Sweden the only country with Correct Approach to CVD-19

Post Reply New Topic

Yes, especially in contrast to the greater Los Angeles area. Related New York is much more of a mass transit town then other cities. A large percentage of the populace do not own cars. In normal times social distancing is practically impossible during large portions of the day be it on the subways, in elevators, or walking in the streets. It is going to be excruciatingly difficult to plan a proper reopening. As other locales reopen their infected people are going to keep on coming and spreading the virus here. Yet economically and mentally keeping a metropolis that is so dependent on tourism and international business locked down for one, two years or more would be unbearable. If New York collapses it takes a lot of the country and world with it.

^The world would not collapse if New Your went down. I don't think it will go down anyway, people are shockingly resilient.
After London burned down in 1666 (right after the black death coincidentally) Charles II had ideas for what sort of city should be built and so did lots of other important people with fancy plans and out they came as soon as the ashes had cooled. Too late, people were already rebuilding right on the same spots*. Having lost everything they couldn't carry they'd gone straight back as soon as they could without actually getting burned.


*This is why despite the fire many London buildings were still in their medieval plots well into the 20th century.

New York is not going to collapse.

I think the OP must be confused.

One would think that a “correct approach,” to a viral pandemic would be one that resulted in fewer deaths, not more.

In conclusion:

Wtf?

Honolulu is a major hub in the Pacific with a population of 342,000 and 11 deaths.
Like NYC it relies heavily on mass transit.

Fewer deaths over what time frame?

"200 a week for 30 weeks" is by no means a better deal than "2600 upfront."
It can even be a far worse deal.

You have to be careful to not compare Apples with Oranges.

Sweden's "approach" is a ****ing joke. I can assure peeps that plenty of the "old" people (as well as people with risk factors) certain sociopaths are so willing to sacrifice for the economy, are not willing to give their lives for it, and plenty of peeps are not willing to see loved ones die for your money or the "freedom" of effing brats.

Tegnell is an arrogant POS who I hope will...
Oh yeah, can't say that on here.
nvm

will say this though. He's as bad as Trump.


I think my country has done too little and too late, and they're opening up way too early, but man, compared to sweden it's well done

amen! the only good approach is to beat the virus down and stop it, which we could have done easily if the will was there.

NYC got the coronavirus primarily from Europe, rather than China. Though China certainly contributed.

Compare the amount of flights which came into Honolulu from China and Europe in February, compared to the amount of flights which came into NYC from China and Europe during February.

Given New Yorks demographics and cultural history I'd venture that family travel to and from Italy was probably one of the major vectors.

It certainly didn’t help.

But, really, most people of Italian heritage in NYC are at least 3 generations removed from Italy. They take much more pride in being Italian-American than they do in Italy.

Fewer COVID-19 deaths from this global pandemic per capita, or which has more commonly been reported as, per Million people.

Sweden’s death rate per Million people is 8th highest in the world. USA is 10th, Canada is 12th - and IMO China is probably lying and some countries may not even be reporting/don’t have the test kits available to confirm cause of death or others might sneak into the top 10.

No matter how you slice it, though, Sweden has a high COVID-19 mortality rate, not a low one that we should all strive to emulate by mimicking their approach.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/110 ... habitants/

I'll make this simple....

There is a trade-off that countries make between herd immunity and lockdown waiting for a vaccine.

The lockdown approach reduces mortality but depends on two assumptions...i) the economy can withstand the time there is a lockdown ii) when a vaccine is produced it actually works? the latter is based on faith because we have no idea how effective a vaccine will be or how frequently it will need to be taken?

Sweden has taken a herd immunity approach which means the younger generation are exposed to the virus and gain some level of immunity. This protects it's economy at the expense of a couple of thousand old people

I think there are ethical problems with what Sweden has done but their population seems to have supported the general approach (particularly those at risk) because they are thinking in terms of long term prosperity for the vast majority of the population rather than strangling themselves so a few old people in their 80s can live for a couple more years.

Somewhere between the two approaches is probably the best - but I acknowledge Sweden has maybe tackled this more bravely and at least have consulted with older Swedes who have supported the move so their grandchildren have a future... a no brainer

A lot of countries, including the USA, lack the infrastructure to seriously consider the Swedish approach.
You could argue the ethics of allowing that to happen.

The Swedish approach requires strong central leadership and a united front between state jurisdictions and federal jurisdictions maintaining a consistent approach and a common goal.

While this will be a challenge for large countries like the US it's still possible.

Infrastructure?

We were going for herd immunity in the UK at first but changed to different approach. I think if anywhere can pull it off then it would be Sweden as I think someone already put they already social distance. We've become a bit touchy feely over the last couple of decades and we've never been the full loaf as Northern Europeans.