No lockdown, no masks, nNo hysteria... NO PROBLEM: Sweden didn't go into a lockdown a
 

Your point?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Sandbrook's sub-title of the article is " Is this proof we got it all terribly wrong?" Those who wanted to open up the economy were criticized as anti-science or protecting what was left of the "Trump economy." Those who insisted that we must follow the science were positive that the science demanded a lockdown, and still does to a great degree.

Sweden did not destroy its economy, life and living is fairly normal there, and the virus has basically been relegated to a sort of flu while the rest of the world that had draconian and extended lockdowns have shattered economies, and are looking for more lockdowns as the virus surges.

Did we get it wrong? And has our version of "the science" been flawed? And should we be opening up more and locking down, or threatening to, less?

The point is that covid is a democratic plot to rig the election.

I’d note though that Sweden has a higher covid mortality rate than the US.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

yet much lower than our states run by democrat governors...

btw...US deaths/million pop 547

Sweden deaths/million pop 575

No problem? No problem??? How many people died per million ??

I guess deaths related to this are acceptable to conservatives.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

how you get here for there is amazing...

if the goal is always to eliminate deaths, we’d eliminate the automobile. think how many lives that would save. but we don’t do that. there’s a reason why.

is sweden conservative? is that what you’re suggesting?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

lack of thought is how you get there.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

and there is a difference from getting killed in an auto vs getting a virus at Walmart that could be prevented

you can catch a lotta stuff at Walmart....

They are a recent poll I posted was over 54% found the deaths from covid as acceptable..

HeLL you can go back to the beginnings of this and find post decrying Obama's deaths for the bird flu. When covid deaths were low. ... as Jim he was was all over that nonsense , no he is changing gears

Pointing out deaths or crime in dem controlled cities is the new mantra. Because crime happens no place else , and definently not were Republicans are in charge


.1 Alaska • Violent crime rate: 885 per 100,000 people 2 . New Mexico

• Violent crime rate: 856.6 per 100,000 people 3 . Tennessee

• Violent crime rate: 623.7 per 100,000 people 4th . Arkansas

• Violent crime rate: 543.6 per 100,000 people and 5th Nevada

• Violent crime rate: 541.1 per 100,000 people

And murder top 5 per 100,000. Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, Missouri and Alaska
Damn pesky facts



All this chaos has come under Trump whom they hold responsible for nothing

But it was Obama's fault that police were killed

is there a point here?

Did you note this from the article: "According to Sebastian Rushworth, an American-born doctor in a Stockholm A&E department, he hasn’t seen a single Covid-19 patient in a month: ‘Basically,’ he writes, ‘Covid is in all practical senses over and done with in Sweden.’ "

auto deaths can be eliminated. but we don’t do it. we accept tens of thousands of deaths a year on the roads, as a cost of having a quality of life. true or false?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

And many doctors could say the same in Vermont, just think of it like Tweety does of absentee ballots.
Except in Florida, of course
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Teen pregnancy is at epidemic proportions there.

Don’t drink the water
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

We do, but there are rules in place to try to limit the deaths - something many states did not do. And if a city tried to limit the deaths by imposing restrictions the Repub. govern. all tried to prevent them bc I guess they don't like local control - hypocrites.

We don't know that Vermont's lockdown was necessary. We do know that Sweden didn't lock down and got the "same" result you noted as Vermont.

And Vermont didn't need some "national plan" other than what the Federal government already did. It's called federalism. Separation of powers. Limited central government. States having far more power to shape their destiny than you seem to care for.

Now playing dumb

That's not what he said and not what occurred.

nope...it was an honest question

you are desperately trying to split hairs. there are rules, but they are very very non invasive. you’re going to compare speed limits, with the spring shutdown? similarly invasive?

Anything at all, to avoid saying “you make a good point.”

speed limits and no school, are equally intrusive according to you.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

How about wearing a mask?

And the states that had shutdowns and slowly opened were decreasing until the virus started to come back from the other states. You're the one brought up driving a car (which we use to take my dad to his Drs. appts). my wearing a mask is pretty noninvasive.

As usual you confuse power with leadership.
Just like the weak leader who had to gas people to go make a political statement and demonstrate his power.

All is not perfect in Sweden, though I’m surprised that your example of good behavior is a country with national healthcare, a generous safety net to support those who fell ill and guaranteed income. Perhaps that influenced their people to do the voluntary isolation.

Swedish’s top epidemiologist, Anders Tegnell, said in an interview with Swedish Radio that the country made some mistakes. “If we were to encounter the same illness with the same knowledge that we have today, I think our response would land somewhere in between what Sweden did and what the rest of the world has done,” he said.
In any case, the most instructive phase of Sweden’s approach may lie ahead: “It will be interesting to find out whether they can respond now, or whether they’re going to keep going with a strategy that seems like it’s not working,” says Schneider.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Trump continues to believe he knows best medically, so it’s an emergency order to approve without the usual testing for plasma treatments, which most experts agree “may” help some. He is also it appears going to take the same approach on vaccines, so I suggest the entire GOP get in line to get those injections, so they can show us all that rely on science and proven methods to vet a vaccine what the side affects might be.

I don't know who Schneider is, but the author of the article I posted believes the Swedish strategy is working very well.

Look at the # of people who have gotten Covid in Sweden. Then look at the # in California.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Your point?

He's not a college history professor and TV personality like Sandbrook
You need to learn that simple anecdotal evidence proves nothing but sounds great when it seems to validate your point.

As far as your claim that VT and Sweden had the same results
Sweden's infection and death rate is far greater than Vermont's
Vermont population is 625K with 1572 infections and 58 deaths
Sweden population is 10.5M with 158K infections and 2600 deaths

Just remember that everyone who comes near Tweety gets tested, but it's nothing to worry about.

I didn't say they had the same results, I said the "same" result you noted--"And many doctors could say the same in Vermont"

Would you like to compare New York's stats to Sweden. Comparing stats might tell a story. If the people of Sweden are happier with their results than we are, that might tell a story.

I honestly don't know. Do you?

What I do know is the USA has the highest number of infections and deaths in the world and the CDC, changing its Covid-19 testing guidelines, no longer recommends testing for most people without symptoms, even if they've been in close contact with someone known to have the virus. Many doctors are puzzled by the agency's change.

Tweety: spends 6 months explaining he wants less covid testing so that his numbers look better.

CDC: suddenly changes guidelines to cut back on testing without explanation.

Media: "we have no info about why the CDC would do such a perplexing thing, it is an unknowable mystery".

So you shift to your usual change the subject as a means to insert another supposed black mark for Trump. It becomes a futile endeavor to respond to your posts, since the responses just become spring boards for some new attack point for you.

That's a good strategy in war, but a killer of rational conversation.

Very, very often, if we wait a few days, we find that what seemed like a nefarious action, is actually the opposite. Let's wait and see. There is already this response in the Washington Times: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...-not-argue-an/

I wear a mask, and can't believe people make a stink about it. Similarly, I can't believe you'd deny the parallel between accepting deaths from car accidents (we don't ban cars) and accepting deaths from disease (no school, closing bars, restaurants, churches, etc)

All large social gatherings, except BLM protests and the VMA awards, are banned it seems. It's absurd that you'd equate our societal shutdown, with having to obey speed limits. As I said, anything to avoid admitting your side might have flawed logic.

That's not a response, just confusing baloney without evidence.

Alison Galvani
Director of the Center for Infectious Disease Modeling and Analysis (CIDMA), Burnett and Stender Families' Professor of Epidemiology, Yale University
The CDC just revised their testing guidance to exclude people without symptoms. Our work on the ‘silent’ spread underscores the importance of testing people who have been exposed to #COVID-19 regardless of symptoms. This change in policy will kill.

Meanwhile in places where it is not just the flu, that actually shut down and don't claim they have done a great job while having the worst results in the world.

New covid-19 deaths, yesterday:

Spain: 52
France: 16
Japan: 15
Canada: 7
UK: 16
Germany: 9

United States: 1,290

Population of countries above: 426 million
Population of United States: 328 million

Are you seriously trying to suggest because we don’t ban cars to prevent less than 40,000 deaths yearly, that we shouldn’t have closed down like we did? That’s an argument you could never win. First those 40K car deaths aren’t all due to cars, many are due to alcohol, animal strikes or just driver fatigue. We will I’m sure surpass 200,000 deaths soon and that’s WITH a partial to full (depending on local government) shut down, I can’t even imagine the death toll if we hadn’t shut down. If you are making the case that the old, the medically vulnerable, or the brave first responders should have been sacrificed so the economy didn’t crash, Trump would in the back of his self centered pea brain probably wish that were the track they took.

What I said, is that there are MANY cases where we accept that a meaningful (and fully preventable) number of deaths will occur, in order to maintain a quality of life. But we aren't willing to maintain or normal way of life for covid. I'm not saying the lockdowns were wrong, I don't know, too many "experts" contradicting each other for me to say anything with any confidence. But I can make a valid case that we make many public policy decisions that we know will result in American deaths. The reason we don't do it, is because we don't want to deal with the imposition on our lives.

"those 40K car deaths aren’t all due to cars"

but the deaths would be avoided if there were no cars. Not all covid deatsh are strictly related to covid either. We know there has been overcounting, and we know some were already very sick and didn't have long to live anyway.

You're not refuting my case.

"We will I’m sure surpass 200,000 deaths soon and that’s WITH a partial to full (depending on local government) shut down, I can’t even imagine the death toll if we hadn’t shut down."

Yet some countries didn't shut down, and don't have death rates that exceeded ours. Lots of moving pieces, and I don't understand the science enough to conclude the correlation between lockdowns and lives saved. But the existence of countries that didn't lock down and have low death rates, appear to contradict your assumption that death rates decrease with the magnitude of the lockdowns. CT and NY have brutal lockdowns and some of the highest death rates in the nation.

Also, in the worst flu season ever, we never discussed for a second, these kinds of shutdowns.

Sweden had one new death.

You're right, its the same # of people.

I can’t say for certainty, but I would bet countries that didn’t shut down and did reasonably well, are not full of the selfish it’s all about me and my rights and my fun American youth. If we didn’t lock down I’d bet the numbers would be really high and the shut down would have been required even if late and the damages far worse.