4 ms·

It's baffling that you would take this singular anecdotal factually-cherry-picked account of one doctors experience during one nations allegedly ineffective (la

It's baffling that you would take this singular anecdotal factually-cherry-picked account of one doctors experience during one nations allegedly ineffective (lack of a) response to COVID as sensible advice moving forward. For one, his per-capita-death-rates are wayyy off. (1 out of 200 dying? try around 8% in Spain and Italy...) For 2, yes, it's precisely about slowing the spread 1) giving a chance for emergency services to handle the influx instead of being slammed in one go 2) attempting to quash a given outbreak So many sweeping generalizations here and so little counter-point to the facts the general public have become well-acquainted with, I'm afraid our Good Doctor seems a bit eccentric and witless writing such a trivializing dismissive blog post. Let's call him "an outlier" even for Sweden, as travel is not making his strange claims that "covid is over for Sweden" look even sillier. Covid is not finished for "the world" at large, and it's an interconnected world, and suspicion of "t-cells bearing COVID immunity rather than antibodies" as if the PCR were just a cheap placebo test and no antibodies were detected in prior COVID sufferers (it does detect them.)... this is all making light of what deserves serious engagement. Fire this man or get a committee investigating his various claims as flippant blogs are not the appropriate realm for such incendiary topics.

refurb 6y ago
You seem overly dismissive. I mean he states "this is my experience in Sweden", so I'm not sure how death rates in Spain and Italy are relevant to his observations. And the "T-cell immunity" is factually correct. Even the NYTimes wrote an article on how people who have never been exposed to Covid, do indeed, appear to have some level of immunity due to T-cell and likely prior infection by a related virus.[1] [1]https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/06/health/coronavirus-immune-cells.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/06/health/coronavirus-immune...
tripletao 6y ago
> 1 out of 200 dying? try around 8% in Spain and Italy... You have conflated the CFR and IFR, and are thereby spreading gross misinformation. From the article: > And remember, the risk of dying is at the very most 1 in 200 if you actually do get infected. They're talking about the risk of dying "if you actually do get infected" (i.e., IFR), not the risk of dying if you get infected and test positive (i.e., CFR). Most people infected suffer mild enough symptoms that they don't seek a test, so the CFR is much higher than the IFR. This is especially true during severe outbreaks, where people with mild symptoms are explicitly encouraged to just stay home until they get better (or worse) to avoid further stressing the medical system. A recent meta-analysis estimates the IFR around 0.7%[1], a little higher than the Swedish doctor's numbers but pretty close. The exact number will vary dramatically with the age structure of the population, since the IFR is >100x for old people vs. young. 1. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.03.20089854v4.full.pdf https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.03.20089854v...

refurb 6y ago

You seem overly dismissive. I mean he states "this is my experience in Sweden", so I'm not sure how death rates in Spain and Italy are relevant to his observations. And the "T-cell immunity" is factually correct. Even the NYTimes wrote an article on how people who have never been exposed to Covid, do indeed, appear to have some level of immunity due to T-cell and likely prior infection by a related virus.[1] [1]https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/06/health/coronavirus-immune-cells.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/06/health/coronavirus-immune...

tripletao 6y ago

> 1 out of 200 dying? try around 8% in Spain and Italy... You have conflated the CFR and IFR, and are thereby spreading gross misinformation. From the article: > And remember, the risk of dying is at the very most 1 in 200 if you actually do get infected. They're talking about the risk of dying "if you actually do get infected" (i.e., IFR), not the risk of dying if you get infected and test positive (i.e., CFR). Most people infected suffer mild enough symptoms that they don't seek a test, so the CFR is much higher than the IFR. This is especially true during severe outbreaks, where people with mild symptoms are explicitly encouraged to just stay home until they get better (or worse) to avoid further stressing the medical system. A recent meta-analysis estimates the IFR around 0.7%[1], a little higher than the Swedish doctor's numbers but pretty close. The exact number will vary dramatically with the age structure of the population, since the IFR is >100x for old people vs. young. 1. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.03.20089854v4.full.pdf https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.03.20089854v...