COVID-19 — Coronavirus

[nellyonthewing]

Tney dont die of a highly infectious virus we dont have immunity to , it is a false comparison imo

Sadly those 1500 a day are predominantly elderly and many suffering with dementia, diabetes, copd or just old age and this cruel virus takes a large % of them.

 

[Healdplace]

Tney dont die of a highly infectious virus we dont have immunity to , it is a false comparison imo

Nor would someone suggest we are over reacting if we had an outbreak of cholera and were putting resources into curbing it.

Yes there has to be balance with not over stretching the economy but you do not ignore a highly infectious disease by likening it to flu. And the world is not stupid and pretty much everywhere is taking it as seriously as we are. Which would be odd if the planet was over reacting as one in a competition to reach bankcruptville first.

With flu we also spend a lot of money every single year fighting via ever expanding free vaccination.

 

[Bluesince1979]

Have you read TOTO's post?

Over the last fourteen days the UK has recorded 333.3 new cases per 100,000 compared to Swedens 85.5.

As for deaths, the UK recorded 1.7 per 100,000 people, whereas Sweden have recorded 0.3. I'm sure you'll agree that us a significant variance, that is roughly four times as many new cases in the UK and six times as many deaths.... now matter how you try to dress it up that is a significant variation.... and not prime bollocks... in my opinion.

And i believe the population in sweden is as dense as here in uk. The line spun that sweden is more spread out is incorrect. The vast majority live in Citys , same as here

 

[BigJoe#1]

Its about more than death figures, if we hadn’t shut down in March the NHs would have been overwhelmed, it came close in some areas even woth lockdown, and many more would have died, not just from covid. Comparing what Sweden did and what we did is pointless.

Well apart from the fact we built loads of unused Nightingale hospitals and, the nett benefit is the prospects going forward. We could have done the same as Sweden and built our nightingale hospitals which would have been a back up and protected our NHS as in fact it did.

Don't get me wrong, Sweden messed up but that was mainly in the protection of care homes. They too, like the rest of the world can learn lessons form other countries by taking the best of each. The trouble is our politicians do not want to acknowledge they may have got it wrong.

Nothing to do with blame but about learning lessons and best practise going forward.

 

[Healdplace]

16,171 cases - up about 500

 

[blueparrot]

And i believe the population in sweden is as dense as here in uk. The line spun that sweden is more spread out is incorrect. The vast majority live in Citys , same as here

The average population density for Sweden is 25.4 inhabitants per km2 (2019).

As of 2019, the population density for the United Kingdom was 275 people per square kilometer.

10 times less.

 

[Healdplace]

England hospital numbers

Patients up 167 in day to 4814. (wk ago 3225) (50% rise)

Ventilators up 12 in day to 494. (wk ago 396) (25% rise)

 

[BigJoe#1]

The average population density for Sweden is 25.4 inhabitants per km2 (2019).

As of 2019, the population density for the United Kingdom was 275 people per square kilometer.

10 times less.

The average maybe, but if we compare cities Marcus has a point.

 

[Blue Maverick]

Have you read TOTO's post?

Over the last fourteen days the UK has recorded 333.3 new cases per 100,000 compared to Swedens 85.5.

As for deaths, the UK recorded 1.7 per 100,000 people, whereas Sweden have recorded 0.3. I'm sure you'll agree that us a significant variance, that is roughly four times as many new cases in the UK and six times as many deaths.... now matter how you try to dress it up that is a significant variation.... and not prime bollocks... in my opinion.

You forget the density of populations per square mile in the countries though, compared to Sweden we are living in a shoebox compared to them, it’s no surprise rates are higher.

 

[blueparrot]

Well apart from the fact we built loads of unused Nightingale hospitals and, the nett benefit is the prospects going forward. We could have done the same as Sweden and built our nightingale hospitals which would have been a back up and protected our NHS as in fact it did.

Don't get me wrong, Sweden messed up but that was mainly in the protection of care homes. They too, like the rest of the world can learn lessons form other countries by taking the best of each. The trouble is our politicians do not want to acknowledge they may have got it wrong.

Nothing to do with blame but about learning lessons and best practise going forward.

Yes, the Nightingales were for an emergency in case the NHS was overwhelmed, luckily we locked down and didn’t need them. If we hasn’t locked down we may have needed them , that wouldnt have been a good thing, and wouldn’t have protected the NHS.
Whether for population,geographical, social, cultural, lifestyle reasons, whether the robustness of health services. They are all open to debate. What isn’t is that we could have taken the path they did. We simply couldn’t, it would have caused a health service and social care meltdown.