I agree with most of the sentiment in the post by the GP. But I disagree with this statement.
"Everyone else and every other business apart from those which pose excessive risk of viral spread (night clubs, pubs, gyms etc.)"
First of all these dont appear to be much of a risk. Secondly, the people that go to these venues are by and large healthy people who you would want the virus to spread to. The risk of them getting ill or dying is almost non existent. Further, with a virus with a risk of death that rises exponentially, it is better to get the virus today than tomorrow. So that means even if the virus does spread amongst patrons of these establishments, the risk to those people is tiny, it reduces their overall risk of dying as a group, and society as a whole benefits as we move closer to herd immunity and that helps get covid under control.
If you add in the benefits that people receive in going to these venues, and we must be careful not to overlook the utility that they bring, then opening these venues is a total no brainer in my book. We should be as a society, trying to maximise (length of life x quality of life). Removing these quality of life activities for what appears to be negative benefit for length of life makes no sense. I hope that the good GP will consider this and perhaps reconsider this point.
Sweden - no lockdown and it didn't work.
Around 3.5 times higher deaths/million population compared to Denmark.
Yes it did. They are now experiencing seasonal variations like everyone else. And the excess deaths earlier in the year compared to surrounding countries were explained by, among others, Ivor Cummins. Sweden had a particularly 'easy' year in 2019 with reduced mortality. That led to 'dry tinder' being carried over to 2020.
The UK also had an easy year. With an 'excess' of over 20,000 80+ year olds carried over from 2019, it was not quite so pronounced as Sweden.
Dear LeicesterSQ - I think you make a very good point.
Best wishes
JA
Sweden - no lockdown and it didn't work.
Around 3.5 times higher deaths/million population compared to Denmark.
Yes it did. They are now experiencing seasonal variations like everyone else. And the excess deaths earlier in the year compared to surrounding countries were explained by, among others, Ivor Cummins. Sweden had a particularly 'easy' year in 2019 with reduced mortality. That led to 'dry tinder' being carried over to 2020.
The UK also had an easy year. With an 'excess' of over 20,000 80+ year olds carried over from 2019, it was not quite so pronounced as Sweden.
Sweden had a relatively good early 2020, which was interesting and explained by having a socially responsible population and well funded healthcare system. It's all gone very wrong now! Look at the numbers.
How do you explain their terrible performance relative to other Nordic countries, with similar demographics?
Sweden - no lockdown and it didn't work.
Around 3.5 times higher deaths/million population compared to Denmark.
Perhaps Sweden’s death rate is always 3.5 times higher that Denmark?
Sweden’s yearly death count (Statista.com website) looks pretty stable to me (c 88-92k each year) and this year is no exception despite the Pandemic.
I’m no expert in these matters but if the data below is accurate, then it would seem to me that the MSM’s selective use of statistics comparing Sweden’s death toll this year to its neighbours and the recent vilification of Anders Tegnell isn’t justifiable.
2020 (to Dec 18) - 91,773
2019 - 88,766
2018 - 92,185
2017 - 91,972
2016 - 90,982
2015 - 90,907
2014 - 88,976
2013 - 90,402
2012 - 91,938
2011 - 89,938
2010 - 90,487
