5 ms·

You seem to be mixing up cause and effect. The reason COVID hasn't been so bad is because of all the special preventative measures. It's super contagious, still

You seem to be mixing up cause and effect. The reason COVID hasn't been so bad is because of all the special preventative measures. It's super contagious, still sends 10% of people to hospital, and is killing 1-2% of people. Sitting in the presence of strangers for hours in an enclosed space is a great way to transmit COVID, and this is why indoor dining must be closed.

ceilingcorner 6y ago
Sweden’s approach seems to indicate the opposite.
- evgen 6y ago
  Given how poorly Sweden has fared compared to its neighbors you really need to stop trying to use it as an example of good policy.
  - ceilingcorner 6y ago
    What neighbors? What data are you using? As far as I can tell, it is pretty much middle of the pack. Behind Italy, Spain, and the UK in Europe alone. Somewhere like Belgium is far far worse. Not to mention the fact that Sweden specifically used this strategy in order to avoid government control over people, which as we have already seen, other countries are not doing. See: Australia. “Good policy” expands beyond a single metric.
    - evgen 6y ago
      It's neighbors would be the countries with which it shares a border: Norway, Finland and Denmark.
dannyw 6y ago
Sydney resident here, been eating out, indoors, since May. Our suppression strategy has been working; we don't adopt a "close at all costs" strategy.
- Par_Avion 6y ago
  For the uninformed, would you mind explaining your suppression strategy? Anything beyond the "shutdown early/shutdown hard" combined with universal testing and contact tracing?
  - paranoidrobot 6y ago
    The poster you are replying to is leaving out the major parts as to why Sydney's strategy is working. Borders (local+international) were closed before there was a major influx of infected persons. We've had hotel quarantine for ~all entries into the state. The level of infections has been low enough that contact tracing was never overwhelmed. The level of testing has generally been very high where outbreaks occurred. The level of compliance with stay at home/limit travel has generally been pretty good. And a a major factor is that we've been very lucky. Still, there's been a lot of businesses severely impacted. Those that were already on the edge and either unable or unwilling to adapt, or were not able to make their new processes profitable have gone under. e: Also, lets not forget that Victoria (Melbourne) had a broadly similar situation. They were unlucky in that their hotel quarantine process was poorly managed and there wasn't a strict adherance to quarantine protocols. This was a major trigger for their massive spike. Anyone thinking this couldn't happen here in NSW (Sydney) is fooling themselves.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
nradov 6y ago
False. The infection fatality rate is under 1%. Please stop spreading alarmist misinformation. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning-scenarios.html https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning-scena...
jMyles 6y ago
> The reason COVID hasn't been so bad is because of all the special preventative measures. If that's the case, then why is Sweden's population-level mortality (578 per million) lower than the USA (642 per mission) or Spain (nearly 700), or several other lockdown states? Sweden didn't close restaurants or schools for a day. Sweden's rate is also flat, while the USA and Spain are still increasing. > sends 10% of people to hospital, and is killing 1-2% of people. Can you provide a source for these strange figures? The last several dozen papers on serological prevalance have found the IFR to be nearly an order of magnitude lower than you're saying it is.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
logicchains 6y ago
>You seem to be mixing up cause and effect. The reason COVID hasn't been so bad is because of all the special preventative measures. How does this square up with the fact that places without any lockdowns, like Sweden and South Dakota, still have fewer deaths per capita than places like New York, Peru, Belgium and Spain? A recent study found no correlation between lockdowns and reduced fatality; social distancing is the thing that has an effect: https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/social-distancing-more-important-than-lockdowns-in-covid-19-fight-tau-644754 https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/social-distancing-more-imp.... “We found that an early implementation of social distancing is the most significant factor, with a very high correlation to the mortality rate,” said the researchers. “Countries that responded quickly with social distancing measures – not necessarily with a tight lockdown – ultimately emerged from the first outbreak with better results. In contrast, no correlation was found between mortality data and the severity and/or length of the lockdown. Even in Sweden, a country that never imposed a lockdown, we can see that the early decrease in mobility, starting in March, was manifested in the mortality rate. Our study is based purely on observations and does not relate to the premises of any existing epidemiological model. We show that the spread of the pandemic can be prevented by quickly implementing basic measures of social distancing – without a rigorous lockdown.”

ceilingcorner 6y ago

Sweden’s approach seems to indicate the opposite.

evgen 6y ago
Given how poorly Sweden has fared compared to its neighbors you really need to stop trying to use it as an example of good policy.
- ceilingcorner 6y ago
  What neighbors? What data are you using? As far as I can tell, it is pretty much middle of the pack. Behind Italy, Spain, and the UK in Europe alone. Somewhere like Belgium is far far worse. Not to mention the fact that Sweden specifically used this strategy in order to avoid government control over people, which as we have already seen, other countries are not doing. See: Australia. “Good policy” expands beyond a single metric.
  - evgen 6y ago
    It's neighbors would be the countries with which it shares a border: Norway, Finland and Denmark.

dannyw 6y ago

Sydney resident here, been eating out, indoors, since May. Our suppression strategy has been working; we don't adopt a "close at all costs" strategy.

Par_Avion 6y ago
For the uninformed, would you mind explaining your suppression strategy? Anything beyond the "shutdown early/shutdown hard" combined with universal testing and contact tracing?
- paranoidrobot 6y ago
  The poster you are replying to is leaving out the major parts as to why Sydney's strategy is working. Borders (local+international) were closed before there was a major influx of infected persons. We've had hotel quarantine for ~all entries into the state. The level of infections has been low enough that contact tracing was never overwhelmed. The level of testing has generally been very high where outbreaks occurred. The level of compliance with stay at home/limit travel has generally been pretty good. And a a major factor is that we've been very lucky. Still, there's been a lot of businesses severely impacted. Those that were already on the edge and either unable or unwilling to adapt, or were not able to make their new processes profitable have gone under. e: Also, lets not forget that Victoria (Melbourne) had a broadly similar situation. They were unlucky in that their hotel quarantine process was poorly managed and there wasn't a strict adherance to quarantine protocols. This was a major trigger for their massive spike. Anyone thinking this couldn't happen here in NSW (Sydney) is fooling themselves.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

nradov 6y ago

False. The infection fatality rate is under 1%. Please stop spreading alarmist misinformation. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning-scenarios.html https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning-scena...

jMyles 6y ago

> The reason COVID hasn't been so bad is because of all the special preventative measures. If that's the case, then why is Sweden's population-level mortality (578 per million) lower than the USA (642 per mission) or Spain (nearly 700), or several other lockdown states? Sweden didn't close restaurants or schools for a day. Sweden's rate is also flat, while the USA and Spain are still increasing. > sends 10% of people to hospital, and is killing 1-2% of people. Can you provide a source for these strange figures? The last several dozen papers on serological prevalance have found the IFR to be nearly an order of magnitude lower than you're saying it is.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

logicchains 6y ago

>You seem to be mixing up cause and effect. The reason COVID hasn't been so bad is because of all the special preventative measures. How does this square up with the fact that places without any lockdowns, like Sweden and South Dakota, still have fewer deaths per capita than places like New York, Peru, Belgium and Spain? A recent study found no correlation between lockdowns and reduced fatality; social distancing is the thing that has an effect: https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/social-distancing-more-important-than-lockdowns-in-covid-19-fight-tau-644754 https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/social-distancing-more-imp.... “We found that an early implementation of social distancing is the most significant factor, with a very high correlation to the mortality rate,” said the researchers. “Countries that responded quickly with social distancing measures – not necessarily with a tight lockdown – ultimately emerged from the first outbreak with better results. In contrast, no correlation was found between mortality data and the severity and/or length of the lockdown. Even in Sweden, a country that never imposed a lockdown, we can see that the early decrease in mobility, starting in March, was manifested in the mortality rate. Our study is based purely on observations and does not relate to the premises of any existing epidemiological model. We show that the spread of the pandemic can be prevented by quickly implementing basic measures of social distancing – without a rigorous lockdown.”