Did Sweden end up taking the best approach?

305,484 Views | 1675 Replies | Last: 1 yr ago by Enzomatic
ORAggieFan
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to California Ag 90 • 1:49p, 4/15/20
You continue to show you either can't comprehend or are unwilling to listen.

No one wants to eliminate all deaths. It's a balance for sure. Just like no one has wanted to eliminate all flu deaths or we'd be doing this every flu season. It's all about management.

Also, no one wants long term stay at home orders. I think most are saying we should begin easing soon. Look at the Western states with Newsome putting together a plan. It's not going to just be life as normal for a long time. It's going to be opening things slowly, take extra precautions and hopefully everything gets back to normal as we get into 2021 through both vaccines and treatments.
Reply Quote
8
Mordred
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:50p, 4/15/20
AG
Is it possible to get back to the topic at hand, you know, Sweden?

They had a really bad day today. 170 new deaths, accounting for 14% of their overall total, and about 50% over their previous record of 114 set just yesterday. Is this an outlier? Change in reporting? Is Sweden about to go off the rails because they never shut down?

They're now 7th in deaths per capita and look drastically worse than Denmark, Norway or Finland who all shut down.

Encouraging sign is that new cases have been kind of flat but they also are pretty average in testing per capita.
Reply Quote
7
1 edit
PJYoung
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:20a, 4/16/20
AG
Reply Quote
7
Cancelled
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Mordred • 8:21a, 4/16/20
AG
Ultimately, if they do, they do. People are going to die regardless. I would prefer a few weeks of intense suffering to months of prolonged suffering. In most things in life, once you have made preparations and weighed to cost/benefits, it's best to face the music

And I have preexisting conditions..
Reply Quote
2
1 edit
Player To Be Named Later
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Cancelled • 8:26a, 4/16/20
AG
So you'd prefer to have a greater chance of dying than hopefully ride things out for a bit until the medical community can catch up to this thing and possibly have treatments?

I guess I also see this time period as giving the medical minds a chance to learn from this and develop treatments rather than becoming MASH units where they are too busy keeping their heads above water to really learn anything or work on treatments.
Reply Quote
7
Cancelled
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Player To Be Named Later • 8:56a, 4/16/20
AG
I'm cool with riding things out "for a bit." But there are few types of people that I can tell that would keep us locked down until the virus is eradicated: 1. The FB mom type that believes everything posted on line is truth and that everything has to be safe; 2. The big government types that see this as a revolutionary moment (guillotine2020 types); 3. the types that have nothing to lose because they have govt jobs or are politicians and 4. The people that literally get off on doom like the media and certain types of posters seen here.

The virus will not be eradicated by lockdown. We may get the numbers down, but when we open up, it will spread again. Only at that point, we will have exhausted our resources and emotional resolve and a lockdown will have to be forced upon us by the strong arm of the law, which will lead to noncompliance and civil unrest. People will starve and the economy will be destroyed.

Life is a gamble. I'm willing to roll the dice on my life. Postmodernism has brought this idea that everything has to be safe and we are going to live forever. I've got news for people: 1. Life isn't safe, 2. We won't live forever and We will suffer in life. The sooner Karen figures out that she can't keep her family in a fish bowl the rest of their lives, the better.
Reply Quote
10
1 edit
PJYoung
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Cancelled • 9:27a, 4/16/20
AG
queso1 said:
I'm cool with riding things out "for a bit." But there are few types of people that I can tell that would keep us locked down until the virus is eradicated: 1. The FB mom type that believes everything posted on line is truth and that everything has to be safe; 2. The big government types that see this as a revolutionary moment (guillotine2020 types); 3. the types that have nothing to lose because they have govt jobs or are politicians and 4. The people that literally get off on doom like the media and certain types of posters seen here.

The virus will not be eradicated by lockdown. We may get the numbers down, but when we open up, it will spread again. Only at that point, we will have exhausted our resources and emotional resolve and a lockdown will have to be forced upon us by the strong arm of the law, which will lead to noncompliance and civil unrest. People will starve and the economy will be destroyed.

Life is a gamble. I'm willing to roll the dice on my life. Postmodernism has brought this idea that everything has to be safe and we are going to live forever. I've got news for people: 1. Life isn't safe, 2. We won't live forever and We will suffer in life. The sooner Karen figures out that she can't keep her family in a fish bowl the rest of their lives, the better.

The point of locking things down is to get viral remedies in order, load up on PPE for our front line healthcare workers, ramp up testing to be able to contact trace and make sure our hospitals aren't overrun and people needlessly die because of lack of resources. I don't think there are any people out there that truly want to be locked down until a vaccine appears in 18 months. That is crazy talk.

We will begin to open back up next month. This month long lock down or however long it will end up being looks like it saved a lot of lives. Even our worst hit areas had enough hospital beds and ventilators. At what economic cost is still to be seen.
Reply Quote
4
2 edits
jwoodmd
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Cancelled • 9:30a, 4/16/20
queso1 said:
I'm cool with riding things out "for a bit." But there are few types of people that I can tell that would keep us locked down until the virus is eradicated: 1. The FB mom type that believes everything posted on line is truth and that everything has to be safe; 2. The big government types that see this as a revolutionary moment (guillotine2020 types); 3. the types that have nothing to lose because they have govt jobs or are politicians and 4. The people that literally get off on doom like the media and certain types of posters seen here.

The virus will not be eradicated by lockdown. We may get the numbers down, but when we open up, it will spread again. Only at that point, we will have exhausted our resources and emotional resolve and a lockdown will have to be forced upon us by the strong arm of the law, which will lead to noncompliance and civil unrest. People will starve and the economy will be destroyed.

Life is a gamble. I'm willing to roll the dice on my life. Postmodernism has brought this idea that everything has to be safe and we are going to live forever. I've got news for people: 1. Life isn't safe, 2. We won't live forever and We will suffer in life. The sooner Karen figures out that she can't keep her family in a fish bowl the rest of their lives, the better.
So, you're a FB mom.
Reply Quote
8
Cancelled
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to jwoodmd • 9:49a, 4/16/20
AG
Ah yes, the weakest argument being the ad hominem attack. So many people base their presidential vote on "oooh got him" in presidential debates.
Reply Quote
1
Player To Be Named Later
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Cancelled • 10:05a, 4/16/20
AG
queso1 said:
Ah yes, the weakest argument being the ad hominem attack. So many people base their presidential vote on "oooh got him" in presidential debates.
To be fair, you kind of invited that type of response by trying to lump every possible person into 4 categories that fit your opinion. Both your response, and his to you, aren't really productive IMO. Be nice if we could just stop each "side" from trashing each other for a bit.

Your lumping EVERY person with that view into 4 categories that you drew up isn't that far from an "ad hominem" attack in itself.
Reply Quote
7
1 edit
fig96
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:15a, 4/16/20
AG
If nothing else comes out of this discussion I'd hope that people realize that positions on this aren't black and white.

People that want to open things up sooner than later aren't ready to kill off our senior citizens and high risk patients, and people that feel like social distancing might be effective for a bit longer aren't trying to destroy the economy. Are there some people that probably think that? Sure, but they're in the extreme minority.
Reply Quote
13
jwoodmd
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Player To Be Named Later • 10:29a, 4/16/20
Player To Be Named Later said:
queso1 said:
Ah yes, the weakest argument being the ad hominem attack. So many people base their presidential vote on "oooh got him" in presidential debates.
To be fair, you kind of invited that type of response by trying to lump every possible person into 4 categories that fit your opinion. Both your response, and his to you, aren't really productive IMO. Be nice if we could just stop each "side" from trashing each other for a bit.

Your lumping EVERY person with that view into 4 categories that you drew up isn't that far from an "ad hominem" attack in itself.
I agree my response was not really productive. However, I have tried to use reason and arguments - like fig above states regarding things not being black and white - and its falls on deaf ears. queso was posting exactly the same way as those he was trying to complain about and force things into the narrative he wants.
Reply Quote
5
PJYoung
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:30a, 4/16/20
AG
Comparing their case fatality rate to Denmark, Finland and Norway:

Reply Quote
5
Player To Be Named Later
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to PJYoung • 10:34a, 4/16/20
AG
Well that's not exactly a glowing review of their polices..... so far.
Reply Quote
7
California Ag 90
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Player To Be Named Later • 10:45a, 4/16/20
AG
Player To Be Named Later said:
Well that's not exactly a glowing review of their polices..... so far.
its kind of a catch 22. they are not testing broadly, beyond the symptomatic seeking medical help, so the case confirmation count is low, which drives up CFR.

i find the deaths per million population more interesting. they are far behind their neighbors, but doing better than the UK, Italy, Spain.

it is extremely interesting to watch this play out. for nothing more than a 'control group' analysis, i hope they stay the course to give a comparative of different approaches. they seem convinced they will avoid 'second wave' damage that more 'locked down' countries will face.

time will tell.
We're from North California, and South Alabam
and little towns all around this land...
Reply Quote
6
Sq 17
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:46a, 4/16/20
not a fan of cfr just because the denominator is problematic, would definitely prefer deaths / million. That number can then be compared 6 months from now to judge the approach of course official covid deaths is also a squirrelly piece of data
Reply Quote
Player To Be Named Later
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to California Ag 90 • 10:49a, 4/16/20
AG
California Ag 90 said:
Player To Be Named Later said:
Well that's not exactly a glowing review of their polices..... so far.
its kind of a catch 22. they are not testing broadly, beyond the symptomatic seeking medical help, so the case confirmation count is low, which drives up CFR.

People say that Texas is doing well..... despite having low testing numbers

Everybody is using every number to justify every position. It's pretty interesting.
Reply Quote
1
California Ag 90
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Player To Be Named Later • 10:57a, 4/16/20
AG
Player To Be Named Later said:
California Ag 90 said:
Player To Be Named Later said:
Well that's not exactly a glowing review of their polices..... so far.
its kind of a catch 22. they are not testing broadly, beyond the symptomatic seeking medical help, so the case confirmation count is low, which drives up CFR.

People say that Texas is doing well..... despite having low testing numbers

Everybody is using every number to justify every position. It's pretty interesting.
agreed. its a jumbled mess.
We're from North California, and South Alabam
and little towns all around this land...
Reply Quote
2
BlackGoldAg2011
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Sq 17 • 10:58a, 4/16/20
AG
Sq 17 said:
not a fan of cfr just because the denominator is problematic, would definitely prefer deaths / million. That number can then be compared 6 months from now to judge the approach of course official covid deaths is also a squirrelly piece of data
ask and you shall receive





Quote:
To the rest of the world, the Scandinavian countries are known far more for their similarities than their differences. A region full of happy people in safe environments with wide-ranging welfare programs, Scandinavia often does things as one. One surprising exception is the response to the coronavirus crisis.

There's mounting criticism among doctors and academics on Sweden's "wait and see" approach. While Denmark and Norway closed their borders and imposed strict regulations on their residents, Sweden has done relatively little. Major events such as the start of the Swedish soccer season are postponed and universities are closed, but otherwise everyday life continues.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidnikel/2020/03/30/why-swedens-coronavirus-approach-is-so-different-from-others/#3a0de8cc562b
Reply Quote
PJYoung
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to PJYoung • 10:58a, 4/16/20
AG
PJYoung said:
Comparing their case fatality rate to Denmark, Finland and Norway:


Interesting that Denmark is talking about returning to normal faster than their neighbors because they locked down (in a very strict way) first.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-04-06/denmark-attempts-return-from-virus-lockdown-after-early-response
Reply Quote
HotardAg07
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Sq 17 • 10:59a, 4/16/20
AG
Reply Quote
Pumpkinhead
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to HotardAg07 • 11:03a, 4/16/20
AG
HotardAg07 said:
I agree with posters that more time is required before passing some final judgement on Sweden's approach, but as of right now (April 16th) it is becoming more difficult to argue in favor of what they are doing, compared to their immediate neighbor countries.
Reply Quote
1 edit
PJYoung
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Sq 17 • 11:10a, 4/16/20
AG
Sq 17 said:
not a fan of cfr just because the denominator is problematic, would definitely prefer deaths / million. That number can then be compared 6 months from now to judge the approach of course official covid deaths is also a squirrelly piece of data

Reply Quote
2
Mordred
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to fig96 • 11:13a, 4/16/20
AG
fig96 said:
If nothing else comes out of this discussion I'd hope that people realize that positions on this aren't black and white.

People that want to open things up sooner than later aren't ready to kill off our senior citizens and high risk patients, and people that feel like social distancing might be effective for a bit longer aren't trying to destroy the economy. Are there some people that probably think that? Sure, but they're in the extreme minority.
Agreed. Everybody is trying to do the best they can with imperfect information. It's not an enviable job, and the decisions they are making always have downsides that could negatively effect them.

There's also the old adage, "Never attribute malicious intent to that which can be explained by incompetence." Look at your local government and ask yourself if they should know how to properly respond to a global pandemic the likes of which we haven't seen for 100 years. People are in way over their heads and mistakes are gonna be made. It's really easy for us armchair QBs to point fingers because we don't have any responsibility.
Reply Quote
6
California Ag 90
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Pumpkinhead • 11:15a, 4/16/20
AG
Pumpkinhead said:
it is becoming more difficult to argue in favor of what they are doing, compared to their immediate neighbor countries.
agree if you are confident that the short term death rate is the primary thing that matters, and are certain there will be no 'secondary' hit.

their health policy statements seem very reasoned and rational.

Quote:
"We try to use evidence-based measurements," Emma Frans, a doctor in epidemiology at Sweden's Karolinska Institute, told Euronews. "We try to adjust everyday life. The Swedish plan is to implement measurements that you can practice for a long time."

The problem with lockdowns is that "you tire the system out," Anders Tegnell, Sweden's chief epidemiologist, told the Guardian. "You can't keep a lockdown going for months it's impossible."

i really hope they stay the course - right or wrong we will learn a lot about alternative policy approaches to this sort of pandemic for future reference. their current fatality rate appears high compared to Scandinavian peers but they are hardly being reckless compared to the rest of Europe.

We're from North California, and South Alabam
and little towns all around this land...
Reply Quote
California Ag 90
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Mordred • 11:17a, 4/16/20
AG
agree 100% re: state/local.

federal and international institutional response has been dismal (not referring to politicians (am staying out of that) but to institutions - CDC, NIH, WHO, ...)
We're from North California, and South Alabam
and little towns all around this land...
Reply Quote
1
Mordred
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to California Ag 90 • 11:27a, 4/16/20
AG
Agreed. They should have been able to handle this stuff better.
Reply Quote
2
Beat40
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:31a, 4/16/20
So, here's the question regarding Sweden. What's their hospital situation like right now and projected to be? I haven't

That's one of the main drivers of the lockdowns, correct? Not to overrun hospitals being the main driver while having time to stock up on PPE and find treatments.
Reply Quote
2
Player To Be Named Later
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to California Ag 90 • 11:33a, 4/16/20
AG
California Ag 90 said:
agree 100% re: state/local.

federal and international institutional response has been dismal (not referring to politicians (am staying out of that) but to institutions - CDC, NIH, WHO, ...)
Yeah, as far as the CDC, NIH, WHO.... it's kinda their job to plan for these worst case scenarios. Even Fauci has said, prior to this epidemic, that this virus is his worst case nightmare scenario. I know he alone can't plan to have everything in order..... but if this is the worst case scenario then those agencies have done a really bad job of getting countries prepared. Unless of course countries just didn't listen to any recommendations, which is an entirely different argument.

I just can't help but feel that we should have at least been somewhat better prepared to deal with this. Hopefully we will learn a lot from this situation and actually put new procedures/polices into place for the next one.
Reply Quote
1
California Ag 90
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Player To Be Named Later • 11:41a, 4/16/20
AG
Player To Be Named Later said:
California Ag 90 said:
agree 100% re: state/local.

federal and international institutional response has been dismal (not referring to politicians (am staying out of that) but to institutions - CDC, NIH, WHO, ...)
Yeah, as far as the CDC, NIH, WHO.... it's kinda their job to plan for these worst case scenarios. Even Fauci has said, prior to this epidemic, that this virus is his worst case nightmare scenario. I know he alone can't plan to have everything in order..... but if this is the worst case scenario then those agencies have done a really bad job of getting countries prepared. Unless of course countries just didn't listen to any recommendations, which is an entirely different argument.

I just can't help but feel that we should have at least been somewhat better prepared to deal with this. Hopefully we will learn a lot from this situation and actually put new procedures/polices into place for the next one.
two elements of the national level cluster **** that drive me crazy to think about:

- the inability to sustain the vaccine effort for SARS that was progressing quickly to a solution, then evidently reprioritized into oblivion.

- the story about the ventilator stockpile development after the H1N1 scare that got derailed by a big company acquisition of the contractor.

either effort, if pursued to fruition, would have calmed some of the early panic and enabled far less risk avoidance of health care system overrun, with all the downstream disastrous impacts we are now facing. both were recognized as necessary steps and both were not sustained, at terrible cost.

i really hope we learn and remember - our culture seems incapable of remembering policy disasters for very long.

We're from North California, and South Alabam
and little towns all around this land...
Reply Quote
2
DTP02
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Pumpkinhead • 11:41a, 4/16/20
AG
Pumpkinhead said:
HotardAg07 said:
I agree with posters that more time is required before passing some final judgement on Sweden's approach, but as of right now (April 16th) it is becoming more difficult to argue in favor of what they are doing, compared to their immediate neighbor countries.


It depends. Sweden is doing the best job of trying to flatten the curve to this point. They've kept more of their society and economy open, but their hospitals haven't been close to their breaking point. It's hard for some to remember, but that was the original goal when we all started our various measures to slow the spread.

But the goalposts people are using now have moved. We've gone from "flatten the curve" to, in many people's minds, trying to eliminate as many deaths as possible. That wasn't really the goal when we started this.

So, according to the original criteria we all started with, Sweden has actually done a better job than the other Scandinavian countries precisely because they've allowed the virus to progress thru their population a little more, while staying well on the safe side of the line re healthcare capacity.

When most of the world is about to start looking more like Sweden as things start to reopen in the next few weeks, it's actually hard to argue against what Sweden has done at this point:

"Sweden did this all wrong. Let's loosen things up like Sweden."

We're all going to be dancing the razor's edge of loosening restrictions while monitoring to make sure things don't get so out of hand we get overwhelmed. Sweden just seems to have started that process weeks earlier than the rest of us.

In the absence of an established game-changing treatment protocol, they're that many weeks closer than the rest of us toward the endgame of herd immunity. If we do get an established treatment protocol in the next few weeks, then you can easily argue that Sweden would have been better off being more strict.
Reply Quote
4
4 edits
HotardAg07
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to DTP02 • 11:58a, 4/16/20
AG
I mean, first of all, there was no national approach that was taken in the US that wasn't taken in Sweden. All of the non essential closures have happened at the local level, not the national level. Sweden isn't having big conferences or sporting events either.

At a local level, clearly a city like New York needed a strict lock down. Even with what they've done, they've pushed their medical system to the limits. It would seem obvious that they shouldn't have done what Sweden did. You could have argue that NYC did too little too late, costing many people their lives when the community spread was taking hold in their city.

At other localities not as high risk as NY, it's an open question what the best approach should have been or should be. NY seems like a more obvious case due to their pop density and reliance on public transport, but other cities that have had breakouts are pretty diverse in background, such as New Orleans or Detroit.

I think it's fair to say a pretty broad lock down for a short period of time was warranted in order to collect more data about what was happening and to prepare the system to transition to loosening restrictions. I sure hope our authorities have used their time wisely.

Reply Quote
2
NASAg03
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Pumpkinhead • 12:33p, 4/16/20
Pumpkinhead said:
HotardAg07 said:
I agree with posters that more time is required before passing some final judgement on Sweden's approach, but as of right now (April 16th) it is becoming more difficult to argue in favor of what they are doing, compared to their immediate neighbor countries.
It should be expected that they will have higher deaths / million INITIALLY. They are looking to peak early and avoid a second wave, and also avoid future lockdowns.

What matters is the final tally a year from now, both from covid and total deaths. That will tell the complete story.
Mike Shaw - Class of '03
Reply Quote
1 edit
DTP02
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to HotardAg07 • 12:33p, 4/16/20
AG
I wouldn't quite call your response a non sequitur, but you're not really addressing anything I said.

Sweden correctly assessed that it could avoid overwhelming its healthcare system without being as restrictive as its neighbors (and most of the rest of the first world). That would be considered a successful approach by the rule book we all started this process with.

I don't think you can compare Sweden's national approach with the US national approach because they are much more top down in political structure. We are built for states and local govts to have much more say.

I generally agree that the US largely needed the widespread SIP to catch our breath and make progress on logistical things and treatments. Much of the country would have been fine being Sweden, however.

I also agree with you that the US' primary issue right now stems from the failure of NY to move early or strongly enough. They had to know they were incredibly vulnerable to this, but they moved much too slowly.

I said early on that in the US it was likely going to end up looking like NY and the rest of the country in terms of the impact. I still think that's largely true. NY has actually overflowed and seeded other parts of the eastern seaboard. Plus there are some other hot spots like New Orleans and Detroit, as you mentioned.

But NYC itself is a huge chunk of the impact of this thing on the US, and we need to be sure that we don't make policy for the entire country based on the results, as well as the fears, emanating from NY. Don't discount the fact that the concentration of media in NYC has played a big role in the media coverage, and thus the public perception.
Reply Quote
1
1 edit
Player To Be Named Later
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to NASAg03 • 12:42p, 4/16/20
AG
My hope is that some of the treatments that the medical community try will wind up being effective. If that winds up happening, the countries that minimized deaths early will come out of this in much better shape.

If they don't, then every country is going to be in bad shape.
Reply Quote
3
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.