In the Coronavirus Fight in Scandinavia, Sweden Stands Apart

[jem]

Using de Prado' model we have been making that argument for months.
How long you shutdown would depend on the virus and the data

.
All the data we had showed that hospitals outside of NY and a 3 or 4 other cities were empty.
And all the data showed this virus preyed upon the elder and those with co morbidities.

There was and is no data saying that shutting down the low risk group for more than 2 or 3 weeks provided better overall results.

Now... all you fear mongers were like... but we all catch the virus and so many will die..

Well... we have Sweden to prove to you.. that was a bullshit argument... the low risk group will catch the virus... but Sweden's daily death rate has gone from 96 per day in April down to 4 yesterday...

and that chart is as good as just about any lock down countries chart.
and it better than teh US chart as of a few days ago when I posted that comparison.

You keep repeating your lie, I'll tell the obvious truth.

You have to lockdown for however long it takes to get the state and people and materials organised. That is not two to three weeks, its two to three months.

This is the real world kiddo.

 

[Bugenhagen]

Using de Prado' model we have been making that argument for months.
How long you shutdown would depend on the virus and the data

.
All the data we had showed that hospitals outside of NY and a 3 or 4 other cities were empty.
And all the data showed this virus preyed upon the elder and those with co morbidities.

There was and is no data saying that shutting down the low risk group for more than 2 or 3 weeks provided better overall results.

Now... all you fear mongers were like... but we all catch the virus and so many will die..

Well... we have Sweden to prove to you.. that was a bullshit argument... the low risk group will catch the virus... but Sweden's daily death rate has gone from 96 per day in April down to 4 yesterday...

and that chart is as good as just about any lock down countries chart.
and it better than teh US chart as of a few days ago when I posted that comparison.

Nope, how long you shut down depends on how long it takes to get society and material organised on a massive scale.

Has one person chimed is to say hey, sure two three weeks for a task of that scale in the US under the current regeim, no problem!

As I said, results in vitro rarely work out as neatly in vivo. This is just something adults who have had jobs in large organisations know. Its not about science, it is about project management.

A couple of months, probably three really. By that time you also have more data to confirm things.

 

[jem]

this is why I keep asking for science and data...

your argument is independent of letting the low risk out.
you don't need material on a massive scale if the low risk group is rarely being hospitalized or dying from Covid.

Sweden shows since mid april lockdown does not create better results...
you isolate the high risk and let the low risk out.

again... if you have and data showing that isolating the low risk group provides benefit... (once the hospital beds are open) please produce it.

Nope, how long you shit down depends on how long it takes to get society and material organised on a massive scale.

Has one person chimed is to say hey, sure two three weeks for a task of that scale in the US under the current regeim, no problem!

As I said, results in vitro rarely work out as neatly in vivo. This is just something adults who have had jobs in large organisations know. Its not about science, it is about project management.

A couple of months, probably three really.

 

[Bugenhagen]

this is why I keep asking for science and data...

your argument is independent of letting the low risk out.
you don't need material on a massive scale if the low risk group is rarely being hospitalized or dying from Covid.

Sweden shows since mid april lockdown does not create better results...
you isolate the high risk and let the low risk out.

again... if you have and data showing that isolating the low risk group provides benefit... (once the hospital beds are open) please produce it.

Everyone else can see I'm not making an argument, I'm making an assessment that two to three weeks is too short a time to get what needed doing done.

Theory/model does really not matter if if can't be implemented.

Find someone who had a fully realised plan on how to do it in two-three weeks when you say it should have been done.

 

[jem]

anyone can see you have no science or data to support the idea that locking down the low risk did any good...
so you are making a new spurious side argument.


However, I do give you kudos... for doing what the paid whore lawyers do.
When a lawyer doesn't have have the facts or the law on their side.
They try to make the case about something else.
I have always wondered if they are doing this just to increase billable hours of if they do it with their client's consent...

That type of lawyering never wins... but it does drive up the time wasted...

you are now back on ignore.

Everyone else can see I'm not making an argument, I'm making an assessment that two to three weeks is too short a time to get what needed doing done.

Theory/model does really not matter if if can't be implemented.

Find someone who had a fully realised plan on how to do it in two-three weeks when you say it should have been done.

 

[Bugenhagen]

Magical thinking: Decoupling of cause and effect such that desired results occur spontaneously.

I'm not doing the lawyer thing. I'm doing the reality thing.

Jemcorp presents:

 

[Nine_Ender]

this is why I keep asking for science and data...

your argument is independent of letting the low risk out.
you don't need material on a massive scale if the low risk group is rarely being hospitalized or dying from Covid.

Sweden shows since mid april lockdown does not create better results...
you isolate the high risk and let the low risk out.

again... if you have and data showing that isolating the low risk group provides benefit... (once the hospital beds are open) please produce it.

Canada has far better results then the US, and the chances we'll match Sweden's pro rated death count this year is very, very small. We isolated the "low risk" group. You continually ignore these facts because they doesn't support your theories at all. And I'm sure there are other countries as well I'm just naming the one I'm familiar with. I'm not saying we nailed the best approach, but it's a darn sight better then the current American experience. I have no opinion on Sweden's approach other then that it appears they made some early mistakes. If we have massive problems later on, you can get on here and point that out. But not now because you think we will.

 

[Nine_Ender]

Magical thinking: Decoupling of cause and effect such that desired results occur spontaneously.

I'm not doing the lawyer thing. I'm doing the reality thing.

Jemcorp presents:

He doesn't seem to understand the carnage the US would have had using the Swedish approach. And you are of course right, even if the US and Canada got medical advice to open up after 3 weeks, it would have involved logistics that neither country could implement practically. As of 3 weeks, the vast majority of the medical community was unwilling to recommend the risks involved either.

 

[Buy1Sell2]

My goodness, these Swedish numbers are good----

 

[gwb-trading]

My goodness, these Swedish numbers are good----

View attachment 232609

Yeah they get the award for the highest per capita deaths in Europe over recent weeks. Guess they are number 1 and looking “good”. So how is the Swedish “natural herd immunity” doing? Oh they are under 5% nationally. Sucks to be them. When will other European countries open their borders to Europe. According to the EU - not in the foreseeable future. Sucks to live in Sweden.