3 ms·

To be honest, I'd like somebody to explain to me how a lockdown would have prevented more deaths in elder care facilities in Sweden.

gvjddbnvdrbv 6y ago
Preventing general spread in the population prevents the care home workers catching it.
- bigfudge 6y ago
  But his point is that they are just experiencing these deaths now rather than in 2 or 6 months time, and that does seem likely given a vaccine is at least a year away.
  - gvjddbnvdrbv 6y ago
    Unless he has an accurate crystal ball I can't see how he can see the future.
marvin 6y ago
Speaking of today's situation, that's straightforward. Fewer infections in the population in general, lower probability that an elder care worker in a given facility gets infected and goes to work contagious without their knowledge. Once that happens, game over. This effect is evident just from different death rates per capita in countries that have similar demographic and housing situations, e.g. between the Scandinavian countries.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
kzrdude 6y ago
I'd expect that better working conditions would have been a much bigger help. These workers would like to follow the general guidelines and stay home if they have any symptoms, but they generally work hours, not salary jobs, and can't miss too much work. If they had the flexibility and leisure a lot of the swedish middle class experience at their office jobs, being able to call in sick, then more of the care workers could have obeyed the recommendation by the health authority. But for now it's a low-wage, high pressure sector with less than ideal working conditions. To add to that, the same patients meet very many different caregivers during a week due to the same working conditions, and this is also not good for preventing transmission.
- CuriousSkeptic 6y ago
  I suspect that in the aftermath of this. There’s are the things that will have had the biggest impact on outcomes. The pre-conditions at the start. Not differences in response strategies.

gvjddbnvdrbv 6y ago

Preventing general spread in the population prevents the care home workers catching it.

bigfudge 6y ago
But his point is that they are just experiencing these deaths now rather than in 2 or 6 months time, and that does seem likely given a vaccine is at least a year away.
- gvjddbnvdrbv 6y ago
  Unless he has an accurate crystal ball I can't see how he can see the future.

marvin 6y ago

Speaking of today's situation, that's straightforward. Fewer infections in the population in general, lower probability that an elder care worker in a given facility gets infected and goes to work contagious without their knowledge. Once that happens, game over. This effect is evident just from different death rates per capita in countries that have similar demographic and housing situations, e.g. between the Scandinavian countries.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

kzrdude 6y ago

I'd expect that better working conditions would have been a much bigger help. These workers would like to follow the general guidelines and stay home if they have any symptoms, but they generally work hours, not salary jobs, and can't miss too much work. If they had the flexibility and leisure a lot of the swedish middle class experience at their office jobs, being able to call in sick, then more of the care workers could have obeyed the recommendation by the health authority. But for now it's a low-wage, high pressure sector with less than ideal working conditions. To add to that, the same patients meet very many different caregivers during a week due to the same working conditions, and this is also not good for preventing transmission.

CuriousSkeptic 6y ago
I suspect that in the aftermath of this. There’s are the things that will have had the biggest impact on outcomes. The pre-conditions at the start. Not differences in response strategies.