Sweden Doing Well So Far

[Hyperduck Quack Quack]

Really? Based on what?

You need look no further than these forums for your answer.

[Barry]

Swedish people are probably more likely to act on advice and be sensible and cautious that British people are.

Really? Based on what?

[Hyperduck Quack Quack]

Swedish people are probably more likely to act on advice and be sensible and cautious that British people are.

[Scott777]

There was a short piece about Sweden on the BBC news this morning.  They were going around asking Swedish people what their take was. One woman, probably in her 70's, was in a hairdressers.  She said something like: "we're all going to get it anyway so we might as well carry on as normal."

Sounds about right.  Most people will, if they haven't already.

[Hyperduck Quack Quack]

There was a short piece about Sweden on the BBC news this morning.  They were going around asking Swedish people what their take was. One woman, probably in her 70's, was in a hairdressers.  She said something like: "we're all going to get it anyway so we might as well carry on as normal."

[Scott777]

How do you work out they are doing well Scott?,they have 23 deaths per hundred thousand,neighbouring nations with lockdown 3 or 4 per hundred thousand.



Unsurprisingly the fact in another thread you think it all a hoax might explain the fact your conclusions are rubbish.

Here's an example of why deaths per population doesn't help much.  Belarus has no lockdown, and has 1 death per 100,000, so if that indicates how well things are going, they are doing brilliantly.

[Scott777]

I think that we can.

Deaths per million population is an excellent pointer of how far on the disease is in any particular country. Currently.

Belgium 647

Andorra 544

Spain 519

Italy 458

UK 384

France 369

Netherlands 275

Isle of Man 247

Sweden 244

Ireland 241



So Sweden is, comparatively, doing well. However, I suspect they will all level out over time to something under 700 per million.

Sweden might end up with 7,000 dead, the UK 45,000.

I suppose it has some value, in that it might vaguely indicate how much the virus has spread, but it doesn't say much about the disease itself, or effectiveness of lockdown.  There are too many other factors.

[Scott777]

In contrast - Why is the Case Rate not meaningless without knowing how many infections there have been in the population?

If the cases are dropping, then the deaths will follow.  Given there is no lockdown, that's very important.

[Scott777]

Death rate is meaningless? look they have a worse death rate than their neighbours.



You determine its all hype and not as lethal as the flu,convincing you otherwise is a waste of time you are only interested in it being a conspiracy.

'Conspiracy theory' is just a cop out.  It's nothing more than a derogatory ad hominem, when you don't have a point to make.

[Barry]

You can't just compare deaths per million, or whatever.  

I think that we can.

Deaths per million population is an excellent pointer of how far on the disease is in any particular country. Currently.

Belgium 647

Andorra 544

Spain 519

Italy 458

UK 384

France 369

Netherlands 275

Isle of Man 247

Sweden 244

Ireland 241



So Sweden is, comparatively, doing well. However, I suspect they will all level out over time to something under 700 per million.

Sweden might end up with 7,000 dead, the UK 45,000.

[Nalaar]

The death rate is meaningless without knowing how many infections there have been in the population

In contrast - Why is the Case Rate not meaningless without knowing how many infections there have been in the population?

[cromwell]

It's doing well in terms of cases.  Number of deaths is a completely separate point.   The death rate is meaningless without knowing how many infections there have been in the population.  You can't just compare deaths per million, or whatever.  But if we take your figures, and assume we can, then your figures give an Infection Fatality Rate of 0.02% - less than the flu, in which case, a peak in cases, leading to a peak in deaths, inevitably means a low IFR.

Death rate is meaningless? look they have a worse death rate than their neighbours.



You determine its all hype and not as lethal as the flu,convincing you otherwise is a waste of time you are only interested in it being a conspiracy.

[Scott777]

Look your thread header says "Sweden doing well so far" how on earth do you work that out when the death rate is about 6 times its neighbours other than you think the lockdown is wrong and a hype.

It's doing well in terms of cases.  Number of deaths is a completely separate point.   The death rate is meaningless without knowing how many infections there have been in the population.  You can't just compare deaths per million, or whatever.  But if we take your figures, and assume we can, then your figures give an Infection Fatality Rate of 0.02% - less than the flu, in which case, a peak in cases, leading to a peak in deaths, inevitably means a low IFR.

[cromwell]

Look your thread header says "Sweden doing well so far" how on earth do you work that out when the death rate is about 6 times its neighbours other than you think the lockdown is wrong and a hype.

[Scott777]

Oh I see the number of deaths is an irrelevance.

Did I say that?  I said that was nothing to do with my point, which was about a peak in cases.  But if it is relevant, you're welcome to explain how.