It is amazing how nearly every debate I have with you, you invariably move the goalpost. The goalpost was "Does isolation reduce DEATHS in a pandemic", the answer is obviously YES in the context of not overwhelming the medical system.Of course everyone doesn't die from covid. Covid is largely similar to a bad cold, for most people. It's a danger for the elderly, infirm and obese, generally speaking.
LOL - flattening the curve can certainly help to not overwhelm the hospitals. That's not to say that most everyone is not going to get Covid. Most everyone did.
The numbers would have been a ton better had authorities protected the elderly and infirm, instead of locking everyone down, and the ventillator craze was ridiculous. They snaked tubes down people's throats and many of those would otherwise have survived, because the practice for a while was to ventillate early, and those things are not great - they are sometimes necessary, but once that tube goes in, every doc will tell you it needs to come out as quickly as possibly..
According to the article, “It seems likely that Sweden did much better than other countries in terms of the economy, education, mental health, and domestic abuse, and still came away from the pandemic with fewer excess deaths than in almost any other European country, and less than half that of the United States”.The independent Swedish Corona Commission, formed by the government after pressure from parliament, was critical of many aspects of how authorities acted during the pandemic, but the overall conclusion was positive:
The choice of path in terms of disease prevention and control, focusing on advice and recommendations which people were expected to follow voluntarily, was fundamentally correct. It meant that citizens retained more of their personal freedom than in many other countries … [and] many countries that have pursued [another] approach have experienced significantly worse outcomes than Sweden, indicating at present, at least, that it is highly uncertain what effect lockdowns have in fact had.49
When choices were made about pandemic strategies, the end result could not be known, and yet many politicians and journalists in countries including the United States, Britain, and Norway attacked Sweden fiercely for choosing an unusual and more liberal path. Why was that? Preben Aavitsland, Norway’s state epidemiologist, has recently come up with an explanation:
Click link above for full Article.
The Swedish experience offers lessons for the next pandemic. Treating people as responsible citizens paid off for Sweden. The Swedish strategy has gone from being called a disaster to being a success with regard to its policy toward Covid. Sweden was the anti-lockdown exception. Time has demonstrated that their approach worked better to protect the people.
Sweden immigrant population is 25% of the total population of 10.22 million, equivalent to 2.55 million, and accounted for 40% of the 27,390 covid deaths, equal to 10,956 covid deaths. The rest of the population accounted for 16,434 covid deaths, with a covid death per million of 2,143, that is in the same range that its neighbors.COVID Deaths per million people (as of today)
Sweden vs neighbors (similar climate, culture, etc.)
Sweden 2680
Finland 2153
Denmark 1511
Norway 1204
Sweden immigrant population is 25% of the total population of 10.22 million, equivalent to 2.55 million, and accounted for 40% of the 27,390 covid deaths, equal to 10,956 covid deaths. The rest of the population accounted for 16,434 covid deaths, with a covid death per million of 2,143, that is in the same range that its neighbors.
Sweden's controversial decision not to impose a strict lockdown in response to the Covid-19 pandemic led to too many deaths, the man behind the policy, Anders Tegnell, has acknowledged. Sweden has seen a far higher mortality rate than its nearest neighbours and its nationals are being barred from crossing their borders. Dr Tegnell told Swedish radio more should have been done early on. "There is quite obviously a potential for improvement in what we have done." Sweden has counted 4,542 deaths and 40,803 infections in a population of 10 million, while Denmark, Norway and Finland have imposed lockdowns and seen far lower rates. Denmark has seen 580 deaths, Norway has had 237 deaths and Finland 321. Sweden reported a further 74 deaths on Wednesday. How Tegnell's views have changed Dr Tegnell, who is Sweden's state epidemiologist and in charge of the country's response to Covid-19, told BBC News in April that the high death toll was mainly because homes for the elderly had been unable to keep the disease out, although he emphasised that "does not disqualify our strategy as a whole". 1:22 Swedish state epidemiologist Anders Tegnell argued in April that Sweden’s strategy is largely working Now he has told Swedish public radio: "If we were to encounter the same disease again, knowing exactly what we know about it today, I think we would settle on doing something in between what Sweden did and what the rest of the world has done."
Sweden immigrant population is 25% of the total population of 10.22 million, equivalent to 2.55 million, and accounted for 40% of the 27,390 covid deaths, equal to 10,956 covid deaths. The rest of the population accounted for 16,434 covid deaths, with a covid death per million of 2,143, that is in the same range that its neighbors.
“Excess mortality” is defined as the difference between the total number of deaths that have occurred and the number of deaths that would have been expected in the absence of the pandemic.Sweden immigrant population is 25% of the total population of 10.22 million, equivalent to 2.55 million, and accounted for 40% of the 27,390 covid deaths, equal to 10,956 covid deaths. The rest of the population accounted for 16,434 covid deaths, with a covid death per million of 2,143, that is in the same range that its neighbors.
“Excess mortality” is defined as the difference between the total number of deaths that have occurred and the number of deaths that would have been expected in the absence of the pandemic.
Excess Deaths = Reported Deaths – Expected Deaths
Sweden was vilified and used as example of what not to do in the treatment of covid. Sweden excess death was the lower in Europe, including Norway, Denmark, and Finland. Its approach resulted in a lowest excess mortality overall. Avoiding the closing of schools and very long lock downs had positive consequences, the Swedish strategy worked. Its approach resulted in a lowest excess mortality overall. Time has demonstrated that Sweden strategy toward covid has been a success.
random rant with a far right agenda, racist stuff - never amy evidence
Sweden did much better than other countries in terms of the economy, education, mental health, and domestic abuse, and still had less excess death than almost any other European country, and less than half that of the United States. This is a lesson for the next pandemic. Harsh pandemic restrictions were often defended with reference to the precautionary principle. But there was no evidence indicating that drastic restrictions made sense. Sweden approach was to rely on voluntary complain with the recommendations. Base on the facts, Sweden approach paid off.
Except they had more of their citizens die than their two closest neighbors.Sweden did much better...
More Swedes died than her neighbors.
Sweden was very successful in avoiding the collateral damage caused by lockdowns Not only lockdowns were a disaster for public health. It was also a disaster for the medical profession's reputation. It shows most people to be gullible or having too little backbone to rebel against government and business taking away their right to make their own health decisions. The media and other people considered the unvaccinated as social pariahs and lack of justification for governments to deny access to places and fire the unvaccinated.Martin Kulldorff on why lockdowns were a disaster for public health.
17th April 2024
Almost as quickly as the Covid-19 pandemic swept the world in 2020, governments began locking down. These measures, we were told, might have been insanely authoritarian and historically unprecedented, but politicians were just ‘following the science’. We simply had to give up our freedoms in order to save lives. And yet, in Sweden, ‘the science’ looked very different. The nation refused to go into full lockdown, insisting this would be better for health in the long-run. It made itself a global pariah in the process.
So, four years on from the first lockdowns across the West, has Sweden’s more liberal approach been proven wrong or vindicated? Swedish epidemiologist and biostatistician Martin Kulldorff, one of the co-authors of the anti-lockdown Great Barrington Declaration, joined Brendan O’Neill on the latest episode of his podcast, The Brendan O’Neill Show, to discuss how Sweden fared. They also discussed censorship and the lockdown on dissent during the pandemic. What follows is an edited extract from their conversation. Listen to the full episode here.
Brendan O’Neill: Were you taken aback by how difficult it became to criticize lockdowns during the pandemic and have a reasoned, scientific discussion?
Click link above for full article.
Sweden was very successful in avoiding the collateral damage caused by lockdowns Not only lockdowns were a disaster for public health. It was also a disaster for the medical profession's reputation. It shows most people to be gullible or having too little backbone to rebel against government and business taking away their right to make their own health decisions. The media and other people considered the unvaccinated as social pariahs and lack of justification for governments to deny access to places and fire the unvaccinated.
Many Governments demanded the remove of numerous articles and post from social media because they were misinformation and disinformation, but those post ended up as true, while the post by governments that were in fact false were left up as trustworthy. Seems like a coordinate attack on human freedom.
You are entirely correct.Many Governments demanded the remove of numerous articles and post from social media because they were misinformation and disinformation, but those post ended up as true, while the post by governments that were in fact false were left up as trustworthy. Seems like a coordinate attack on human freedom.
I can't wait to the next pandemic, which is a bit of sarcasm, when people's kids are the ones dying instead of old people.Martin Kulldorff, PhD, a professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, is one of the authors of the Great Barrington Declaration, which encourages governments to lift lockdown restrictions on young and healthy people while focusing protection measures on the elderly. The Declaration was censored on social media, pressure by the Biden administration supporting lockdowns and other pandemic strategies.
Francis Collins, former NIH director, admitted that mistakes were made during the covid pandemic with regard to lockdowns that disrupted people’s lives, shut down the schools and ruins the economy. Four years later the anti-lockdown was vindicated. Censorship is the antithesis of democracy & science. Barrington Declaration was the way to go.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?