OT: Sweden 'literally gained nothing' from staying open during COVID-19, including 'no economic gains'
* Sweden's central bank expects its economy to contract by 4.5 percent this year, which is as bad or worse than its Nordic neighbors.
* They have a per-capita death rate 40% worse than the US, and 700%-1200% worse than Norway and Finland.
* While other economies around them are opening up, Sweden now has the strictist restrictions on movement of these 3 countries.
8.0.1I wondered when we would circle back to Sweden.....
Today. The answer is today.
8.0.18.0.1 !!!
I think I explode when I get to 10
8.0.1Who could've seen that coming....
Not ijohnb, NittanyFan, or JPC
I was in the pro Sweden camp
ill admit I was wrong
This is good news. Four months worth of angry Michigan fans slinging feces at one another and at least one mind has been changed! ?
It’s not rocket science.
We are now at the point where all of these debates are over since unfortunately “foresight is now hindsight.”
I wish 2020 was hindsight.
<rim shot>
Well we should look at all the facts here because Sweden's loose Covid response isn't a perfect correlation to the number of deaths that have occurred. It's not a simple "Didn't shut Down=More Deaths" according to this article from Forbes. It also was not the worst effected country according to the article.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/ericmack/2020/07/07/sweden-stayed-open-and-more-people-died-of-covid-19-but-the-real-reason-may-be-something-darker/#3f2a92f869bd
The following excerpt from the article is interesting to say the least but also disturbing:
"The implication here is that Sweden chose to emphasize personal responsibility, but when the choice led to increased infections among the elderly, medical professionals seem to have taken on the responsibility of choosing who likely lives and dies.
Given that the analysis finds not all the nation’s ICU beds were occupied, it’s not even clear that this was necessary."
And also why we can't call this an open and shut case of what should have been done:
"The result of the unique approach was less catastrophic than many predicted, despite the increased death rate. The country had three times as many deaths per capita compared to Denmark, Finland and Norway as of May 15, but it fared better than the United Kingdom and Spain while also lessening the economic impact of the pandemic."
It might be prudent to wait for actual epidemiologists to do a peer-reviewed study on this, than to extend legitimacy to a faux scientific article from an economic magazine that has an implicit bias.
For real, as a society we need to learn that not every topic has two sides worth considering. We didn't need a test to see whether or not herd immunity is a good idea. It's not. Masks, lock downs, and social distancing were the only correct way to go. This applies to many other issues but those will be deemed too political for here.
A general rule is that you prepare for the worst, even if it's a low-risk contingency. This is why these perpetual climate change arguments, in which one side has sculpted talking points that say it's "unproven" so shouldn't be acted on, are totally irrelevant from a risk management perspective. If there is a 5% chance of man-made climate change with the potential to devastate humanity, then it needs to be planned for. COVID was/is the same kind of unknown. And it was met with the same anti-science, anti-government tactics. And here we stand.
Except that climate change is not a low-risk. We have a high degree of confidence that we are in for both rising temperatures and rising seas, both of which are going to involve huge costs.
No one doubts that, it's just people (science denyers) don't believe its man made. They think the same things would happen if weren't here.
I just prefer not to see the science deniers further confused by someone erroneously using a high risk event as an example of a low risk one. There are plenty of good low risk examples. Smoke alarms for house fires, seatbelts for car crashes.
Climate change and climate science wasn't at all debated until the Koch Brothers, who have the second largest private company in the US which is exclusively invested in fossil fuels, poured $150M into anti climate change organizations which include the founding of the first “institute” that hired and paid “scientists” to conduct anti climate change research.
Really? Not worth considering the other side? Funny how people can say that for topics they are passionate about, but not others. Very hippocritical.
I personally believe the shutdowns and mask usage mandates are stupid. But am open to being convinced otherwise. I'm open and NEED TO HEAR both sides.
And if you're wondering what I possibly could be thinking to form the basis of my opinion from "the other side"...
> Do shutdowns and mask usage help prevent Covid? Yes. Although there are negative effects (health and otherwise) that can result from these measures, we won't get into that. Assume these responses are pure positives.
> Is it worth these shutdowns and mask usages to save thousands of lives? I say no. And here is where we migrate from facts to opinions. Am I a monster in that I'm willing to let people die from not wearing a mask? Well, I would turn that around and ask you... Are you a monster for letting people die from the flu and other airborne diseases? Why weren't you wearing a mask BEFORE covid hit if you cared so much about people dying? Ah, well, it's the numbers you say. Ok then, well how many people dying does it take to move your needle to wear a mask? Is it 10,000? 100,000? Your answer is fine for you... but that's your opinion. Why is your number moraly superior to mine? If Covid had a death rate of, say, 10%, then yeah.... I'd probably be moved to take those measures. But even though Covid is indeed a big deal (death rate compared to the flu), it's not a big enough deal, in my mind, to warrant the mandated measures that have resulted. See, facts are facts... but what to do based on those facts are opinion. And those are certainly worth discussing.
"my opinion" is superior to yours because we, as a society, decided that the death/hospitalization rates are too high not to take drastic actions. Every poll has shown that the majority of US citizens agree, not to mention every other first world countries as well.
So, while you are entitled to your opinions, while you are out there mingling with other citizens, wear the damn mask
Glad you think there are “two sides” when it comes to science based vs. anti-science plans to deal with a pandemic.
Just go ahead and join the “we should listen to both sides of racism is bad vs. racism is ok” crowd as well.
Didn't say the plan for dealing for the pandemic wouldn't work (i.e. the science was wrong).
It's just too much for you to wear a damn mask because you're selfish. This is actually worse than being one of the anti-science nuts. You're smart enough to acknowledge that masks work, but you won't inconvenience yourself even a little bit to save lives.
This is a stupid response.
If you are going to have opinions based on facts, please at least get your facts right.
1. About 130,000 people have already died from Covid. That is more than twice as many as have died from the flu in any recent year in the US
2. The mask is not to prevent an individual death. It is to help keep the spread from getting out of hand so that hospitals are not overwhelmed and we don’t have to ration healthcare. This is not based on theoretical modeling but based on ICUs getting filled to capacity in multiple cities in the US.
Nothing I wrote disagrees with the facts you've stated.
I personally believe the shutdowns and mask usage mandates are stupid. But am open to being convinced otherwise. I'm open and NEED TO HEAR both sides.'
We're not stupid. We've seen enough of your posts to know this is a blatant lie.
So you openly admit to being a self-centered asshole that doesn't give a shit about anyone other than yourself. Thanks for clearing that up...
So why didn't you wear a mask before Covid hit to prevent flu deaths? Seems to me you're a self-centered asshole as well. Join the club!
So why didn't you wear a mask before Covid hit to prevent flu deaths?
Because I got a flu shot. Which is equivalent to wearing a mask for the flu. There is no COVID shot.
No one anywhere has said it would have been possible to prevent all deaths from COVID. Just like it's not possible to prevent all fatalities from car accidents. But, we mandate safety features on cars, require licensing of drivers, enact traffic laws, and try to create an environment that is as conducive to safety as possible.
And what is "conducive to safety as possible"? To continue with your car example, why is the speed limit on highways set at 70 mph? It's because the consensus was that was a fair trade between convinence and injuries. If you wanted to limit injuries more, you'd lower the speed limit.
It would be completely fair for someone to provide an opinion that the speed limit should be raised. Yes, we'd lose more people, but it's worth the convinence, they'd argue. There is no right or wrong answer, it's simply their opinion on the risk trade. So why can't I provide an opinion that mask usage due to the Covid death rate isn't warranted? You can disagree, but I'm not wrong.
But that is not what you are doing. Not only are you arguing about what is the correct speed limit, you are also arguing whether or not seat belts save lives. That is where you are losing rest of us.
You should quit while you're behind.
I get the flu shot every year, but I think it would be a pretty damn good idea for people who have a cold or the flu to start wearing masks when they go outside.
People in Korea and Japan wear masks, and that is likely to be part of the reason those countries have this shit under control and the US does not.
I got the flu shot last year and got the flu. My wife and boys all got a flu shot, but my new born daughter could not have hers yet. You bet your ass I wore a mask in bed all day and didn't move outside of my "zone".
And before anyone jumps on the "see, that's why flu shots don't work", I have two points.
1. I got my flu shot early and it appears I only got 3 strains rather than the 4 strain shot my wife and kids got"
2. I also recovered in a few days. Flu shot can help with recovery time of the flu as well.
You will get flu symptoms before you spread the flu. Therefore, healthy people do not need to wear a mask to prevent flu.
But yes, if you have flu symptoms and go into the office or on a plane without a mask, you are an asshole.
My biggest concern is the oversaturation of the health system. While the mortality numbers have been low, we've also, for the most part, been wearing masks as well as social distancing; you remember New York and Detroit right before we instituted masks and social distancing. That would happen again if we dropped all measures. It doesn't take much imagination to envision the catastrophic effects not wearing masks or observing social distancing would have on society. The number of fatalities would climb. Our healthcare workers and other first responders would be placed at greater riskas well.
It's sad the number of people who die of the flu but that impact on our society is nowhere near the impact that Covid-19 has had. You really can't compare the two. We don't wear masks for the flu but society isn't slammed by the impact of not wearing a mask. Sure, you have to draw the line somewhere with Covid-19, but you are drawing it far to recklessly. Yes you are entitled to your own opinion but don't you feel a responsibility to have the right one?
It's even worse than that.
The "what about the flu" crowd ignores the fact that lots of us are ALSO opposed to how we handle diseases in general in society.
Employers love to cut down sick leave and pressure sick employees to come to the office and maintain their productivity. This is awful and needs to be met with more resistance. Contrary to DualThreat's portrayal, a great many citizens are not "okay" with current practices.
Universities are a step ahead...at Michigan, we were strongly told to stay the hell home if we were sick and recover before venturing out again.
This is the only decent response to my post I've seen. Great reply!
You bring up an excellent point about not just preventing Covid deaths, but other deaths as well via oversaturation of the health system. You are indeed moving the needle for me. Not sure it's moved enough to change my mind just yet, but you've moved it. I still prefer people to choose to stay home if they want to. If you go out in public, you are free to take whatever means you want to protect yourself, but you run the risk. Businesses should decide for themselves if they want to force masks in their establishments or not (or perhaps have business hours where only the ederly, for example, are only allowed to be in the store). If the health care system gets overburdened, well, that's unfortunate. When you go out your door, you run the risk of not only catching Covid, but also running into ailments in a saturated health system that may limit the care you need. That knowledge alone would probably be enough for most people (myself included) to self quaranteen. Life is already dangerous out there. People die every day. It just got bumped up a notch with covid thrown into the mix. True, the flu hasn't saturated the healthcare system, but it should still be my choice how much risk I'm willing to take.
And to those who would say I'm adding risk to the rest of the population. You're right. I am. So are you everytime you step out your door. It's all of our choices how and when we go out in public. Don't want to? Stay home. I realize no one can stay home forever, but if you care that much about not catching diseases, there are lifestyles out there that can basically allow you to live your life without ever leaving the house. It may not be comforable or convienent, but it is possible, on any budget. Every day you leave your home, you are making a calculated risk on how much you're willing to risk death at the expense of your wants or convienence. I simply don't believe the Covid infection rate, nor the hospital impacts thereof, warrant the response we're seeing. I feel Covid needs to be about 10 times worse than it actually is to warrant the response we're seeing. I'm in the minority, but its an opinion.
Yeah, you are an a-hole.
"And to those who would say I'm adding risk to the rest of the population. You're right. I am. So are you every time you step out your door."
So while this statement in itself is factually correct, wearing a mask has been proven to reduce the risk of transmission - especially with the high # of completely asymptomatic people that don't even know they have it. Am I personally worried about it for me? Only marginally so. I'm more concerned for others and for my older friends and family. You can rationalize it however you want, but the reality of it is - if you are in pubic and you wear a mask, there is less chance of transmission. Either way, it's a small inconvenience for the wearer and I view it as a sign of respect for my fellow citizens. It's unfortunate that you've chosen this to take a stand on. Maybe you should think about it as a sign of respect for people that are immuno-compromised
If you're in pubic and you wear a mask, there's less chance of pleasure too, amirite? Amirite?!
Ha, feel this applies to this thread.
Surgeons don't wear a mask to protect themselves, they wear a mask to protect the patient they are working on. Seatbelts save lives, but they save the lives of people wearing them. Masks save lives, but they mostly save the lives of others. When I wear a mask to the store, it is to ensure the workers and other people don't get COVID from me in case they may be at risk. I am not personally afraid of COVID for myself, although my wife was a nurse on a COVID floor and it is very nasty. Long term effects are also not known (reduced lung function and possible heart conditions). I am however concerned for my friends, parents, older neighbors, and community in general. Flu has flu shots, and is symptematic shortly after you are contagious, so the risk of spreading is much smaller. We have had 130,000 deaths WITH a shut down and masks. This is far worse than the flu currently.
I don't consider a mask wearer to be wearing it to protect themselves. I consider them as someone who cares about others. You not wearing a mask for no real reason makes me think you are an asshole because you know it can help save others and stop this disease from spreading, but choose not to. It doesn't make you look tough to not wear a mask. It makes you look like an asshole.
Actually, as a surgeon, I can tell you that there is absolutely zero evidence that wearing a mask protects the patient. There are multiple studies that demonstrate that the only advantage of wearing a mask is to protect the wearer of the mask. In fact, this is the reason why we wear masks in the operating room, to prevent us from getting exposed to any thing from the patient. In the UK, the standard practice is for surgeons and other operating room staff to not wear a mask.
I don’t say this to make a statement that we should not wear masks for COVID-19. I support wearing masks.
interestingly, in the operating room, wearing a hairnet, not a mask, has been proven to decrease surgical site infections.
There are literally no negative effects from wearing masks when you go out other than a minor inconvenience and having to smell your own stinky breath. It's also a temporary solution until we have COVID under control. You are an unspeakably selfish person if you acknowledge that masks work and simultaneously won't wear a mask while we work this out. Just an awful, rotten person. Shame on you.
Then why weren't you wearing a mask before covid? Still waiting for a decent answer.
I'd say you, chunkums, are incredibly selfish for WILLFULLY exposing your fellow American's to the potential for flu, norovirus, and all the other ailments that exist. I mean, it's just a mask, right? Why weren't you wearing one? Maybe just during winter when those diseases are more prevelant? It would've only been temporary. Of all the selfesh, low down worst people, you're at the bottom of the barrell. How dare you. May my meaningless assertion of your worth of a person based on debatable message board opinions be forever etched in your soul.
Love your Star Wars trench run gif btw. Still remember it's awesomeness.
I get an annual flu shot despite the flu probably being about 1/10th as deadly and not nearly as contagious as COVID-19. I wear a mask despite having already gotten COVID-19 because I want to encourage further mask usage because I think it's sad when grandma dies. Yes, there are always ways you can be safer in everyday life. No, you didn't get me by bringing up the flu example. COVID-19 is a novel virus, which means it is something unusual that we aren't equipped to handle. I'm willing to inconvenience myself a tiny bit until we can take care of this novel virus. I'm not going to engage with your Ben Shapiro-style bullshit any further. You're a selfish ass and my blood pressure is rising just thinking about a smart person being so selfish and convincing himself that he's just being logical. Just wear a fucking mask. It is incredibly easy to do and it saves lives.
Then you're a better person than I.
The thought of your blood pressure rising makes me think of your profile pic. And I'm a fan of your work, so I don't want to see that. (But I gotta say - The novelty of covid is irrelevant to my argument on the risks of it. I don't care if it's new or not. What determines my response is the prognosis, not the newness, of the disease.)
But you're right, I'm a selfish ass for my tolerance for death being at a different level than yours on this issue. At least I'm not glorifying people who slaughter younglings. /s
That is exactly correct. Your higher tolerance for the deaths of others does make you a selfish ass hole.