You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Re: Covid 19
buzzsaw wrote:Not that anyone is interested in facts that back what I've been saying the whole time, but here's some anyway:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothec … 5d967e74cd
Nursing homes and assisted living facilities: The #1 COVID problem
2.1 million Americans, representing 0.62% of the U.S. population, reside in nursing homes and assisted living facilities. (Nursing homes are residences for seniors needing help with activities of daily living, such as taking a shower or getting dressed, who also require 24/7 medical supervision; assisted living facilities are designed for seniors who need help with activities of daily living, but don’t require full-time on-site medical supervision.)
According to an analysis that Gregg Girvan and I conducted for the Foundation for Research on Equal Opportunity, as of May 22, in the 43 states that currently report such figures, an astounding 42% of all COVID-19 deaths have taken place in nursing homes and assisted living facilities.
I just don't get your point...I don't understand why this matters.
Of course you don't. Understanding this would force you to admit that we should have locked down our nursing/long-term care facilities instead of locking down the whole country. Now had someone else come up with that idea, you'd think it was brilliant. Since it's been at the core of my argument from day one, you just don't understand.
42% of our deaths (in the US) come from .62% of the population. How many deaths could we have avoided if we had put our resources and energies into protecting the people at those facilities with the testing, medical supplies, and PPE that we did have early on? 42% of 100K is 42,000 people. Now certainly some of those people would have died anyway no matter how well we protected them, but let's say we saved 32,000 (roughly 3/4) of them. 68K sounds a lot better than 100K, right? Meanwhile the rest of the country went about their business, business didn't close, millions of people didn't lose their jobs, and we're further along towards herd immunity than we are currently (apparently not very far at all) because we decided to shut everything down.
I'm sure you'll dismiss this, but data keeps coming out and almost all of it is backing what I've said since this began. This is why I am comfortable just waiting on Sweden. Flattening the curve did exactly what it was intended to do...lower the peak, extend the length of the peak. Once all is said and done, Sweden is going to end up not far from where we will...they will have just gotten there a on a different path. You're not going to believe it until it happens, so I agree to just wait it out. It's not often that I'm wrong, but maybe you'll get lucky and this will be one of those times.
Re: Covid 19
mitchejw wrote:buzzsaw wrote:Not that anyone is interested in facts that back what I've been saying the whole time, but here's some anyway:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothec … 5d967e74cd
Nursing homes and assisted living facilities: The #1 COVID problem
2.1 million Americans, representing 0.62% of the U.S. population, reside in nursing homes and assisted living facilities. (Nursing homes are residences for seniors needing help with activities of daily living, such as taking a shower or getting dressed, who also require 24/7 medical supervision; assisted living facilities are designed for seniors who need help with activities of daily living, but don’t require full-time on-site medical supervision.)
According to an analysis that Gregg Girvan and I conducted for the Foundation for Research on Equal Opportunity, as of May 22, in the 43 states that currently report such figures, an astounding 42% of all COVID-19 deaths have taken place in nursing homes and assisted living facilities.
I just don't get your point...I don't understand why this matters.
Of course you don't. Understanding this would force you to admit that we should have locked down our nursing/long-term care facilities instead of locking down the whole country. Now had someone else come up with that idea, you'd think it was brilliant. Since it's been at the core of my argument from day one, you just don't understand.
42% of our deaths (in the US) come from .62% of the population. How many deaths could we have avoided if we had put our resources and energies into protecting the people at those facilities with the testing, medical supplies, and PPE that we did have early on? 42% of 100K is 42,000 people. Now certainly some of those people would have died anyway no matter how well we protected them, but let's say we saved 32,000 (roughly 3/4) of them. 68K sounds a lot better than 100K, right? Meanwhile the rest of the country went about their business, business didn't close, millions of people didn't lose their jobs, and we're further along towards herd immunity than we are currently (apparently not very far at all) because we decided to shut everything down.
I'm sure you'll dismiss this, but data keeps coming out and almost all of it is backing what I've said since this began. This is why I am comfortable just waiting on Sweden. Flattening the curve did exactly what it was intended to do...lower the peak, extend the length of the peak. Once all is said and done, Sweden is going to end up not far from where we will...they will have just gotten there a on a different path. You're not going to believe it until it happens, so I agree to just wait it out. It's not often that I'm wrong, but maybe you'll get lucky and this will be one of those times.
Dude...come on...enough with this shit...they’re burning cities to the ground right now...why are you still on this?! The course of action has been selected. This is a moot point.
Re: Covid 19
*I will not read anything that backs your argument, and by the way READ THIS ARTICLE I JUST POSTED THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ARGUMENT, BECAUSE INFECTIONS AND DEATH RATES ARE NOT AT DEBATE, BUT HOW SUCCESSFUL STAYING HOME WAS, WHICH I CANNOT VALIDATE WITH ANYTHING BUT CONJECTURE, EVEN THOUGH I PROBABLY DIDN'T EVEN READ THIS ARTICLE MYSELF, AGGGGHHHH!!!*
Re: Covid 19
*I will not read anything that backs your argument, and by the way READ THIS ARTICLE I JUST POSTED THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ARGUMENT, BECAUSE INFECTIONS AND DEATH RATES ARE NOT AT DEBATE, BUT HOW SUCCESSFUL STAYING HOME WAS, WHICH I CANNOT VALIDATE WITH ANYTHING BUT CONJECTURE, EVEN THOUGH I PROBABLY DIDN'T EVEN READ THIS ARTICLE MYSELF, AGGGGHHHH!!!*
Damn bro, you are mitch jr.
Re: Covid 19
On my phone so can't link the article but Sweden's chief epidemiologist says in hindsight they should have done more but still not as much as was done elsewhere.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles … e=url_link
One of the big arguments for their method was keeping the economy intact. Still, they are not doing any better there either, as the article says “Sweden is facing its worst economic crisis since World War II, with GDP set to slump 7% in 2020, roughly as much as the rest of the EU.“
Re: Covid 19
buzzsaw wrote:On my phone so can't link the article but Sweden's chief epidemiologist says in hindsight they should have done more but still not as much as was done elsewhere.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles … e=url_link
One of the big arguments for their method was keeping the economy intact. Still, they are not doing any better there either, as the article says “Sweden is facing its worst economic crisis since World War II, with GDP set to slump 7% in 2020, roughly as much as the rest of the EU.“
I think that’s exactly it...staying open with no rules hasn’t proven to have saved the economy or jobs. The only major difference is that I’m certain Sweden will take care of ALL its citizens...not just the business owners.
Re: Covid 19
On my phone so can't link the article but Sweden's chief epidemiologist says in hindsight they should have done more but still not as much as was done elsewhere.
https://madison.com/news/world/scientis … kuVDkYwvmQ
STOCKHOLM (AP) — Sweden's chief epidemiologist on Wednesday defended his country's controversial coronavirus strategy, which avoided a lockdown but resulted in one of the highest per capita COVID-19 death rates in the world.
Anders Tegnell of the Public Health Agency denied that “the Swedish strategy was wrong and should be changed. That’s not the case."
“We still believe that our strategy is good, but there is always room for improvement. ... You can always get better at this job,” Tegnell told a news conference in Stockholm.
Sweden has stood out among European nations and the world for the way it has handled the pandemic, not shutting down the country or the economy like other nations but relying on citizens’ sense of civic duty. Swedish authorities have advised people to practice social distancing, but schools, bars and restaurants have been kept open the entire time. Only gatherings of more than 50 people have been banned.
Tegnell's statement to reporters came after more contrite comments earlier in the day to Swedish radio in which he said “I think there is potential for improvement in what we have done in Sweden, quite clearly.”
Asked if the country’s high death toll has made him reconsider his unique approach to the pandemic, Tegnell told Swedish radio “yes, absolutely.”
According to the national health agency, Sweden, a nation of 10.2 million people, has seen 4,542 deaths linked to COVID-19, which is far more than its Nordic neighbors and one of the highest per capita death rates in the world. Denmark has had 580 coronavirus deaths, Finland has seen 320 and Norway has had 237, according to a tally by Johns Hopkins University.
“If we were to encounter the same disease again, knowing precisely what we know about it today, I think we would settle on doing something in between what Sweden did and what the rest of the world has done,” Tegnell, considered the architect of the unique Swedish pandemic approach, told SR.
In these challenging times, our local businesses need your support. Find out how to get food, goods, services and more from those remaining open.
Still, authorities in Sweden, including Tegnell, have been criticized — and some have apologized — for failing to protect the country's elderly and nursing home residents.
But Tegnell said Wednesday it was still unclear what the country should have done differently. He also said other nations are unable to tell exactly what measures affected the outcomes of their outbreaks because they threw everything at the crisis at once.
“Maybe we know that now, when you start easing the measures, we could get some kind of lesson about what else, besides what we did, you could do without a total shutdown,” Tegnell said in the radio interview.
At the news conference, Tegnell made it clear that his previous statement “was an admission that we always can become better. I’m sure my colleagues all over the world would say the same thing. There are always aspects which we could have handled this situation even better than we do today, now, as we learn more and more things,” he told The Associated Press.
“Sometimes I feel like a personal punchbag, but that’s OK. I can live with that,” Tegnell added.
Sweden's COVID-19 infection rate of 43.2 deaths per 100,000 inhabitants is lower than Spain's (58.1) and Italy's (55.4), but is higher than reported rates in the United States (32.1) and Brazil (14.3), according to Johns Hopkins University.
Last week, the country’s former state epidemiologist, Annika Linde, said in retrospect she believes an early lockdown could have saved lives in Sweden. Political pressure has also forced the Swedish government to speed up an investigation into the handling of the pandemic.
Ordinary Swedes are not sure what to think.
“I’m not walking around thinking that we have a real disaster here in Sweden,” Jan Arpi, a 58-year-old sales executive, told The Associated Press. “I think we have it more or less under control, but we have to be even more careful now after we learned how the virus is spread, especially among elderly people.”
Tegnell's pandemic tactics made Sweden a bit of a local pariah in the Nordics and didn't spare the Swedish economy.
Sweden's economy, which relies heavily on exports, is expected to shrink 7% in 2020 and the finance minister says the Scandinavian country is headed for “a very deep economic crisis.”
More than 76,000 people have been made redundant since the outbreak began and unemployment, which now stands at 7.9%, is expected to climb higher.
On the travel front, neighboring Norway and Denmark said they were dropping mutual border controls but would keep Sweden out of a Nordic “travel bubble.”
The Danes said they will reopen the border next month to residents of Germany, Norway and Iceland as the country eased its coronavirus lockdown. But Denmark, which has a bridge that goes directly into Sweden, has postponed a decision reopening to Swedish visitors until after the summer.
