GAC06 said:

---

Sure but as you approach 300,000 cases that shouldn't be skewed too far one way or the other

---

I know March of 2020 seems like ages ago, but I think you have to go back to the Spring to get some answers. Italy was the first European country to get hit, were caught flat-footed and the hospitals got overrun. They were at a point where they were having to pick and choose who to try and save as people were dying in their homes. Also, I seem to remember that Italy was only testing the really sick, so it inflated their death rates quite a bit. At one point, the CFR in Italy was like 25%. While the number of positive cases between the two may be similar, the number of actual infections is likely much higher in Italy. Another problem with Italy is the tradition of multi-generational homes. I'm not familiar with how Germany handles their elderly population (are they more independent like in the US?), but the average age of death in Italy was very high as the younger people were getting infected and bringing it home to their parents and grandparents.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/29/world/europe/sweden-coronavirus-strategy.html

Quote:

---

Now, though, the question is whether the country's current low caseload, compared with sharp increases elsewhere, shows that it has found a sustainable balance, something that all Western countries are seeking eight months into the pandemic or whether the recent numbers are just a temporary aberration.

"It looks positive," said Anders Tegnell, Sweden's state epidemiologist, who gained global fame and notoriety for having kept Sweden out of lockdown in March.

With a population of 10.1 million, Sweden averaged just over 200 new cases a day for several weeks, though in recent days that number has jumped to about 380. The per capita rate is far lower than nearby Denmark or the Netherlands (if higher than the negligible rates in Norway and Finland). Sweden is also doing far better, for the moment, than Spain, with 10,000 cases a day, and France, with 12,000.

---

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3702595

Quote:

---

Abstract
Using monthly all-cause death tolls for Denmark, Sweden and Finland from January 1946 (and Norway from January 2000) to June 2020, I estimate the stock of vulnerable elderly with a high mortality risk "dry tinder" in each country primo each month from January 1960 to April 2020.

My calculations show that the stock of "dry tinder" in Sweden was very large compared to other Nordic countries going into the COVID-19-pandemic early April and large even in a historical per-spective. The results are robust to different specifications of the expected mortality and the "dry tinder"-stock.

My results show that a large share of the excess mortality in Sweden in April 2020 may be partially explained by a vulnerable, elderly population due to very mild flu seasons in 18/19 and 19/20 as well as very few deaths during the 2019 summer compared to earlier years and compared to other Nordic countries.

My results illustrate that plain coincidences may be important when understanding the COVID-19-death toll in a country compared to national lockdown policies.


Note: Funding: I work for a libertarian think tank in Denmark. The funding is mostly undisclosed - even for employees - except for a few charitable foundations.

---

The Lockdown for nothing world will not admit they were 100% wrong. Propaganda at its finest.

TheMasterplan said:

---

fig96 said:

---

It feels like anyone who isn't rabidly pro-Sweden in this is somehow perceived here as anti-Sweden.

---

The main question is why is the Sweden approach working and why are the pro-lockdown types not being asked the right questions on why Sweden's approach is working so far after all the doomsday predictions over it. They are being allowed to ignore it which is unacceptable.

You can bring up other nordic countries all you want but they are maskless and not seeing massive spread. They were also predicted to have almost 20x more deaths then they have now.

They should perform some self-reflection and humility and at least ask the question, "Was there an alternative solution?"

---

Not sure what that has to do with my comment.

Once again, people who want to be cautious aren't necessarily "pro lockdown" nor do they want the economy to die. This weird black and white thing some of you want to do is just odd.

No one knows the right answer in this situation, and we certainly didn't know what the best course was a few months ago.

Again, nothing to do with my comment.

fig96 said:

---

TheMasterplan said:

---

fig96 said:

---

It feels like anyone who isn't rabidly pro-Sweden in this is somehow perceived here as anti-Sweden.

---

The main question is why is the Sweden approach working and why are the pro-lockdown types not being asked the right questions on why Sweden's approach is working so far after all the doomsday predictions over it. They are being allowed to ignore it which is unacceptable.

You can bring up other nordic countries all you want but they are maskless and not seeing massive spread. They were also predicted to have almost 20x more deaths then they have now.

They should perform some self-reflection and humility and at least ask the question, "Was there an alternative solution?"

---

Not sure what that has to do with my comment.

Once again, people who want to be cautious aren't necessarily "pro lockdown" nor do they want the economy to die. This weird black and white thing some of you want to do is just odd.

No one knows the right answer in this situation, and we certainly didn't know what the best course was a few months ago.

---

I guess where people should be cautious is the LTC/nursing facilities.

I'm not really arguing against you I guess. Just frustrated that the questions aren't being asked to those saying we need to lockdown 100% and wear masks 24/7.

Sure we didn't know the best course months ago. We all fell for the CCP propaganda of people falling in the streets. Nobody wants to admit they were wrong and that's what is going on here. No humility whatsoever.

Now that we know more we should be opening up way more like Sweden is. They are still encouraging voluntary responsibility like social distancing which is great from a freedom and liberty perspective which should still be valued.

Well, when comparing nations there are so many differences to take into account. Population, immigration, ports of entry ie how easy is it to close off etc etc. I personally think that the virus is gonna do its thing regardless. If, as the experts say, we are simply flattening the curve, then cases of the virus per capita in the end should be pretty close world wide. The big difference is how long it took to get to the end. I have a feeling that the shut it all down crowd will be dealing with this a bit longer than the open it all up crowd. Some would argue that they will benefit from the coming vaccine. However, considering it normally takes years to get a safe vaccine on the market and that they have failed to successfully develop one for SARRS in 20 years, a very similar virus, I don't know that I would count on it. Personally I will wait to see what happens after a few years before I indulge. I just don't see the risk considering my age and health of simply getting the virus as greater than taking a potentially dangerous vaccine. Statistically under 70 and healthy with no preexisting issues, my chances of having a bad case are extremely small and dying of it even smaller. All that being said, I think those countries that protected the vulnerable well and early will have a better death rate, but every other statistic in the end will likely be very similar from country to country. But the day we are all done with this as nations is a long ways off.

As I have stated on this thread the country that I believe really should be looked at for a no shutdown situation is Nicaragua. There was no lockdown, no businesses shut down by government order, and the population basically had to keep on working or they would go hungry.

Their borders were closed, but so were the borders of all the other neighbors. The health care system in the country is poor, no pun intended, for the most part. The climate resembles the US during summertime. There are plenty of unhealthy people and so on and so forth.

Their official statistics are 4,225 cases and 153 deaths. If those numbers are 4X what they are saying, out of a country of 6.5 million I don't think that is a bad number. Especially the 2nd poorest country in this hemisphere. Many people were afflicted with it, un-diagnosed and untreated, and most survived.

Due to politics there is some nebulous activity in the reporting and handling of Covid, but from long time friends and co-workers who live and work there, and lived and worked through the height of the deal, things are really on the down turn and there is not the fear that there is in other countries.

AgCPA said:

---

Well, when comparing nations there are so many differences to take into account. Population, immigration, ports of entry ie how easy is it to close off etc etc. I personally think that the virus is gonna do its thing regardless. If, as the experts say, we are simply flattening the curve, then cases of the virus per capita in the end should be pretty close world wide. The big difference is how long it took to get to the end. I have a feeling that the shut it all down crowd will be dealing with this a bit longer than the open it all up crowd. Some would argue that they will benefit from the coming vaccine. However, considering it normally takes years to get a safe vaccine on the market and that they have failed to successfully develop one for SARRS in 20 years, a very similar virus, I don't know that I would count on it. Personally I will wait to see what happens after a few years before I indulge. I just don't see the risk considering my age and health of simply getting the virus as greater than taking a potentially dangerous vaccine. Statistically under 70 and healthy with no preexisting issues, my chances of having a bad case are extremely small and dying of it even smaller. All that being said, I think those countries that protected the vulnerable well and early will have a better death rate, but every other statistic in the end will likely be very similar from country to country. But the day we are all done with this as nations is a long ways off.

---

SARS didn't last long enough or infect enough people to do phase 3 trials. You need to compare how many people in a test group get sick to how many people in a control group get sick. SARS was easy to identify who had it and isolate before they infected others so basically no one got sick. There was about 8000 confirmed cases of SARS worldwide from 2002-2004.

Please stop using a lack of SARS vaccine as some indication that we can't make a vaccine to COVID19. It wasn't that the SARS vaccines didn't work, it was that they couldn't test them.

ham98 said:

---

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/resources/the-world-factbook/geos/nu.html

Median age of Nicaragua: 27.3

Nicaragua has a low death rate because they have a young population. It holds true worldwide. A lot of African countries also will never see a big death spike due to covid due to their young populations

---

Good point, Nicaragua does have a younger population than the US, I don't know if I agree with the CIA median age, due to having lived there for 11 years and the fact that the Autonomous Zones are/were never accurately counted in the censuses.

I would not think the Nicaraguan median age would be too far off of Hispanic majority population centers in the US. Another factor, Nicaragua, at least from my experience in LatAm and the Caribbean, has the most multigenerational households, and extended family ones, of any place I have lived and spent time in, more than Haiti and or Mexico.

The access to advanced healthcare in that country is probably a small step above Africa. One thing I do believe makes a difference is that in Nicaragua probably no more than 15% of the population spends ample time in AC. Malls, markets, schools, factories, hospital hallways and many rooms, and the majority of the homes are al fresco. I believe that plays a large part in the reducing transmission, just a personal opinion.

But overall, even compared to their similar, yet more advanced, neighbors the effects of the virus appeared less on society and for sure economically.

You make a valid point. But Im not sure it is as pertinent as you believe. You can still develop the vaccine with the virus you have in the lab. You can still test it for safety in humans. You can also test the antibodies produced in humans for efficacy against the virus. Its true that human trials are the best last step, but there are always alternatives when needed. But regardless of how much a SARRS comparison is valid, I still am of the opinion as are several MD buds that one cannot be certain of safety in less than a year. Not saying folks that are vulnerable or simply want one should not take it. Honestly I hope they do so we can get past this. But as I stated, for me personally, I will wait a year or two before taking it myself.

AgCPA said:

---

You make a valid point. But Im not sure it is as pertinent as you believe. You can still develop the vaccine with the virus you have in the lab. You can still test it for safety in humans. You can also test the antibodies produced in humans for efficacy against the virus. Its true that human trials are the best last step, but there are always alternatives when needed. But regardless of how much a SARRS comparison is valid, I still am of the opinion as are several MD buds that one cannot be certain of safety in less than a year. Not saying folks that are vulnerable or simply want one should not take it. Honestly I hope they do so we can get past this. But as I stated, for me personally, I will wait a year or two before taking it myself.

---

Texas Children's had a SARS vaccine that I believe made it through phase 1 and phase 2, but there was no interest in a phase 3 because SARS was gone. You cannot do a phase 3 in vitro. You cannot test safety in vitro.

Good news for you, the phase 1 for each of the 9 COVID vaccine candidates in phase 3 trials right now all showed antibodies that responded to the virus at levels similar to those who recovered from the virus. Guess we can approve now and skip the rest of the phase 3. LOL

100% Correct!

If anyone wants a hilarious read. https://apple.news/AJeh22SAHSfGHwiblOadZxQ

" Sweden and the U.S. essentially make up a category of two: they are the only countries with high overall mortality rates that have failed to rapidly reduce those numbers as the pandemic has progressed."

https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/coronavirus/swedens-rank-global-covid-19-deaths-continues-fall-other-countries-move