Randy
Well-known member
Wrong. Backdating.
Meanwhile, in Sweden...
- Thread starter borolad259
- Start date
- Status
BoroMart
Well-known member
My bad, it's 320 then, my point still stands, we have 320 deaths recorded in 2 days.
Spain+Italy+Germany+France = 153
My point still stands, we haven't cleared through the first wave yet.
Possible scare tactics, which might work on the feeble minded (and is sometimes necessary), but they don't listen to anyone anyway, as the UK is full of ignorant ar$eholes, which has had a big impact on why we're in this mess.
The decline is in proportion to the government measures taken, and the public's response to the measures and is either is slow, slower or even slower. Activities which up the R will slow the rate of decline, it's a fact.
Bet he doesn't reply "Wrong" to that, wonder what he will reply with?
BoroMart
Well-known member
He might dissapear of the thread like he did on the white lives matter one when faced with logic and reasoning
Randy
Well-known member
Ah bully boy tactics. Lovely.
It seems you two can only see what's in front of your face and any other viewpoint is regarded as null and void because they don't match up with your viewpoints.
It also seems that some can't stand the fact that the seasonal virus is on the downward trend, the streets aren't littered with bodies and aren't happy that hospitals are still up and running and haven't been overwhelmed with covid-19 patients.
I do agree that a second wave is inevitable. I just hope hospitals are geared up with enough chemotherapy treatments and scanners for the influx of cancer patients.
ForssAwakens
Well-known member
Where is the evidence that it’s seasonal. It rattling through some warm climates at the moment
Randy
Well-known member
Just my opinion. The country still allows it at the moment. Notice I said seasonal though and not temperate.
It's not just my viewpoint, it's pretty much the entire worlds viewpoint with regards to: lockdown = smaller R = saved lives. You're in the minority here, not us.
You however can't seem to see that 5200 deaths for a nation of 10m is absolutely shocking, even worse considering their initial infection was low, even much, much worse compared to their Nordic counterparts and even worse considering they had more notice than other nations in the "most deaths per million" race.
You're also acting like Sweden have not taken or advised any/ as many measures whatsoever, which isn't true. They've effectively just been asked to not to spread the virus, rather than being strongly advised not to spread the virus or even forced not to spread the virus. The only thing that makes it a disaster, and not a massive disaster is the Swedish people seem to be more trustworthy than the UK.
I'm more glad than anyone we're on the downward trend in the UK, and most other EU nations pretty much have had it under wraps for a while. Seasonal (if it is seasonal) is nothing compared to the impact of social distancing, lockdowns and test, track, trace and isolate, which has been known for 100 years.
A second wave isn't inevitable for those who are prepared, not one anywhere near the same proportions as before anyway. Most countries will have massive testing, tracking and tracing capability now, along with a mass of knowledge and statistics. Any further outbreaks should be much simpler to detect and contain.
The cancer patients stand a better chance if the NHS is not overwhelmed and if they don't have covid-19 as well.
Randy
Well-known member
Thousands of cancer patients have unfortunately already been consigned to the probable outcome of death due to the public been scared away from hospitals and doctor's surgeries. The stats about cancer referrals dropping are there for all to see.
That is the second wave.
Back to Sweden, I'm not asking to be proven right or wrong. My opinion is that Sweden will come out of this in a better position socially and economically than a lot of other countries because of their actions. People were intent on comparing our country to others that were in no way similar so you can't argue that Sweden should only be compared to its neighbours.
ForssAwakens
Well-known member
Ye good point on seasonal to be fair as it’s ravaging through Brazil which is Southern Hemisphere
Although Pakistan and India have seen significant increases recently
Nobody said don't go to hospital if you have or think you have cancer though, nobody said anything like that. Cancer is unlikely to kill you inside 18 days, unlike covid if you end up needing to go to hospital. Cancer isn't contagious either.
My bet is the excess deaths line follows the Covid-19 line, just like it is doing, and that the increase in cancer deaths is either undetectable or less than 10% of the covid peak deaths, and certainly not even a drop in the ocean compared to what it would be if we let covid-19 run amok.
Sweden was already better socially than the UK, nobody really doubts that. Economies can recover, people can't be brought back to life.
Compare Sweden to every country in the world of similar wealth and population then, it's pretty much in the top 5% of the worst.
Compare it to the rest on the deaths per million list, it's up there with the worst and is is still climbing against the worst. That's with me even letting you include Italy and Spain, which were hit bad early doors and worse than anywhere else in Europe.
Norway and Finland are about as similar as you're going to get, who else would you say Sweden is comparable to, if not Norway, Finland or Denmark?
Brazil is about the same temperature as the UK is now, just like Peru or Mexico. Covid doesn't seem to give much of a toss about what the season or temperature is, not like normal flu as it's much more contagious. Droplets do naturally dry quicker in warmer climates, but the thing is, when most transmissions are probably indoors the outside season probably doesn't matter as much.
Evil
Well-known member
A lot of this thread is showing political bias as usual, however, they are comparing Sweden with other countries' curves and its actually displaying extremely similar to those who locked down early.
If you follow decent scientists and statisticians rather than the media, you'll find that lockdown has shown immediate initial effect. However, long term, Swedens approach isn't actually any more or less damaging than if they locked down at the beginning.
If you follow decent scientists and statisticians rather than the media, you'll find that lockdown has shown immediate initial effect. However, long term, Swedens approach isn't actually any more or less damaging than if they locked down at the beginning.
Corcaigh_the_Cat
Well-known member
1992 European Championship final from Gothenburg just kicking off on BBC2 (they're a bit late).
Could you imagine England hosting a major international tournament with the final not held in London?
Could you imagine England hosting a major international tournament with the final not held in London?
No political bias on my part at all, we've just done a crap job as we were too slow to lock down and we were too soft with it, people all over the world say that and can see it, who have zero link to the UK and probably don't even know which party is in power.
It's not similar to Germany, Norway, Finland, Denmark, Netherlands, Switzerland, Ireland, Portugal, Austria, Czech republic, Greece etc etc etc.
Their graph/ trend is similar to those that got absolutely ravaged initially and had an absolute mountain to climb (or come down from). That's why Sweden where nowhere near the top on the deaths per million race initially, but now they're one of the "winners".
ForssAwakens
Well-known member
Depends what your definition of a early lockdown is
Italy Spain and U.K. didn’t complete an early lockdown. They had a lockdown during a time where exponentially raises where happening and the full extent of pre lockdown status takes at least around 3 weeks to realise
On another note, It’s also stupid to compare 50 deaths a day during a rise to 50 deaths a day when your
On a decline.
Randy
Well-known member
This word ravaged you keep using doesn't sit right.
That's from Google after typing in 'how many deaths from covid-19 in the UK'.
43,081 whilst sad and a lot of them preventive (see care homes) is hardly a number that says a country has been ravaged when it contains nearly 68 million people.
That's from Google after typing in 'how many deaths from covid-19 in the UK'.
43,081 whilst sad and a lot of them preventive (see care homes) is hardly a number that says a country has been ravaged when it contains nearly 68 million people.
Ravaged as in 50% more deaths than there normally would (should) be, and that's with enforced/ strongly advised measures (albeit late and soft ones).
At the peak the weekly deaths was about double what it normally would be, and would have no doubt gone much higher if we had done nothing.
At the peak the weekly deaths was about double what it normally would be, and would have no doubt gone much higher if we had done nothing.
BoroMart
Well-known member
Oh come on Randy, you were given the reasons why WLM was racist on multiple occasions and tried to distract and avoid before disappearing off the thread. Repeating the facts is not 'bullying'
- Status