Spiritual_Chaos said:

The disaster that never came

Sweden's low death rate is an inconvenient truth for the media and those in power in several countries. They show that millions of people have lived without freedom to no avail.

/.../

Faced with the threat of a new coronavirus, the world's rulers came up with completely new measures to prevent the spread. By closing schools, by banning people from meeting, by forcing entrepreneurs to close down their businesses, by imposing masks on citizens, the idea was that lives could be saved.

As during the "noble experiment" in the US, this experiment also created a debate. In all democracies of the world, freedom was weighed against what was perceived to be security. Individual rights were at the forefront of public health. 

The path chosen by Sweden stood out in several ways. For the citizens of the country, this was most evident in the fact that they largely did not have to wear masks, that the younger children went to school and that their activities were largely allowed to continue unhindered.

Some groups had their lives or livelihoods disproportionately cut: high school students, people over the age of 70, employees in the restaurant industry. 

But there was no doubt that the Swedes lived more free than others.

/.../

It is almost difficult to remember it now, but for most of 2020 the word "experiment" had a negative sound. After all, this was one that we Swedes exposed ourselves to, when – compared to the rest of the world – we maintained some form of normality.

This experiment was condemned by the outside world early on as "a disaster" (Time magazine), a "a moral story" (The New York Times), "deadly folly" (The Guardian) and so on. The more influential a newspaper was, the stronger the invective seemed to become. In Germany, Focus called the whole thing "slackness", Italian La Repubblica argued that the "Nordic model country" made a dangerous mistake. 

That's what it looked like.

The description of the Swedish line as an experiment was not really incorrect. In theory as well as in practice, Swedes lived very differently from Americans and other Europeans in particular. 

One might object that it was Italy, France, Germany, the USA, the United Kingdom and the other countries that were conducting an experiment, that they were testing completely new ways of preventing the spread of a virus. 

But the choice of words is less important. Sweden chose one route, the rest of Europe another. 

One could see it as the outside world formulating a hypothesis. It was about freedom in Sweden being costly. 

The absence of restrictions, open schools, reliance on recommendations as opposed to laws and police intervention, would result in higher death rates than in other countries. And – consequently – that the freedom experienced by the citizens of the other countries would save lives.

/.../

At the time, it was not an unreasonable theory that Swedish freedom was expensive. In the US, with its powerful lockdowns, the death rate – measured per capita – was significantly lower than in Sweden all spring 2020. And on the sites where the ravages of the pandemic could be followed in real time – such as Our World in Data, Johns Hopkins University's database or Worldometer – it was clear that Sweden had higher death rates than most other countries.

But the experiment continued. In the year that followed, the virus ravaged the world and several of the closed countries now passed Sweden's death toll – one by one.

Britain, the US, France, Poland, Portugal, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Spain, Argentina, Belgium – countries that have sealed off playgrounds, forced their children's masks, closed schools, fined citizens for hanging out on the beach, guarded parks with drones – have all been worse affected than Sweden. 

At the time of writing, over 50 countries have a higher rate of covid-19 deaths. 

According to Eurostat, sweden ranks 21st out of 31 European countries in the overall 2020 over-mortality rate for the whole of 2020. 

This fact must be one of the world's most underreported news. Given all the articles and television features that were made about Sweden's foolishly libertarian attitude to the pandemic a year ago, given how certain data sources were referenced daily in the world's media, it is strange that the same sources today seem completely uninteresting.

That is why there is now a bit of a charade going on in the world's media; it's like Sweden doesn't exist. When the Wall Street Journal published a report from Portugal the other week, it was described as "giving a glimpse" of what it was like to live with the virus. This new life included vaccine passports and masks at large crowds, such as football matches.

Not in a single place in the report was it mentioned that in Sweden you could visit football matches without wearing masks. Not in one place was it told that Sweden – with less deaths than Portugal since the start of the pandemic – had ended virtually all restrictions.

When the US state of Florida took away most restrictions more than a year ago – after strong inspiration from Sweden – and allowed schools, restaurants and amusement parks to open, the judgment of the US media was harsh. About the state's Republican Governor Ron DeSantis, it was said that he "led his state to the morgue" (New Republic). The media was outraged by pictures of bathing and sunbathing Florida residents. 

DeSanti's New York counterpart, the shutdown-happy Democrat Andrew Cuomo, instead received the epithet "strongman" (Washington Post) and had to publish a book subtitled "Leadership lessons from the Covid-19 pandemic."

A few months ago, Andrew Cuomo was forced to resign after harassing a dozen women, but the result of his "leadership lesson" lives on: 0.29 percent of the state's citizens have died of Covid. 

What about Florida? The state that not only allowed the most freedom during the pandemic, but also had the second highest proportion of pensioners in the country?

That is the figure of 0.27%.

This relationship is very underinformed in the US media.

From a human perspective, it is easy to understand the reluctance to absorb the figures. The inevitable conclusion is, of course, that millions of people have lived in freedom, that millions of children have had their schooling destroyed, to no avail.

Who wants to be an accomplice to that?

But the laboratories of democracy have made their human efforts. And the result is clear.

Why things went the way they did is harder to explain. But perhaps we can learn some lessons from the noble experiment in the 1920s United States.

The mistake made by american rulers at the time was to underestimate the complexity of society. Just because they banned alcohol didn't mean the alcohol disappeared. Human urges, desires and behaviors were impossible to predict, impossible to plan away.

One hundred years later, those in power made the same mistake. Just because they closed the schools didn't stop the kids from meeting in other contexts. When the same rulers shut down all life in the cities, those who could went to their holiday homes went and spread the infection to new places. They urged their citizens to order food online, without thinking more about who would transport the goods from home to home.

It's hard to plan other people's lives. It is difficult to command desirable behaviour in the population. It is an experience that many dictatorships have experienced.   

During the covid-19 pandemic, many democracies have experienced the same thing. Perhaps the lesson has not yet sunk in, but hopefully it will eventually.

Then it may be another hundred years before we make the same mistake again.

Katastrofen som aldrig kom (sydsvenskan.se)

Lerxst1992 said:

mace1229 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

PJNB said:

Kids have to wear covid masks outside instead of halloween masks in my area for the 31st.. Also parents have to wear them outside too even just standing on the street. My kids are not allowed to go trick or treating with friends or family members not in our household either. So if they see a classmate or a cousin out trick or treating I have to explain to them yes you can sit on the bus with them yes you can play in the playground with them but sorry you can't go door to door with them cause well I dont have a good reason sorry kiddos. 

 They had me at the start of this pandemic but my care for what the province is pushing now is severely dropping. 

Going door to door kids could unknowingly spread the virus as a carrier to large groups of older people who are not within the daily school community. On the bus, playground etc the initial spread would be with other kids within the same cohort.

Still seems dumb to now allow kids to trick or treat together, but they can ride the bus and sit with each other at school.
If a kid is a carrier, what does the size of the group have to do with it if you’re worried about older people passing out candy?

It’s not the size of the group, it’s when a kid is going door to door, they are continually engaging many different cohorts of the population outside of the school community, which they are likely not doing as much  when on the school bus or playground. Again, I had no issue about my kid out on Halloween, but this policy example is understandable.


 

lastexitlondon said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

The disaster that never came

Sweden's low death rate is an inconvenient truth for the media and those in power in several countries. They show that millions of people have lived without freedom to no avail.

/.../

Faced with the threat of a new coronavirus, the world's rulers came up with completely new measures to prevent the spread. By closing schools, by banning people from meeting, by forcing entrepreneurs to close down their businesses, by imposing masks on citizens, the idea was that lives could be saved.

As during the "noble experiment" in the US, this experiment also created a debate. In all democracies of the world, freedom was weighed against what was perceived to be security. Individual rights were at the forefront of public health. 

The path chosen by Sweden stood out in several ways. For the citizens of the country, this was most evident in the fact that they largely did not have to wear masks, that the younger children went to school and that their activities were largely allowed to continue unhindered.

Some groups had their lives or livelihoods disproportionately cut: high school students, people over the age of 70, employees in the restaurant industry. 

But there was no doubt that the Swedes lived more free than others.

/.../

It is almost difficult to remember it now, but for most of 2020 the word "experiment" had a negative sound. After all, this was one that we Swedes exposed ourselves to, when – compared to the rest of the world – we maintained some form of normality.

This experiment was condemned by the outside world early on as "a disaster" (Time magazine), a "a moral story" (The New York Times), "deadly folly" (The Guardian) and so on. The more influential a newspaper was, the stronger the invective seemed to become. In Germany, Focus called the whole thing "slackness", Italian La Repubblica argued that the "Nordic model country" made a dangerous mistake. 

That's what it looked like.

The description of the Swedish line as an experiment was not really incorrect. In theory as well as in practice, Swedes lived very differently from Americans and other Europeans in particular. 

One might object that it was Italy, France, Germany, the USA, the United Kingdom and the other countries that were conducting an experiment, that they were testing completely new ways of preventing the spread of a virus. 

But the choice of words is less important. Sweden chose one route, the rest of Europe another. 

One could see it as the outside world formulating a hypothesis. It was about freedom in Sweden being costly. 

The absence of restrictions, open schools, reliance on recommendations as opposed to laws and police intervention, would result in higher death rates than in other countries. And – consequently – that the freedom experienced by the citizens of the other countries would save lives.

/.../

At the time, it was not an unreasonable theory that Swedish freedom was expensive. In the US, with its powerful lockdowns, the death rate – measured per capita – was significantly lower than in Sweden all spring 2020. And on the sites where the ravages of the pandemic could be followed in real time – such as Our World in Data, Johns Hopkins University's database or Worldometer – it was clear that Sweden had higher death rates than most other countries.

But the experiment continued. In the year that followed, the virus ravaged the world and several of the closed countries now passed Sweden's death toll – one by one.

Britain, the US, France, Poland, Portugal, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Spain, Argentina, Belgium – countries that have sealed off playgrounds, forced their children's masks, closed schools, fined citizens for hanging out on the beach, guarded parks with drones – have all been worse affected than Sweden. 

At the time of writing, over 50 countries have a higher rate of covid-19 deaths. 

According to Eurostat, sweden ranks 21st out of 31 European countries in the overall 2020 over-mortality rate for the whole of 2020. 

This fact must be one of the world's most underreported news. Given all the articles and television features that were made about Sweden's foolishly libertarian attitude to the pandemic a year ago, given how certain data sources were referenced daily in the world's media, it is strange that the same sources today seem completely uninteresting.

That is why there is now a bit of a charade going on in the world's media; it's like Sweden doesn't exist. When the Wall Street Journal published a report from Portugal the other week, it was described as "giving a glimpse" of what it was like to live with the virus. This new life included vaccine passports and masks at large crowds, such as football matches.

Not in a single place in the report was it mentioned that in Sweden you could visit football matches without wearing masks. Not in one place was it told that Sweden – with less deaths than Portugal since the start of the pandemic – had ended virtually all restrictions.

When the US state of Florida took away most restrictions more than a year ago – after strong inspiration from Sweden – and allowed schools, restaurants and amusement parks to open, the judgment of the US media was harsh. About the state's Republican Governor Ron DeSantis, it was said that he "led his state to the morgue" (New Republic). The media was outraged by pictures of bathing and sunbathing Florida residents. 

DeSanti's New York counterpart, the shutdown-happy Democrat Andrew Cuomo, instead received the epithet "strongman" (Washington Post) and had to publish a book subtitled "Leadership lessons from the Covid-19 pandemic."

A few months ago, Andrew Cuomo was forced to resign after harassing a dozen women, but the result of his "leadership lesson" lives on: 0.29 percent of the state's citizens have died of Covid. 

What about Florida? The state that not only allowed the most freedom during the pandemic, but also had the second highest proportion of pensioners in the country?

That is the figure of 0.27%.

This relationship is very underinformed in the US media.

From a human perspective, it is easy to understand the reluctance to absorb the figures. The inevitable conclusion is, of course, that millions of people have lived in freedom, that millions of children have had their schooling destroyed, to no avail.

Who wants to be an accomplice to that?

But the laboratories of democracy have made their human efforts. And the result is clear.

Why things went the way they did is harder to explain. But perhaps we can learn some lessons from the noble experiment in the 1920s United States.

The mistake made by american rulers at the time was to underestimate the complexity of society. Just because they banned alcohol didn't mean the alcohol disappeared. Human urges, desires and behaviors were impossible to predict, impossible to plan away.

One hundred years later, those in power made the same mistake. Just because they closed the schools didn't stop the kids from meeting in other contexts. When the same rulers shut down all life in the cities, those who could went to their holiday homes went and spread the infection to new places. They urged their citizens to order food online, without thinking more about who would transport the goods from home to home.

It's hard to plan other people's lives. It is difficult to command desirable behaviour in the population. It is an experience that many dictatorships have experienced.   

During the covid-19 pandemic, many democracies have experienced the same thing. Perhaps the lesson has not yet sunk in, but hopefully it will eventually.

Then it may be another hundred years before we make the same mistake again.

Katastrofen som aldrig kom (sydsvenskan.se)

Remember  Scandinavia  is one of the healthiest  places on earth  this too comes into play. Look at the state of some americans and Britons  its embarrassing  the obesity  crisis. Thats not in play  so much in Sweden.  And obesity amd diabetes are ranked as high co morbidities is more the point 

Indifference said:

mrussel1 said:

Indifference said:

interesting wasn't expecting to see this in newsweek:

https://www.newsweek.com/how-fauci-fooled-america-opinion-1643839

This opinion is a joke piece.  The punch line is.. "Mounting evidence indicates that natural immunity is stronger and longer lasting than vaccine-induced immunity"

This is untrue.  The evidence points the other way.  Only this Israeli study from several months ago comes to this conclusion,  and the anti vaxxers point to it every time.  Yet last time I checked,  it wasn't even peer reviewed.  

By contrast,  the CDC just published a study that comes to the exact opposite conclusion. The vaccines were 5x more effective in reducing severe symptoms.  https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7044e1.htm

Although I have to give it to the evil Dr. Fauci. This guy has been in govt for 40 years,  just waiting to spring this deception on us.  He played the long game. 

I'll take Israeli study over the CDC.

mrussel1 said:

Indifference said:

mrussel1 said:

Indifference said:

interesting wasn't expecting to see this in newsweek:

https://www.newsweek.com/how-fauci-fooled-america-opinion-1643839

This opinion is a joke piece.  The punch line is.. "Mounting evidence indicates that natural immunity is stronger and longer lasting than vaccine-induced immunity"

This is untrue.  The evidence points the other way.  Only this Israeli study from several months ago comes to this conclusion,  and the anti vaxxers point to it every time.  Yet last time I checked,  it wasn't even peer reviewed.  

By contrast,  the CDC just published a study that comes to the exact opposite conclusion. The vaccines were 5x more effective in reducing severe symptoms.  https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7044e1.htm

Although I have to give it to the evil Dr. Fauci. This guy has been in govt for 40 years,  just waiting to spring this deception on us.  He played the long game. 

I'll take Israeli study over the CDC.

Really? Can you explain why you trust random Israeli study compared to the world's foremost disease center, with literally the best researchers and doctors? 

Indifference said:

mrussel1 said:

Indifference said:

mrussel1 said:

Indifference said:

interesting wasn't expecting to see this in newsweek:

https://www.newsweek.com/how-fauci-fooled-america-opinion-1643839

This opinion is a joke piece.  The punch line is.. "Mounting evidence indicates that natural immunity is stronger and longer lasting than vaccine-induced immunity"

This is untrue.  The evidence points the other way.  Only this Israeli study from several months ago comes to this conclusion,  and the anti vaxxers point to it every time.  Yet last time I checked,  it wasn't even peer reviewed.  

By contrast,  the CDC just published a study that comes to the exact opposite conclusion. The vaccines were 5x more effective in reducing severe symptoms.  https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7044e1.htm

Although I have to give it to the evil Dr. Fauci. This guy has been in govt for 40 years,  just waiting to spring this deception on us.  He played the long game. 

I'll take Israeli study over the CDC.

Really? Can you explain why you trust random Israeli study compared to the world's foremost disease center, with literally the best researchers and doctors? 

Sure: https://brownstone.org/articles/a-review-and-autopsy-of-two-covid-immunity-studies/

F Me In The Brain said:

mrussel1 said:

Indifference said:

mrussel1 said:

Indifference said:

mrussel1 said:

Indifference said:

interesting wasn't expecting to see this in newsweek:

https://www.newsweek.com/how-fauci-fooled-america-opinion-1643839

This opinion is a joke piece.  The punch line is.. "Mounting evidence indicates that natural immunity is stronger and longer lasting than vaccine-induced immunity"

This is untrue.  The evidence points the other way.  Only this Israeli study from several months ago comes to this conclusion,  and the anti vaxxers point to it every time.  Yet last time I checked,  it wasn't even peer reviewed.  

By contrast,  the CDC just published a study that comes to the exact opposite conclusion. The vaccines were 5x more effective in reducing severe symptoms.  https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7044e1.htm

Although I have to give it to the evil Dr. Fauci. This guy has been in govt for 40 years,  just waiting to spring this deception on us.  He played the long game. 

I'll take Israeli study over the CDC.

Really? Can you explain why you trust random Israeli study compared to the world's foremost disease center, with literally the best researchers and doctors? 

Sure: https://brownstone.org/articles/a-review-and-autopsy-of-two-covid-immunity-studies/

This is circular reasoning.  As Mickey points out,  he wrote the inflammatory opinion piece.  Second,  he misrepresents the Israeli's own study.  He said they controlled for co morbidity when in their own writing, they say they do not.  He also claims the Israeli study is significant when the population of re-infection was 8! people in one conclusion and less than 20 in another.  Yet he says the CDC is not statistically significant when their data is orders of magnitude higher. And he concludes that analysis with statements about discrimination and other inflammatory comments.  I suggest you read the actual Israeli assessment. 

Edit he also wrote that Barrington paper in 2020 that advocated for letting covid run rampant to promote herd immunity.  He's starting from a biased position 

But the site/institute exists to promote 🗽!
 

Lerxst1992 said:

PJNB said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mace1229 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

PJNB said:

Kids have to wear covid masks outside instead of halloween masks in my area for the 31st.. Also parents have to wear them outside too even just standing on the street. My kids are not allowed to go trick or treating with friends or family members not in our household either. So if they see a classmate or a cousin out trick or treating I have to explain to them yes you can sit on the bus with them yes you can play in the playground with them but sorry you can't go door to door with them cause well I dont have a good reason sorry kiddos. 

 They had me at the start of this pandemic but my care for what the province is pushing now is severely dropping. 

Going door to door kids could unknowingly spread the virus as a carrier to large groups of older people who are not within the daily school community. On the bus, playground etc the initial spread would be with other kids within the same cohort.

Still seems dumb to now allow kids to trick or treat together, but they can ride the bus and sit with each other at school.
If a kid is a carrier, what does the size of the group have to do with it if you’re worried about older people passing out candy?

It’s not the size of the group, it’s when a kid is going door to door, they are continually engaging many different cohorts of the population outside of the school community, which they are likely not doing as much  when on the school bus or playground. Again, I had no issue about my kid out on Halloween, but this policy example is understandable.


 

Ya you are not getting what my issue is and making a new one up. Again my comment had nothing to do with the risk of trick or treating itself but the ridiculous decision to no let kids do it together with friends or family outside of there household while letting them do these things outside of the Halloween night window. 

“ Kids have to wear covid masks outside instead of halloween masks in my area for the 31st.” makes it appear you are complaining kids have to wear masks while trick or treating.

tempo_n_groove said:

oftenreading said:

tempo_n_groove said:

oftenreading said:

Lerxst1992 said:

cincybearcat said:

Lerxst1992 said:

PJNB said:

Kids have to wear covid masks outside instead of halloween masks in my area for the 31st.. Also parents have to wear them outside too even just standing on the street. My kids are not allowed to go trick or treating with friends or family members not in our household either. So if they see a classmate or a cousin out trick or treating I have to explain to them yes you can sit on the bus with them yes you can play in the playground with them but sorry you can't go door to door with them cause well I dont have a good reason sorry kiddos. 

 They had me at the start of this pandemic but my care for what the province is pushing now is severely dropping. 

Going door to door kids could unknowingly spread the virus as a carrier to large groups of older people who are not within the daily school community. On the bus, playground etc the initial spread would be with other kids within the same cohort.

That risk is pretty low no?

If one child has covid and visits 75 houses with mostly older homeowners to me the risk seemes to be much greater than a few kids in the playground. 

Wouldn't you consider walking door to door and being within six feet of the occupants among the worst activities during a pandemic, assuming we are still in one?

Definitely not "one of the worse activities", given that the kids are outside and the interaction is very brief. There is little to no chance of transmission in a 15 second conversation, even unmasked, and I'm guessing that most people were masked. 

Some kids had halloween masks on some didn't.  No kid wore a protective mask by me.

I’m guessing/hoping that the “mostly older homeowners” wore masks, if they were concerned. 

Where I live no one cares anymore.  It's like it moved on from here, seriously.  No one we know has got sick anymore in months.