Coronavirus outbreak

[roubaixtuesday]

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/sweden-hit-rare-covid-triple-whammy-no-lockdowns-low-deaths-minimal-economic-damage?utm_campaign=&utm_content=ZeroHedge:+The+Durden+Dispatch&utm_medium=email&utm_source=zh_newsletter

This sums up my outlook, I was worried about the reaction and the subsequent consequences.

Pandemics always come with large economic and social costs, for reasons of altruism as well as of self-interest. The only way to contain the spread of a deadly, contagious disease, in the absence of a cure or vaccine, is to social distance; fear and panic inevitably kick in, as the public desperately seeks to avoid catching the virus. A “voluntary” recession is almost guaranteed.

But if a drop in GDP is unavoidable, governments can influence its size and scale. Politicians can react in one of three ways to a pandemic. They can do nothing, and allow the disease to rip until herd immunity is reached. Quite rightly, no government has pursued this policy, out of fear of mass deaths and total social and economic collapse.

The second approach involves imposing proportionate restrictions to facilitate social distancing, banning certain sorts of gatherings while encouraging and informing the public. The Swedes pursued a version of this centrist strategy: there was a fair bit of compulsion, but also a focus on retaining normal life and keeping schools open. The virus was taken very seriously, but there was no formal lockdown. Tegnell is one of the few genuine heroes of this crisis: he identified the correct trade-offs.

Sweden has an order of magnitude more deaths than other Nordics, and the same or worse economic hit.

If their aim was to limit economic damage, it failed.

If their aim was to limit deaths, it failed catastrophically.

Sweden hoped herd immunity would curb COVID-19. Don't do what we did. It's not working

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/opini...munity-drove-up-death-toll-column/5472100002/

 

[randynewmanscat]

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/sweden-hit-rare-covid-triple-whammy-no-lockdowns-low-deaths-minimal-economic-damage?utm_campaign=&utm_content=ZeroHedge:+The+Durden+Dispatch&utm_medium=email&utm_source=zh_newsletter

This sums up my outlook, I was worried about the reaction and the subsequent consequences.

Pandemics always come with large economic and social costs, for reasons of altruism as well as of self-interest. The only way to contain the spread of a deadly, contagious disease, in the absence of a cure or vaccine, is to social distance; fear and panic inevitably kick in, as the public desperately seeks to avoid catching the virus. A “voluntary” recession is almost guaranteed.

But if a drop in GDP is unavoidable, governments can influence its size and scale. Politicians can react in one of three ways to a pandemic. They can do nothing, and allow the disease to rip until herd immunity is reached. Quite rightly, no government has pursued this policy, out of fear of mass deaths and total social and economic collapse.

The second approach involves imposing proportionate restrictions to facilitate social distancing, banning certain sorts of gatherings while encouraging and informing the public. The Swedes pursued a version of this centrist strategy: there was a fair bit of compulsion, but also a focus on retaining normal life and keeping schools open. The virus was taken very seriously, but there was no formal lockdown. Tegnell is one of the few genuine heroes of this crisis: he identified the correct trade-offs.

This comment by one of the founders of zerohedge to Bloomberg sums up the state of the website since it became a tool.
"Russia=good. Obama=idiot. Bashar al-Assad=benevolent leader. John Kerry= dunce. Vladimir Putin=greatest leader in the history of statecraft."
In 2008 it was a libertarian website with very accurate insider advice and comment.
Now it is a disinformation portal.

 

[srw]

Have you missed the third way?

That would be Germany or New Zealand - enough restrictions to squish the disease so that the economy can get back to normal quickly. And the fourth, the British way - fart around failing to put systems in place, declare your actions "world beating" and have the worst economic impact in Europe.

 

[marinyork]

That would be Germany or New Zealand - enough restrictions to squish the disease so that the economy can get back to normal quickly. And the fourth, the British way - fart around failing to put systems in place, declare your actions "world beating" and have the worst economic impact in Europe.

New Zealand isn't a realistic comparison, Germany is.

One of the curious things with the UK is it's been reported on tv without a source several times the last couple of weeks that the UK has the lowest percentage of people at work in Europe at the moment. It's curious if this is true and if so why? If it's the case also in terms of virus rates.

 

[vickster]

New Zealand isn't a realistic comparison, Germany is.

One of the curious things with the UK is it's been reported on tv without a source several times the last couple of weeks that the UK has the lowest percentage of people at work in Europe at the moment. It's curious if this is true and if so why? If it's the case also in terms of virus rates.

Furlough scheme still ongoing here, not elsewhere?

 

[Stephenite]

@MarkF I can't be bothered clicking on the link as it's plain to see from the three paragraphs you pasted it's peddling an inaccurate assumption.

But let's say there are three ways to dealing with a pandemic:- do nothing; partial lockdown; total lockdown.

All the countries in Europe are taking 'the second approach. UK, Sweden, etc. Not one country is taking the first or the third.

 

[marinyork]

Furlough scheme still ongoing here, not elsewhere?

It could be.

 

[silva]

That's a claim you might want to substantiate. Because your series of posts reads very much like encouragement to the rest of us to do something dangerous.

An influenza-season toll is listed as a 250000-500000 deaths annually.
Corona SARS-CoV2 season was listed last week as 730000 deaths.
I've read the statement (didn't bother yet so far to verificate) that some countries register influenza as corona.
But I'll this last completely aside: Corona is now 50% more worse than influenza.
And I'm willing to make it 100% more worse.
And even 500% more worse.
It's still nothing compared to the influenza of 1918, the worst ever recorded, for what recording was worth back then. And it was during the last year of one of the biggest catastrophes that governments caused historically.
And, that worst-ever influenza, just lasted like 6 months (per world region).

Then tell me, all that extreme usage of force upon populations, now in 2020, to "cope" with this new corona family virus, what word would YOU stick on it ?

 

[silva]

Indeed.
Pity Trumpton doesn't let facts get in the way. He's thick as 2 shirt planks.

I care as much about Trump as I cared about Obama and all their predecessors: nothing.
What I do care about is the reasons that people voted for him. I agree with them. That's the positive light I saw when Trump got elected, not Trump, in the end ALL politicians at election time just say what people want to hear, why would Trump be different?
And why would it matter anyway?
I'm far away from United States, never been there, but I do know some history, and that is that people fleed the literal and figurative ruins governments made of European countries, to find and work on new found land, to start a new living and a new society. Sadly, governments there also popped up, bringing the once free land to the ugly prisoners camp it became now. Happily, there is still a population part fighting government. I see these as a hope in a world that becomes central planned darked with the day.

 

[MarkF]

The pandemic has now, after deaths have dwindled and spikes didn't arrive, and for reasons we don't yet know, admissions and deaths dramatically falling, is now a casedemic where we are cherry picking "likely" demographic areas, providing easy cases via a very flawed system from asymtomatic people who are not and unlikely to be poorly, proven in the Leicester cases.

I believe we've overeacted and the damage is going to be worse than the virus, much worse. I don't agree with anti-vaxxers, Bill Gates crackpots, virus deniers or plandemic believers but I am not virus fixated either. It's clear, on here and elsewhere, that opinions are largely politically motivated and again, I am stuck in the middle. We have a growing cancer ticking timebomb of delayed and cancelled treatments along with another timebomb of people who don't yet know that they have cancer, that's just cancer. At some point we will find that you cannot just "switch" business back on, scaring the customer base witless and introducing financial insecurity into millions is unlikely to result in spending. Oh, and pubs are open yet schools still shut.

I'll leave it again and ignore the thread and go back to following Doctors, Oncologists, Biophysists and the like on Twitter, I can't help it, I naturally gravitate towards positive reading. Let's hope for the best for everybody. I leave a positive snippet from an ICU Doctor worth following.

Dr. Ron Daniels.
I think we’ve got a BIT better at decision-making in people with COVID. Effect of Dex and antivirals likely there but small. Immunity seriously unknown. But something is happening to diminish the admissions and deaths impact of SARS-CoV-2.

 

[Rocky]

Just in case anyone is in any doubt....the latest Covid stats

Numbers are still rising alarmingly. This is not trivial and it is not going away.

 

[silva]

The virus ran out of weak enough victims.
See, people can't die twice.

 

[srw]

What a crass uniformed post. Strong people catch it and die - viral load is important. Plus there’s plenty of vulnerable people who haven’t been infected yet. Somehow you seem to be arguing that it’s ok to let them catch Covid and die.

Plus there are plenty of less vulnerable people who got it and became vulnerable. Even if you "recover" from the acute illness there's lots of examples of people who have been left seriously chronically ill.

 

[marinyork]

Around 10 million out of 66 million.

 

[Joey Shabadoo]

I care as much about Trump as I cared about Obama and all their predecessors: nothing.
What I do care about is the reasons that people voted for him. I agree with them. That's the positive light I saw when Trump got elected, not Trump, in the end ALL politicians at election time just say what people want to hear, why would Trump be different?
And why would it matter anyway?
I'm far away from United States, never been there, but I do know some history, and that is that people fleed the literal and figurative ruins governments made of European countries, to find and work on new found land, to start a new living and a new society. Sadly, governments there also popped up, bringing the once free land to the ugly prisoners camp it became now. Happily, there is still a population part fighting government. I see these as a hope in a world that becomes central planned darked with the day.