Meanwhile, in Sweden...

Alvez_48

Well-known member
I actually looked at these figures about 10am. Basically you can say they’ve had around 3k excess deaths because of covid.

for the U.K. to performed as comparable on population it would have to have been 21k. Excess

Yes even if you compare it at face value that drives home that we must look beyond headlines.

Now what would be really interesting (but I can't seem to find them anywhere) would be looking at the all cause mortality in its neighbours as well as Europe as a whole (all comparable).

Will Norway, Denmark and Finland have normal deaths or lower deaths for the year?
 

Statto1

Well-known member
Yes, I know it does, but that does not include ALL the deaths up to 30th December, it includes only the REPORTED deaths up to the 30th of December, and they take 2-4 weeks to report them in full.

This is what I mean, this is from the same site, anywhere from from about week 48/50 is not complete, unless you think next to nobody died in the last two weeks, and that the peak suddenly dropped off a cliff despite cases rapidly increasing.

You're using incomplete data.

1610462738570.png
 

Alvez_48

Well-known member
Yes, I know it does, but that does not include ALL the deaths up to 30th December, it includes only the REPORTED deaths up to the 30th of December, and they take 2-4 weeks to report them in full.

This is what I mean, this is from the same site, anywhere from from about week 48/50 is not complete, unless you think next to nobody died in the last two weeks, and that the peak suddenly dropped off a cliff despite cases rapidly increasing.

You're using incomplete data.

View attachment 12136

They are saying it's up to date to the 30th December.

Your graph shows to be 'up to date' till past week 51 (i.e. 30th December) guess we will see and there will be I assume you're saying thousands more to be added.
 

Statto1

Well-known member
It's a misleading 3rd party website, using incomplete data, and wrongly implying it's complete.

When I looked at this in October/ November it was under reported by about 10%, on the date it was claiming.

Here, found the link again:

There's an excel file on there, the 2020 number is currently 97,164, but then the notes below state:

This information should be regarded as raw data that is neither quality-assured nor comparable with
official statistics on deaths that are published approximately five weeks after the end of the reference period.


It was miles off for dates 2-3 weeks ago, when I looked at this back months ago (as it didn't add up), the lag will be longer due to Christmas and new year.
My bet is that 97,000 is shy by about 100-300 per day, for the last two weeks, so effectively I think they will end up around 100k, which would be 12k more than last year. This won't be apparent on Statista until about end of Jan/ early Feb.
 
Last edited:

BiggEggo

Active member
954 deaths per million is better than Boris brigade are mismanaging. If their incompetence has cost 9k lives what word would you use to describe Johnson's 80k.
 

Statto1

Well-known member
954 deaths per million is better than Boris brigade are mismanaging. If their incompetence has cost 9k lives what word would you use to describe Johnson's 80k.
We've done $hit too, never said we haven't. I've slated us more than anyone else on here.

My point has always been Sweden's method has failed, with the country and people they have, even more so when compared to their most similar neighbours Norway, Finland and Denmark.

My other point has always been put that system over here and our 80k would have been dwarfed due to our selfish people taking the pi$$ and there being a free for all.
 

borolad259

Administrator
Staff member
Bored with saying this but Sweden is not comparable with Norway, Denmark and Finland. Very different in terms of population, poor immigrant/refugee population, population density in the big cities etc
They also had a much more difficult start with many Swedes coming back to the southern cities from Northern Italy (skiing).

You can say that their method has "failed" if you like, but you can also say the same of some countries that went with very strict lockdowns. As I have said many times though, it's not just premature to judge, it's distasteful.

They have conceded that mistakes were made. Quite openly. But they haven't had the total ctastrophe that some people here seem to want to crow about.

Edit: on a good news front, there appears to be a downturn in new cases and ICU admissions. They may just have passed the winter peak.
 
Last edited:

Statto1

Well-known member
Bored with saying this but Sweden is not comparable with Norway, Denmark and Finland. Very different in terms of population, poor immigrant/refugee population, population density in the big cities etc
They also had a much more difficult start with many Swedes coming back to the southern cities from Northern Italy (skiing).

You can say that their method has "failed" if you like, but you can also say the same of some countries that went with very strict lockdowns. As I have said many times though, it's not just premature to judge, it's distasteful.

They have conceded that mistakes were made. Quite openly. But they haven't had the total ctastrophe that some people here seem to want to crow about.

Edit: on a good news front, there appears to be a downturn in ICU admissions. They may just have passed the winter peak.
Comparing to the other Nordic countries is the closest and simplest comparison and they've no excuse, that's my take, you're welcome to yours, that's the joy of a forum.
Your argument of being different is no excuse for having 4 x as many deaths as those three combined though from 50% less people. Even the Swedish king and PM say the same.

Sweden has it's own skiing, and practically every European country has tons of people going to Northern Italy skiing, I've even been myself (from England), poor excuse.
Sweden's death rate was similar to Spain's and Italy's who had a much, much bigger problem initially, and they had much less notice than anyone (unlike Sweden), those two actually get the tourists from everywhere. If they didn't get it first then their numbers would be pretty low as they got a grip on it.

It's more distasteful to kill people or not protect them, or distasteful to declare the pandemic over and that you had herd immunity, but Tegnel did that and you agreed, despite the entire worlds experts saying, nope, you're wrong.

Good to see their ICU admissions down, looks like their lockdowns and additional measures that the PM and king pleaded for have worked (y)
 

Corcaigh_the_Cat

Well-known member
Skiing in Northern Italy wasn't restricted to the Swedes though, other Scandinavians, possibly the same ratio, will have done the same.

The downturn is great news, ours to follow in the next few weeks and with the vaccine taking effect the spring will look a lot brighter than last year.
 

ThirdLeg

Active member
I know more people that have gone on holiday to Sweden in the last 12 months than have gone to Italy. Just an observation.

Anyway, the desire for Sweden's approach to be rendered just as useless and ineffective as the rest of the worlds is palpable. Quite sad, really. Fair play to them for having the guts initially to do what they thought best for their own country, and then to admit they have made mistakes.

Similar situation we now see with Brexit. One gets the sense some people cannot wait for things to fall apart. Constant reporting of every minor hiccup. Surprised we havent got a counter online tracking each second a lorry driver is stationary or something.

Everyone wants their "i told you so" moment. Even if achieving it means both sides must lose.
 

Statto1

Well-known member
I know more people that have gone on holiday to Sweden in the last 12 months than have gone to Italy. Just an observation.

Anyway, the desire for Sweden's approach to be rendered just as useless and ineffective as the rest of the worlds is palpable. Quite sad, really. Fair play to them for having the guts initially to do what they thought best for their own country, and then to admit they have made mistakes.

Similar situation we now see with Brexit. One gets the sense some people cannot wait for things to fall apart. Constant reporting of every minor hiccup. Surprised we havent got a counter online tracking each second a lorry driver is stationary or something.

Everyone wants their "i told you so" moment. Even if achieving it means both sides must lose.
Your opinion on those shooting this system down is misguided, certainly of me anyway.

It's not a desire wanting their system to be rendered useless, everyone wanted it to work, I wished it would work, but it blatantly wasn't going to which most were saying from Day 1. It didn't work there which was blindingly obvious to see, as was it blindingly obvious to see that they had no herd immunity and herd immunity was not the way.

My key argument wasn't even against Sweden (as I said if it could work anywhere it would be there), it was against people pushing the Swedish system to be used elsewhere, in countries where people will not do as they're told, never mind them doing as they're barely even asked. Everyone wanted them to listen to the experts, use common sense and see the light.

Making a mistake is fine, taking a gamble on something not backed up by the worlds experts and killing 10k people isn't a mistake, it's a catastrophe. It's right up there with us pi$$ing about for three weeks in March, which we then did one better by opening shops and houses for Christmas.

It is the same with brexit, 99% of economists are saying it's a bad idea, people need to be made aware of the $hit situation they've caused. Brushing it under the carpet does nobody no favours, not least the lorry drivers we've screwed over.

It's not "I told you so", it's "the experts told you what was going to happen and you chose to ignore them".
 

ThirdLeg

Active member
Who is qualified as an expert? When holding opposing views, which expert is correct? The person who shouts loudest, has most followers on twitter, biggest corey? Are we to reject all future science that does not conform?


We can say that scientific consensus deemed locking down the best course of action. That is true. But i take issue with the way you have framed the decision of the swedes - A reckless gamble by a non-expert. And with the idea that one should follow the consensus even if their experience and learning leads them to another conclusion. Furthermore, your claim it has "killed 10k people" is truly absurd. And suggests you believe they would have recorded zero deaths, not a single one, had they just followed the experts.

Plus, the logic doesn't stack up. What you are saying is:

The decision made by an expert was wrong; you should always follow the experts.


Anyway, you have said your issue lies not with Sweden. Fair enough.
It is instead with people pushing the Swedish approach, failure of which, to you, was "blindingly obvious" And these "people need to be made aware" that they were wrong.

In other words, I Told You So.

Or as you have put it:

"im not saying i told you so, im saying they (the side that i backed) told you so"
 

The Card Cheat

Well-known member
I have to admit I'm a bit baffled by all the statistics and as a bit of a thicko I am at a bit of a disadvantage, but doesn't the fact that we all had a big lockdown in March and April and saw a big decrease in cases and deaths afterwards, then in July and August we were all told "eat out to help out/get p****d you're not on the naughty list" then in September October big increases, prove that Lockdowns are effective?
Or is that overly simplistic?
 
Last edited:

Abel Tasman

Well-known member
I have to admit I'm a bit baffled by all the statistics and as a bit of a thicko I am at a bit of a disadvantage, but doesn't the fact that we all had a big lockdown in March and April and saw a big decrease in cases and deaths afterwards, then in July and August we were all told "eat it to help out/get p****d you're not on the naughty list" then in September October big increases, prove that Lockdowns are effective?
Or is that overly simplistic?
No it’s not. It is called common sense. New Zealand is the country that can prove that. Also The success of Far East countries that have had experience previously with SARS knew lockdown was the only way to go.
 

borolad259

Administrator
Staff member
Comparing to the other Nordic countries is the closest and simplest comparison and they've no excuse, that's my take, you're welcome to yours, that's the joy of a forum.
Your argument of being different is no excuse for having 4 x as many deaths as those three combined though from 50% less people. Even the Swedish king and PM say the same.

Sweden has it's own skiing, and practically every European country has tons of people going to Northern Italy skiing, I've even been myself (from England), poor excuse.
Sweden's death rate was similar to Spain's and Italy's who had a much, much bigger problem initially, and they had much less notice than anyone (unlike Sweden), those two actually get the tourists from everywhere. If they didn't get it first then their numbers would be pretty low as they got a grip on it.

It's more distasteful to kill people or not protect them, or distasteful to declare the pandemic over and that you had herd immunity, but Tegnel did that and you agreed, despite the entire worlds experts saying, nope, you're wrong.

Good to see their ICU admissions down, looks like their lockdowns and additional measures that the PM and king pleaded for have worked (y)

Well it is a simple comparison if you're hard of thinking and you think that geographical proximity is more important than population size, density, distribution, ethnic composition etc. That's where statistics can make a fool of you. You clearly know jack about nordic countries. You are right. It's a forum and you're free to expose your ignorance on it.
 

GazC_MFC

Well-known member
I have to admit I'm a bit baffled by all the statistics and as a bit of a thicko I am at a bit of a disadvantage, but doesn't the fact that we all had a big lockdown in March and April and saw a big decrease in cases and deaths afterwards, then in July and August we were all told "eat out to help out/get p****d you're not on the naughty list" then in September October big increases, prove that Lockdowns are effective?
Or is that overly simplistic?
The fact the medical staff from various hospitals are calling this a third wave of influx all after lockdown shows they work

the November lockdown slowed things down then we saw the increases again
 

changingman

Well-known member
So in summary, Sweden haven't "performed" as well as their Nordic neighbours but have performed on a level with other Western countries who have, largely, invoked more restrictions in response to the pandemic?
 
Top
X