Well, a lot of the reporting was before Sweden took a turn for the better. I agree they made a mistake, but the Swedish example hows even if you don't lock down, the initial wave does eventually burn out.
Return to Play & Practice
- Thread starter jpeter
- Start date
Well, a lot of the reporting was before Sweden took a turn for the better. I agree they made a mistake, but the Swedish example hows even if you don't lock down, the initial wave does eventually burn out.
Nonsense.
Nice rebuttal. Added a lot. Cool.
I could have said that your body of work on this topic makes you look like you are an advocate for a certain point of view no matter what the facts are, but I didn't want to insult your integrity.
The CFR is the case fatality rate (that's not the IFR which is how deadly the thing is). The IFR is a fixed number. The CFR declines the less deadly the thing is. It's less deadly because it's hitting younger people and other states haven't replicated the disastrous policy of the northeast of putting nursing home residents and workers that test positive back in nursing homes. It's also declined because we are doing a lot more testing and catching some of those asymptomatic cases.
I'll give you a cite (because I'm lazy and busy and it's the first one I've found), that even while acknowledging what I'm saying (the CFR is falling) makes the opposite case and says things are still bad. It relies on the fact that deaths are a lagging indicator but it doesn't know things will get worse. I suspect they will in the sunbelt, but not significantly, because almost half of all deaths in the north east were from care facilities and we are doing better in patrolling that (at a minimum by not sending COVID positive patients back or allowing workers that test positive to work there). So both "sides" will ultimately claim victory: the antipanic group by saying it wasn't as bad as New York, the panic group by saying you see there was a bump.
Sheriff Joe
DA
How about the trauma the Trump victory caused you?
Does that count?
Well, isn't Fauci? Trump? Cuomo? Keepermom?
I've been pretty consistent on this. Not the flu but I do think we are overreacting and in an irrational panic. If I were emperor I wouldn't shut down school or youth sports at least for the fall (it's not where the transmission is). Wouldn't have given the protests a free pass, don't like the large scale gatherings going on in private homes either, didn't think an indoor Trump rally was a good idea either. I would have done a mask program early on (said Fauci was full of s--- from the beginning) and would have mobilized resources to produce masks that might actually help (not bandanas and stupid surgical masks). I wouldn't have locked down the South when they did (would have waited several weeks), I would have locked down New York, and though the Constitution doesn't allow it if I were emperor I probably would have shut travel from NY if I were emperor as well as the southern border to even US citizens. I wouldn't have sent sick people back into nursing homes. And no, that would have been without the benefit of 20/20 hindsight.
Beyond that there's not much that governments can do. Some got lucky in their timing and some didn't. This is going to happen, unfortunately, and there's not a whole lot we can do to control it. I know that's uncomfortable in our "we must do something" society but there's really not a whole to be done. Governments, left and right, democratic and authoritarian, have failed around the world at controlling the thing.
None of that impacts my opinion of your performance.
Keepermom2
GOLD
That is not what it shows at all and by the way...this was reported today.
Well, you can't win em all I guess. Your critique is noted. I let my record though speak for itself: knew how this would play out well back in January (and took steps to prepare personally, in business, and at my son's school), nailed the shutdown almost within the week a month out, nailed the stock market crash to the day (as well as the subsequent so-so recovery), the pattern over the summer in Socal, the IFR to less than .1 of a decimal point (when the WHO was saying 3%), the asymptomatic transmission, and both the current patterns in the US and Europe. Was wrong about Australia... at least so far.....
Look at the Swedish charts (both death and reported). It's very clear they are on the down slope of their wave.
Keepermom2
GOLD
I think you are reaching to make yourself right. I think the headline is clear...Certified Failure.
Exactly
Well, I'm in good company then since everyone else has as well. As with espola, though, I'll let me track record speak for itself. Can't really argue with you if you refuse to acknowledge the clear numbers.
Sweden COVID - Coronavirus Statistics - Worldometer
Sweden Coronavirus update with statistics and graphs: total and new cases, deaths per day, mortality and recovery rates, current active cases, recoveries, trends and timeline.
www.worldometers.info
Keepermom2
GOLD
You have not presented one clear number or anything to back your outlandish claim of it fizzling out. When clear data was presented to you showing you were wrong on every claim you just went on to another claim touting your superior knowledge with absolutely nothing to back it up. There is not one country that COVID just fizzles out without some kind of significant strategies. No matter how badly you want it to be that, you have presented nothing to support it. Show some facts...
Look at the chart. I did the research for you. The wave in Sweden has crested,both in death and new cases. I'm not saying the Swedish strategy was the right one. But the waves (even in much maligned Sweden) do eventually expire. It's math.
kickingandscreaming
PREMIER
This doesn't look good for Sweden. Sadly, it's not really over for anyone yet. Come September/October, it wouldn't be surprising to see a second wave.
Sweden's Covid Experiment is Now a Certified Failure
Open Air Failure Sweden captured international attention for its decision to buck the trend on mandated shut-ins. The results are now in as Sweden Has Becomewww.thestreet.com
The point isn't if it's good for Sweden or not. The relevant point is that the waves all eventually expire. The question of the second wave is an open one because we don't know why the waves are expiring on their own (regardless of what governments do, severity of lockdown etc). Some scientists have argued its because of cross coronavirus immunity or T cell immunity. Some scientist have argued the virus has mutated. We just don't know why, but we do know it is happening. The only region so far though that's had a high second wave after having a high first one is Iran, but their data has is unreliable as is their testing so we just don't really know. It's also possible that places like Sweden and Spain fare better for having had larger waves but we just don't know.
