At last other voices starting to emerge agreeing with me; Peter Hitchens again in the Mail and Sweden...

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8188049...ckdown-gone-far.html

Yes, but "we" already stand as far apart from each other as we can, and furiously wash our hands.

Also the health service is more able and prepared for this so it matters less if everyone gets it at the same time.

It sounds brutal, but the good of the whole comes before the individual in Sweden.

www.scandikitchen.co.uk/how-to-queue/

JK2006 wrote:
At last other voices starting to emerge agreeing with me; Peter Hitchens again in the Mail and Sweden...

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8188049...ckdown-gone-far.html


Swedish PM now admits they got it wrong - having been criticised by thousands of worldwide experts.

For allowing life to continue, more or less, as normal. With bars, shops, transport and restaurants open.

And gatherings of up to 500 permitted, for any reason.

It took 400+ deaths for Sweden to realise that no country is exempt.

Despite the rantings of some professionals - see link, above - who frequently criticised the efforts of other countries, including the UK.


The PM has now advised Swedes to prepare for many deaths, in the near future. With, at last, strict measures being put in place.

Sweden is much more sparsely populated than the UK, there are only 10 million people.

It has the highest number of single occupancy dwellings per person in the world.

It has an anti-social culture, unlike warm bloodied countries like Italy and Spain.

Taking into account all of these factors, they are going to have fewer deaths than many other countries.

robbiex wrote:
they are going to have fewer deaths than many other countries

Maybe - but their government is seriously regretting their inaction to date.

Unusual for such a well organised country, with one of the highest HDI indices.

Their PM expects the hundreds of deaths - to increase to the thousands.

But will the quantity of deaths be more or less than in other countries taking far stricter routes? In ratio? I suspect the deaths to infections rate will be about the same in percentage terms.

JK2006 wrote:
I suspect the deaths to infections rate will be about the same in percentage terms.


That may well be.

Although two factors suggest otherwise.


In China and many other countries, lockdowns have proved to be the most effective way of reducing spread.


Swedes are affluent frequent flyers - who constantly seek the sun, because of their climate.

Consequently their high numbers of international travellers could have a detrimental affect on virus levels.

That's just the point Barney; lockdowns have NOT yet been shown to be effective. Might the ratio have been exactly the same with no precautions whatsoever? South Korea and Hong Kong need examining.

JK2006 wrote:
lockdowns have NOT yet been shown to be effective


What then is reducing the number of infections and deaths in China - and the other countries, with lockdowns?

In the absence of a vaccine, the reductions weren't brought about by medical applications - or drugs. Lockdowns largely eliminate mingling.

And social distancing etc. stops/curtails - in the opinion of the WHO, and other international organisations - spreading.

I repeat; the virus may run its course naturally, as Flu does. Simples. We do not yet know.

We know that 75,000 are now dead

And 1,340,000 infected


Lockdowns are the ONLY weapon we have

Barney wrote:
JK2006 wrote:
lockdowns have NOT yet been shown to be effective


What then is reducing the number of infections and deaths in China - and the other countries, with lockdowns?

In the absence of a vaccine, the reductions weren't brought about by medical applications - or drugs. Lockdowns largely eliminate mingling.

And social distancing etc. stops/curtails - in the opinion of the WHO, and other international organisations - spreading.




It is looking increasingly likely - I very much hope Barney - that the answer to decreasing numbers is that millions have had it already.

Herd immunity. People suspect but don't know. The stats do not exist. It is the gaping holes some of us have been highlighting; not a pig headed obstinacy against WHO figures (or how awful it is tbat this virus like others can kill..) that can be endlessly quoted but without a context mean very little...

Lock-downs may help to contain the virus but they cannot go on forever. Circulation is just as important to human affairs and the economy as it is to the body.

JK2006 wrote:
I repeat; the virus may run its course naturally, as Flu does. Simples. We do not yet know.

Your problem is you think you know everything. You can happily assert claims that require months of tests to be proven.

What part of WE DO NOT KNOW YET do you not understand?