Just now, Florin said:

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. 

Yes.

That’s what he said could be a possibility. He explained it. Reread it all.

I don’t think the worst of the worst, I’m listening to experts, science and doctors. 

[BenG 19,908]

COVID-19 may have a low mortality rate but it has a very high transmission rate. Without a lockdown, most countries would have suffered a huge number of deaths as the health systems cannot cope with the sheer number of cases. Not everything is about herd immunity, if it's even an effective measure.

[Juniper 1,062]

Sweden’s goal was to make sure hospitals would be able to keep up. Not to make sure ZERO people got infected. As long as this strategy works, we won’t be on lockdown. And so far hospitals apparently have kept up. 
 

Regarding countries with complete lockdowns I don’t understand if they’re gonna keep people locked inside forever until a vaccine exists, because all it takes is one person who’s infected and then it takes off again because no one will have immunity at all. For a virus to die out, enough people will have to be immune and the virus won’t find hosts. Therefore I think we chose a way where most of us could keep living rather normal. And I’m thankful for that.

[Whispering 18,865]

4 minutes ago, Florin said:

U are the ones who act like u will do that when the lockdown is over. 

I certainly wont do that, but good luck with the licking. 

 

That makes no sense.

I’m staying in as much as possible and social distancing for those who can’t. I’m also responsible for two people who are older, so I’m taking necessary precautions. 

Considering the area I live in, these are the common sense precautions that are needed at this time. As things change, I will change my routine and lifestyle.

[Morphine Prince 109,683]

6 minutes ago, BenG said:

COVID-19 may have a low mortality rate but it has a very high transmission rate. Without a lockdown, most countries would have suffered a huge number of deaths as the health systems cannot cope with the sheer number of cases. Not everything is about herd immunity, if it's even an effective measure.

Exactly. Imagine if NYC took the herd immunity approach. We would have God knows how many more infected and dead right now to the point the hospitals would have collapsed already. It would be a nightmare.

This approach could potentially be somewhat successful in a place where the outbreak is still not as bad. 

[Bt1 5,213]

Just now, Whispering said:

Yes.

That’s what he said could be a possibility. He explained it. Reread it all.

I don’t think the worst of the worst, I’m listening to experts, science and doctors. 

Everything is a possibility. It doesnt mean that we should think that antibodies arent antibodies. 

 

[BenG 19,908]

The number one priority in an epidemic is to keep transmission rates low so that the peak doesn't go beyond the health system's capacity, which would lead to unnecessary deaths (excess deaths due to lack of health intervention). For most countries, the only way this could be achieved is through a lockdown.

Sweden's natural transmission rate might be lower than other countries' due a variety of factors, e.g. age distribution, population density, pollution. Just because it worked for Sweden doesn't mean all countries have the luxury of following suit.

The goal now is to get active cases down, and slowly ease restrictions so that the R value stays below 1. Models are not perfect and this has to be implemented by educated guesses.

[Bt1 5,213]

3 minutes ago, Morphine Prince said:

Exactly. Imagine if NYC took the herd immunity approach. We would have God knows how many more infected and dead right now to the point the hospitals would have collapsed already. It would be a nightmare.

This approach could potentially be somewhat successful in a place where the outbreak is still not as bad. 

Its SF what are you talking about. If at least 25% had it in NYC, there arent enough people left to break the system. 

Not to mention that for the worst case scenario to happen, 100% needed it to have at the same time. 

But maybe it some other places, it was necessary. 

[BenG 19,908]

A side note. Many places also avoided hitting the capacity because it was later shown that ventilators weren't that effective as treatment, which was the main bottleneck in most healthcare systems. This just shows how much easier it is to judge effectiveness of measures with hindsight.

[Whispering 18,865]

1 hour ago, Florin said:

Everything is a possibility. It doesnt mean that we should think that antibodies arent antibodies. 

 

No one said they weren’t. 

Read it again.

[Bt1 5,213]

29 minutes ago, Whispering said:

No one said they weren’t. 

Read it again.

So what did u exactly said? That there is a possibility that the antibodies will do nothing? It's the same thing. 

[Lion Heart 15,041]

>Instead, the government has urged citizens to act responsibly and follow social distancing guidelines.

That's the problem, this would never have worked in the US. I'm sorry but Americans are too proud and stubborn to even adhere to some basic guidelines. There's people out there shopping with no gloves or masks, they keep making large gatherings, no social distancing, etc. Now there are states reopening with NO testing or treatment available. I guess we'll see if there's a second wave by mid May.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Florin said:

Everything is a possibility. It doesnt mean that we should think that antibodies arent antibodies. 

 

Is it that difficult to show some respect and avoid using in a serious post like this where people are giving facts based on what experts have said? Your posts about the virus are always discrediting the cientifics opinion and those who take this s*** seriously. Do whatever you want but your lack of respect is so annoying to me