We're All Doomed!™ (the Conquest, War, Famine, and Death Thread)

The primary goal of this site is to provide mature, meaningful discussion about the Vancouver Canucks. However, we all need a break some time so this forum is basically for anything off-topic, off the wall, or to just get something off your chest! This forum is named after poster Creeper, who passed away in July of 2011 and was a long time member of the Canucks message board community.

Moderator: Referees

User avatar
Cornuck
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 9505
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 11:39 am
Location: Everywhere

Re: We're All Doomed!™ (the Conquest, War, Famine, and Death Thread)

Post by Cornuck »

So all we need is to get 4.5x the normal death rate, mass graves and full hospitals? Where do I sign up? :D
2019-20 - Playoff Bound
User avatar
5thhorseman
MVP
MVP
Posts: 2184
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 11:04 am

Re: We're All Doomed!™ (the Conquest, War, Famine, and Death Thread)

Post by 5thhorseman »

Cornuck wrote: Sat Sep 26, 2020 5:57 am So all we need is to get 4.5x the normal death rate, mass graves and full hospitals? Where do I sign up? :D
No need to sign up Corn, the virus will get you eventually :cry:

That, or you get the vaccine and '666' tattooed on your forehead. It's the only way you'll be able to watch live sports in the future. :shock:
User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 27161
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 12:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: We're All Doomed!™ (the Conquest, War, Famine, and Death Thread)

Post by Strangelove »

5thhorseman wrote: Sun Sep 27, 2020 1:28 pm That, or you get the vaccine and '666' tattooed on your forehead. It's the only way you'll be able to watch live sports in the future. :shock:
But I don't want to be devilish. :(

So I'll just hold up someone's decapitated tattooed head. :D
____
GO CANUCKS GO!!!
User avatar
Per
MVP
MVP
Posts: 6445
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 7:45 am
Location: Sweden

Re: We're All Doomed!™ (the Conquest, War, Famine, and Death Thread)

Post by Per »

Time for an update... The world has now reached more than one million deaths in covid-19.

The countries and US states that have been worst hit, as measured by number of covid deaths per million inhabitants, are listed below*:

Covid deaths/1M pop per 2020-09-28:(Countries and US states with more than 300 dead/1M pop)
New Jersey........... 1826
New York............. 1707
Massachusettes..... 1364
Connecticut......... 1262
San Marino.......... 1237
Louisiana............ 1176
Rhode Island........ 1045
Mississippi............ 981
Peru................... 975
District of Columbia 881
Belgium............... 860
Arizona............... 770
Michigan.............. 701
Illinois................. 698
Andorra............... 686
Bolivia................. 671
Spain.................. 668
Brazil.................. 666
Chile................... 660
Georgia................ 654
Florida................. 653
Maryland.............. 651
Delaware.............. 650
South Carolina....... 646
Pennsylvania.......... 640
Ecuador................ 637
USA..................... 633
UK...................... 618
Italy.................... 593
Mexico................. 591
Sweden................ 581
Texas.................. 547
Panama............... 540
Indiana............... 532
Nevada............... 515
Sint Marteen......... 512
Alabama.............. 510
Colombia............. 500
France................ 486
Arkansas.............. 433
Iowa................... 417
New Mexico.......... 415
Ohio................... 408
California............. 395
Netherlands.......... 372
Virginia............... 370
Minnesota............ 365
Ireland................ 364
Colorado............. 354
Missouri.............. 353
North Macedonia... 350
Argentina............ 348
Tennessee........... 348
North Carolina...... 328
New Hampshire..... 323
Armenia.............. 323
Moldova.............. 319
Iran................... 308
North Dakota........ 303
...

Canada................ 245 (just for comparisson)

*albeit it is prudent to bear in mind that many third world countries and dictatorships may be seriously underreporting, in the former because of flawed infrastructure, in the latter for propaganda purposes.
Whatever you do, always give 100 %!
Except when donating blood.
User avatar
Meds
CC Legend
Posts: 7877
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: We're All Doomed!™ (the Conquest, War, Famine, and Death Thread)

Post by Meds »

Per wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 5:03 am Time for an update... The world has now reached more than one million deaths in covid-19.
So what you're saying is that we've watched the leading societies on the planet run like lemmings over a cliff because of a virus that has now killed 0.00013% of the world's population over 9-10 months.

I love how rational we are as a species.

For the record the flu apparently kills 0.00006% of our global population each year.....although the numbers aren't super clear because if you have lung cancer and die with influenza they will probably say you died of cancer.
User avatar
Per
MVP
MVP
Posts: 6445
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 7:45 am
Location: Sweden

Re: We're All Doomed!™ (the Conquest, War, Famine, and Death Thread)

Post by Per »

Meds wrote: Wed Sep 30, 2020 12:36 am
Per wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 5:03 am Time for an update... The world has now reached more than one million deaths in covid-19.
So what you're saying is that we've watched the leading societies on the planet run like lemmings over a cliff because of a virus that has now killed 0.00013% of the world's population over 9-10 months.

I love how rational we are as a species.

For the record the flu apparently kills 0.00006% of our global population each year.....although the numbers aren't super clear because if you have lung cancer and die with influenza they will probably say you died of cancer.
Uhmm... Yup. Except that just like the people on Fox you seem to don’t understand that when you talk about percent (meaning per hundred) you need to multiply the figure by 100. So you can talk about 0.00013 of the world population (one million / eight billion; NB, no percent sign) or 0.013 % of the world population. (Some people speculate that Fox does this on purpose, to make the numbers look smaller, but we don’t know for sure. It could also just be a sign of the deteriorating US school system leading to more and more people not grasping simple maths.) But I get what you mean, even if you were off by a factor of 100.

Albeit, as I pointed out earlier, there seems to be severe underreporting from countries in the third world and those with authoritarian regimes, so the actual number is probably at least 50% higher than the official figure, so maybe closer to 0.02 %, and several countries are still not even past the first wave, so we still don’t know what the final count will be.

But even though deaths is the easiest way to measure the impact, that’s not all there is to it. :|

Many who survive covid-19 seem to be left with chronic disorders as a result, including things like lung, heart, brain and kidney damage. Those who have been in intensive care also have lost most of their muscle mass and are in pretty bad shape.



In Sweden some 40% of those that have been hospitalised with covid-19 still are still in rehab four months after leaving the hospital. Even those that were relatively young and healthy before it struck. Now, of course, less than ten percent of those that have contracted the disease have needed hospital care, but it’s still@ whole lot of human suffering and a great cost to society.

There are also some that seem to get chronically ill. There are some that still test positive after having had corona for more than three months. There is a lot we do not understand about this virus. And we will probably be living with its lingering aftermath for a very long time.

Whatever you do, always give 100 %!
Except when donating blood.
User avatar
Meds
CC Legend
Posts: 7877
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: We're All Doomed!™ (the Conquest, War, Famine, and Death Thread)

Post by Meds »

Per wrote: Wed Sep 30, 2020 1:53 am
Meds wrote: Wed Sep 30, 2020 12:36 am
Per wrote: Mon Sep 28, 2020 5:03 am Time for an update... The world has now reached more than one million deaths in covid-19.
So what you're saying is that we've watched the leading societies on the planet run like lemmings over a cliff because of a virus that has now killed 0.00013% of the world's population over 9-10 months.

I love how rational we are as a species.

For the record the flu apparently kills 0.00006% of our global population each year.....although the numbers aren't super clear because if you have lung cancer and die with influenza they will probably say you died of cancer.
Uhmm... Yup. Except that just like the people on Fox you seem to don’t understand that when you talk about percent (meaning per hundred) you need to multiply the figure by 100. So you can talk about 0.00013 of the world population (one million / eight billion; NB, no percent sign) or 0.013 % of the world population. (Some people speculate that Fox does this on purpose, to make the numbers look smaller, but we don’t know for sure. It could also just be a sign of the deteriorating US school system leading to more and more people not grasping simple maths.) But I get what you mean, even if you were off by a factor of 100.
Yep. I forgot to multiply by 100.

As for Fox, well both sides of the coin do this in order to make things seem more drastic.

It's a fact that throwing around numbers can be done in such a way that it manipulates fears and opinions. Fixating on the number of positive cases and ignoring the fact that most people who have it are actually relatively asymptomatic.....by that I mean they basically have a common cold (which is very much the norm to have at this time of year as kids go back to school). Even throwing out there that there have been 1 million deaths from Covid now makes things seem big and scary. Even when you say that it is the worldwide total, most people don't think on that scale, they think on a local or national scale.
Per wrote: Albeit, as I pointed out earlier, there seems to be severe underreporting from countries in the third world and those with authoritarian regimes, so the actual number is probably at least 50% higher than the official figure, so maybe closer to 0.02 %, and several countries are still not even past the first wave, so we still don’t know what the final count will be.
Why do you think the number is at least 50% higher? Why couldn't it be $25% higher, or maybe 75%?

Which countries are still in the first wave? Canada seems to be seeing its second wave now, especially in Quebec. But go figure, we opened up. You're going to get more cases. It's inevitable.

The US probably won't get a second wave.....in the end they'll just have one enormous wave. :P

Everything I've read seems to indicate that Sweden had the right initial approach. Is that accurate in your domestic opinion?
User avatar
Per
MVP
MVP
Posts: 6445
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 7:45 am
Location: Sweden

Re: We're All Doomed!™ (the Conquest, War, Famine, and Death Thread)

Post by Per »

Meds wrote: Wed Sep 30, 2020 3:13 am Why do you think the number is at least 50% higher? Why couldn't it be $25% higher, or maybe 75%?
Well, the 75% case would qualify as "at least 50%", wouldn't it? :wink:

Now, I'm just guessing, but I think it's an informed guess.
Some suggest real numbers may be twice as high as those reported, but it will take years before we know for sure.

I base my reasoning on the disparity between excess deaths in 2020 and the reported mortality resulting from covid-19. There is no central source for these comparissons, but The Economist, the New York Times and the Financial Times have all made compilations of data to show how these numbers differe in different countries, and I have linked to all three in the past.
Here is the Economist version: https://www.economist.com/graphic-detai ... -countries

Now, if you look at these numbers, you notice that the disparity between official covid deaths and excess deaths varies greatly between countries.

If we assume that excess deaths (ie more people dying than expected in a normal year) in 2020 are mainly attributed to covid-19, the numbers should be relatively similar. This would mean that the disparity between them equals under- or overreporting.

The only countries in the table in the Economist that seem to overreport are Belgium, Denmark and Norway. In the case of Denmark and Norway, that imposed hard lockdowns early on, their covid deaths are so few that the disparity could be resulting from fewer deaths than expected in the seasonal flu because of the covid lockdown, so it may actually be that they are not overreporting. Especially since excess deaths in Norway is a negative number; ie they have fewer deaths than what should be expected in a normal year.

If you look at Sweden, France, Switzerland and Germany, there is basically no disparity. Possibly a slight overreporting, in the range of 0-10%
What do these countries have in common? They are all democracies with strong governments and a firm belief in a scientific approach to things.

As for the rest....

Britain and Chile seem to be under reporting by 13%*
Italy by 26%
The USA by 40%
Spain by 55%
Istanbul by 57%
The Netherlands by 65%
South Africa by 100%
Austria by 130% (which is kind of odd - compared to neighbours Germany and Switzerland)
Portugal, Moscow, Mexico City and Peru by roughly 200%
Ecuador by 400%
Jakarta by 750%

*when I say under reporting by 13% I mean that excess deaths are 13% higher than covid deaths

Now, basically, most OECD countries are doing a decent job, but the third world countries are way off and figures from eg Russia and China cannot be trusted at all. As you notice there are no figures here from China and hardly anything from Africa.

Anyway, my "at least 50%" is of course on the cautionary side. Considering how way off numbers from eg Jakarta and Ecuador seem to be, the death toll in the so called developing countries could be several times higher than what is reported through official channels.
Meds wrote: Wed Sep 30, 2020 3:13 amWhich countries are still in the first wave? Canada seems to be seeing its second wave now, especially in Quebec. But go figure, we opened up. You're going to get more cases. It's inevitable.
If you look above, I'd argue that Sweden's neighbours, Finland, Norway and Denmark have still not been hit by the pandemic. They had hard lockdowns early and very few cases and deaths. Assuming it will be another year before vaccines have been made available and distributed in the general population, I would not be surprised to see major outbreaks there at some point before that. They cannot stay in lockdown for forever.
Also, I think most of Africa is still rather unaffected. They don't travel as much as Europeans and North Americans. Same goes for parts of the US midwest. You may have noticed that in America the virus first hit the Northeast, then the rest of the coasts, and now it's spreading inward.
Meds wrote: Wed Sep 30, 2020 3:13 amThe US probably won't get a second wave.....in the end they'll just have one enormous wave. :P
Yeah... It's hard to define. I think you must almost look at individual states. The North East had a wave that passed already. Large parts of the South are in the middle of a wave right now, and parts of the middle have barely been affected yet. They are all in different parts of the cycle. There could be a second wave hitting the North East before the first wave has passed through the entire Midwest.
Meds wrote: Wed Sep 30, 2020 3:13 amEverything I've read seems to indicate that Sweden had the right initial approach. Is that accurate in your domestic opinion?
Yes. I think most Swedes support the Public Health Agency, even if there is also a rather loud minority that does not.

But first, I would like to state that the Swedish approach is wildly misunderstood both by those who hail it and those who hate it.
It had nothing to do with herd immunity nor was it a decision to sacrifice lives to save the economy.

What those in charge at the Public Health Agency did was first of all to conclude that this thing will be with us for 2-3 years. Against that background they ruled out all measures that cannot be sustainable over time. That includes a lockdown. But that does not mean they did nothing! What they did was to issue a set of recommendations to follow. Ie, that all people who can should work from home. That all travel must be avoided. That you should try to keep a distance to other people and avoid socializing. They also set a cap at 50 people for all gatherings, and pointed out that elderly people must be kept safe and should not interact with their grandchildren. Initially they also closed cinemas.

At the same time they proclaimed that for children, the health risks of isolation and inaction far outweigh the health risks of covid-19 and for that reason schools (up till grade 9) should remain open and sports activities for children should not be stopped, apart from tournaments and games that involve travel. High schools and colleges were instructed to switch to online teaching.

The main difference in Swden's approach compared to most other countries can be seen as threefold:
1) Measures should be sustainable over time (more specifically a two to three year period). This means a hard lockdown is out of the question.

2) Recommendations instead of legislation. There is a high level of trust in Sweden. We trust our government, and our government trusts us to make sensible decisions based on the information and recommendations we've been given. An Englishman who violates the lockdown rules can be fined 10,000 pounds. A Swede who disregards the covid recommendations may get a lecture from some angry official and frowns from his neighbours, but no other punishment. Yet social pressure and a sense of responsibility is often at least as effective as penal threats.

3) Different concerns for children compared to adults. Children barely get affected by this disease (well, some rare cases with a compromised immune system may, but they are always at risk, and should be considered a special case) but we have problems with child obesity and sedentary lifestyles. Thus it has been regarded as more important to keep schools and children's activities running than to try to isolate children from eachother. The long term health risks of closing schools far outweigh the risk of keeping them open.
Whatever you do, always give 100 %!
Except when donating blood.
User avatar
UWSaint
MVP
MVP
Posts: 573
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 5:37 pm

Re: We're All Doomed!™ (the Conquest, War, Famine, and Death Thread)

Post by UWSaint »

Per wrote: Wed Sep 30, 2020 6:16 am The main difference in Swden's approach compared to most other countries can be seen as threefold:
1) Measures should be sustainable over time (more specifically a two to three year period). This means a hard lockdown is out of the question.

2) Recommendations instead of legislation. There is a high level of trust in Sweden. We trust our government, and our government trusts us to make sensible decisions based on the information and recommendations we've been given. An Englishman who violates the lockdown rules can be fined 10,000 pounds. A Swede who disregards the covid recommendations may get a lecture from some angry official and frowns from his neighbours, but no other punishment. Yet social pressure and a sense of responsibility is often at least as effective as penal threats.

3) Different concerns for children compared to adults. Children barely get affected by this disease (well, some rare cases with a compromised immune system may, but they are always at risk, and should be considered a special case) but we have problems with child obesity and sedentary lifestyles. Thus it has been regarded as more important to keep schools and children's activities running than to try to isolate children from eachother. The long term health risks of closing schools far outweigh the risk of keeping them open.
(1) Thinking about covid as preparing for a marathon instead of a 5K (or sprint) was smart....

(2) Trust of the government isn't the only thing at play that can lead to public policy (or culture) being based on voluntary (but behavior-influencing) social norms instead of every-bad-thing-must-have-a-sanction. There's also a culture of personal responsibility (which should include how one effects others), a culture of trust between people, and humility in government. It is my observation that over my lifetime, the US is deteriorating on all of these measures. And unfortunately, increasingly the government class -- especially the progressives in America -- equates should with shall.

(3) Its not just children as compared with adults, its also the elderly + comorbidities compared with everyone else. Children rarely get the thing with any symptoms or serious symptoms; adults in the "everyone else" category rarely require hospitalization and death is rarer still. They might get knocked out for a week or two and we won't know how many of those people will suffer some kind of longer term effect, but I think it is very difficult to marshal an argument that health-health tradeoffs are likely to favor a stringent lockdown or prolonged isolation for this group as a whole (particularly in the marathon environment).

As this disease has gone on, we know a lot about more about this, but it hasn't stopped many countries (including many US states) from not making policy distinctions based on likely risks to these relatively easy to identify populations. Schools, for example, remain closed in many places.
Hono_rary Canadian
User avatar
Meds
CC Legend
Posts: 7877
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: We're All Doomed!™ (the Conquest, War, Famine, and Death Thread)

Post by Meds »

Per wrote: Wed Sep 30, 2020 6:16 am The main difference in Swden's approach compared to most other countries can be seen as threefold:
1) Measures should be sustainable over time (more specifically a two to three year period). This means a hard lockdown is out of the question.

2) Recommendations instead of legislation. There is a high level of trust in Sweden. We trust our government, and our government trusts us to make sensible decisions based on the information and recommendations we've been given. An Englishman who violates the lockdown rules can be fined 10,000 pounds. A Swede who disregards the covid recommendations may get a lecture from some angry official and frowns from his neighbours, but no other punishment. Yet social pressure and a sense of responsibility is often at least as effective as penal threats.
The hard lockdown was designed to do a few things. One, instill fear in the general populace and keep people isolated so that their input was a media controlled message. It setup a few sectors to make killer financial gains. It also helped a few organizations solidify holds on power and influence (WHO for example).

What you are describing is socialism as it should be. Not the deluded Marxist revolutionaries' vision of it south of us over here. But you've been operating under a more socialist system for a long time. The "free world" is all about "me first". Getting what you can get in "the pursuit of happiness" before someone else gets it first.

Honestly, how can a government that has continually watered down the education system to the point of stupidity actually trust its citizens to make sensible decisions? And how can a people that continually see massive corruption and outright lies coming from their leaders be expected to trust their government? How can they put any faith in people who preach a message of scientifically proven health and safety when those people outright ignored their own previous recommendations regarding a pandemic response?

What a corrupt planet.
User avatar
Per
MVP
MVP
Posts: 6445
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 7:45 am
Location: Sweden

Re: We're All Doomed!™ (the Conquest, War, Famine, and Death Thread)

Post by Per »

UWSaint wrote: Wed Sep 30, 2020 8:11 am
(3) Its not just children as compared with adults, its also the elderly + comorbidities compared with everyone else. Children rarely get the thing with any symptoms or serious symptoms; adults in the "everyone else" category rarely require hospitalization and death is rarer still. They might get knocked out for a week or two and we won't know how many of those people will suffer some kind of longer term effect, but I think it is very difficult to marshal an argument that health-health tradeoffs are likely to favor a stringent lockdown or prolonged isolation for this group as a whole (particularly in the marathon environment).
Yeah, the elderly is where Sweden failed.

Albeit the Public Health Agency did stress that it was important to protect them, and even though most nursing homes banned visitors from the premises early on, several homes were hit by the virus and at least 40% of Swedish covid deaths occurred at nursing homes.

One of the main problems was that people were not aware that many of those infected show no symptoms, and nursing home staff was not regularly tested, so quite logically, the very staff that the elderly depend on were the ones who infected them.

The problem was confounded by nursing homes not having medical staff, and thus lacked people with the proper training to identify the risks. Even if staff had gloves and masks, they would go from one room to the next, without changing them, etc.

A lot of staff at these facilities are temps, so they basically just jump in and work the hours they've been given, which also means they are less likely to call in sick than regular staff, as they fear they may not get called again... As mentioned before, they also lack medical training.

Voices are now being raised that nursing homes need to hire enough staff to get by without temps, and also train their staff better.
At the same time, people are careful not to blame the staff but those who are in charge of running the nursing homes. It is they who are responsible for hiring, training and equipping their staff properly, and making sure the facilities are safe for those who live there.

Some blame the privatization of the sector, which used to be wholly public but now is more or less 50-50 split between privately and publicly run places. While the cost cutting that has occurred in some places after privatization would seem a possible culprit, the fact is that the publicly run places have fared no better than the privately run ones. So it more likely seems to be that the whole sector needs to rethink how to minimize the risks for those they care for during a pandemic.
Whatever you do, always give 100 %!
Except when donating blood.
User avatar
Per
MVP
MVP
Posts: 6445
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 7:45 am
Location: Sweden

Re: We're All Doomed!™ (the Conquest, War, Famine, and Death Thread)

Post by Per »

Meds wrote: Wed Sep 30, 2020 6:36 pm
What you are describing is socialism as it should be. Not the deluded Marxist revolutionaries' vision of it south of us over here. But you've been operating under a more socialist system for a long time. The "free world" is all about "me first". Getting what you can get in "the pursuit of happiness" before someone else gets it first.
Well.... no.

First of all, socialism rarely leaves anything for the individual to decide. It's more of having the same rules for everyone. So the Swedish approach to the covid-19 pandemic is very far from socialism.

It is more of liberalism/libertarianism in that it only sets a framework with recommendations and then lets the individual be responsible for his/her decisions and actions.

As for a socialist system... well... Sweden had social democrats in government from 1932-1976, 1982-91 and 1994-2006, but we've also had centre-right coallitions in government up till 1932, 1976-1982, 1991-1994 and 2006-14.

Since 2014 we have had a minority government formed by the social democrats and the green party, but dependent on support from the liberals and the centre party. Thus it could technically be seen as a centre-left coallition, but the liberal and centre parties have chosen to not be a formal part of the government. Thus there is a socialist component in the government, but the social democrats themselves only have like 28%.

There are socialist elements to our way of life, as for example public health care, free education (including college), a duty to serve in the military (albeit only roughly a third currently need to, so it is mainly filled by those who volunteer, but if you are told to, you have to), etc, but there are also very strong free market elements. The industry in Sweden is far more privately owned than in eg France, Germany and the UK. We have a system of charter schools that would most likely give most leftists in the USA severe brain hemorrages... We can freely choose which school we want to send our kids to, public or private, and the government foots the bill.

Sometimes the combo of socialism and free market work out great. For instance, Swedish employees can take six months off without pay from work to start their own business, without risk of being fired (but of course not to start a company competing with your employer). This has led to Sweden having a very high level of start-ups, especially in IT, and actually more dollar billionaires per capita than the USA...

Likewise, as most school children can learn to play an instrument for free (differs a bit between municipalities, some charge a fee for renting instruments, etc), there's a lot of Swedes trying their fortune in the music business. It is one of our major exports these days, but often flies under the radar. There are only two song writers (John Lennon and Paul McCartney) who have had more #1 hits in the USA than Max Martin (23 and counting), yet he prefers to stay out of the limelight and I'm sure you have no idea who Ludwig Göransson is, even though he has won two grammies for the song This Is America, an Oscar for the score to Black Panther and an Emmy for the music of the Mandalorian. You may have heard of Avicii though. But I digress.



I was basically trying to say that we actually live in a free market system with some minor socialist components, just like virtually all of Western Europe, Australia, New Zeeland and Canada.

As for The Free World, we're part of that. :drink:
Well, at least as it is most commonly defined:
"Democracies not occupied by Germany or Japan"? Check!
"Countries not under communist rule"? Check!
"Western civilisation"? Check!

It's only under its early cold war definition "members of NATO" that we fall by the side, but we do at least have a cooperation treaty with Nato... :look:
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_52535.htm
Whatever you do, always give 100 %!
Except when donating blood.
User avatar
Meds
CC Legend
Posts: 7877
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: We're All Doomed!™ (the Conquest, War, Famine, and Death Thread)

Post by Meds »

Per wrote: Thu Oct 01, 2020 7:38 am
Meds wrote: Wed Sep 30, 2020 6:36 pm
What you are describing is socialism as it should be. Not the deluded Marxist revolutionaries' vision of it south of us over here. But you've been operating under a more socialist system for a long time. The "free world" is all about "me first". Getting what you can get in "the pursuit of happiness" before someone else gets it first.
Well.... no.

First of all, socialism rarely leaves anything for the individual to decide. It's more of having the same rules for everyone. So the Swedish approach to the covid-19 pandemic is very far from socialism.

It is more of liberalism/libertarianism in that it only sets a framework with recommendations and then lets the individual be responsible for his/her decisions and actions.
Libertarianism fits better, yes.
As for a socialist system... well... Sweden had social democrats in government from 1932-1976, 1982-91 and 1994-2006, but we've also had centre-right coallitions in government up till 1932, 1976-1982, 1991-1994 and 2006-14.

Since 2014 we have had a minority government formed by the social democrats and the green party, but dependent on support from the liberals and the centre party. Thus it could technically be seen as a centre-left coallition, but the liberal and centre parties have chosen to not be a formal part of the government. Thus there is a socialist component in the government, but the social democrats themselves only have like 28%.
So yeah, a long time. :P
Likewise, as most school children can learn to play an instrument for free (differs a bit between municipalities, some charge a fee for renting instruments, etc), there's a lot of Swedes trying their fortune in the music business. It is one of our major exports these days, but often flies under the radar. There are only two song writers (John Lennon and Paul McCartney) who have had more #1 hits in the USA than Max Martin (23 and counting), yet he prefers to stay out of the limelight and I'm sure you have no idea who Ludwig Göransson is, even though he has won two grammies for the song This Is America, an Oscar for the score to Black Panther and an Emmy for the music of the Mandalorian. You may have heard of Avicii though. But I digress.
I have heard of Avicii. Sad end to that story.
I was basically trying to say that we actually live in a free market system with some minor socialist components, just like virtually all of Western Europe, Australia, New Zeeland and Canada.

As for The Free World, we're part of that. :drink:
Well, at least as it is most commonly defined:
"Democracies not occupied by Germany or Japan"? Check!
"Countries not under communist rule"? Check!
"Western civilisation"? Check!

It's only under its early cold war definition "members of NATO" that we fall by the side, but we do at least have a cooperation treaty with Nato... :look:
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_52535.htm
Hence why I put "free world" in quotations. ;)
User avatar
Meds
CC Legend
Posts: 7877
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: We're All Doomed!™ (the Conquest, War, Famine, and Death Thread)

Post by Meds »

Per wrote: Thu Oct 01, 2020 6:23 am
UWSaint wrote: Wed Sep 30, 2020 8:11 am
(3) Its not just children as compared with adults, its also the elderly + comorbidities compared with everyone else. Children rarely get the thing with any symptoms or serious symptoms; adults in the "everyone else" category rarely require hospitalization and death is rarer still. They might get knocked out for a week or two and we won't know how many of those people will suffer some kind of longer term effect, but I think it is very difficult to marshal an argument that health-health tradeoffs are likely to favor a stringent lockdown or prolonged isolation for this group as a whole (particularly in the marathon environment).
Yeah, the elderly is where Sweden failed.

Albeit the Public Health Agency did stress that it was important to protect them, and even though most nursing homes banned visitors from the premises early on, several homes were hit by the virus and at least 40% of Swedish covid deaths occurred at nursing homes.

One of the main problems was that people were not aware that many of those infected show no symptoms, and nursing home staff was not regularly tested, so quite logically, the very staff that the elderly depend on were the ones who infected them.

The problem was confounded by nursing homes not having medical staff, and thus lacked people with the proper training to identify the risks. Even if staff had gloves and masks, they would go from one room to the next, without changing them, etc.

A lot of staff at these facilities are temps, so they basically just jump in and work the hours they've been given, which also means they are less likely to call in sick than regular staff, as they fear they may not get called again... As mentioned before, they also lack medical training.

Voices are now being raised that nursing homes need to hire enough staff to get by without temps, and also train their staff better.
At the same time, people are careful not to blame the staff but those who are in charge of running the nursing homes. It is they who are responsible for hiring, training and equipping their staff properly, and making sure the facilities are safe for those who live there.

Some blame the privatization of the sector, which used to be wholly public but now is more or less 50-50 split between privately and publicly run places. While the cost cutting that has occurred in some places after privatization would seem a possible culprit, the fact is that the publicly run places have fared no better than the privately run ones. So it more likely seems to be that the whole sector needs to rethink how to minimize the risks for those they care for during a pandemic.
I really don't think that there was a "failure" when it came to the elderly. At least not in the sense that so many people want to present it as a way to play the blame game. The fact is, and I don't say this coldly, but the elderly are generally on their way out. Death is a necessary part of life, it comes for us all. Why are we pointing the finger at Covid and pandemic responses for people dying when they have already lived for 70 years and came to a slightly earlier end because of an unforeseen new virus? Instead, why aren't we pointing a finger squarely at those in power for not dumping the same level of financial resources that they have into combatting Covid-19 into figuring out how to cure cancer?

The rich, high and mighty, powerful, individuals who want to vaccinate the planet (although many of them also sit on committees that want to see the earth depopulated) in favor of better health don't get as loud and vocal over cancer? Why?

I mean that's just one example.

The failure is a world where death is completely feared and so we see it as failure when someone dies, and we call it "needless", and say that people have to be more "responsible", blah blah blah. There's truth in there. But it's hardly a failure of system or society when someone in a nursing home with other comorbidities dies when they get sick. The same is true of the 75 year old patient with diminishing health who still lives alone, functions independently, albeit slowly, and then ends up sick and dies because their grandchild came to visit and gave them a hug. Where was the failure in that?

There are things we can do better in our systems, no question, but we also want to put too much of our burdens on a healthcare system and its workers yet don't want to fund it.....but really it's fear that leads to all of this.

The best quote I've read when it comes to this entire Covid situation.....
In one way we think a great deal too much of the atomic bomb. “How are we to live in an atomic age?” I am tempted to reply: “Why, as you would have lived in the sixteenth century when the plague visited London almost every year, or as you would have lived in a Viking age when raiders from Scandinavia might land and cut your throat any night; or indeed, as you are already living in an age of cancer, an age of syphilis, an age of paralysis, an age of air raids, an age of railway accidents, an age of motor accidents.”

In other words, do not let us begin by exaggerating the novelty of our situation. Believe me, dear sir or madam, you and all whom you love were already sentenced to death before the atomic bomb was invented: and quite a high percentage of us were going to die in unpleasant ways. We had, indeed, one very great advantage over our ancestors—anesthetics; but we have that still. It is perfectly ridiculous to go about whimpering and drawing long faces because the scientists have added one more chance of painful and premature death to a world which already bristled with such chances and in which death itself was not a chance at all, but a certainty.

This is the first point to be made: and the first action to be taken is to pull ourselves together. If we are all going to be destroyed by an atomic bomb, let that bomb when it comes find us doing sensible and human things—praying, working, teaching, reading, listening to music, bathing the children, playing tennis, chatting to our friends over a pint and a game of darts—not huddled together like frightened sheep and thinking about bombs. They may break our bodies (a microbe can do that) but they need not dominate our minds.


C.S. Lewis — “On Living in an Atomic Age” (1948) in Present Concerns: Journalistic Essays
The bold and red is just for you Per.....you dirty raider. :P
User avatar
Per
MVP
MVP
Posts: 6445
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 7:45 am
Location: Sweden

Re: We're All Doomed!™ (the Conquest, War, Famine, and Death Thread)

Post by Per »

Meds wrote: Thu Oct 01, 2020 6:23 pm I really don't think that there was a "failure" when it came to the elderly. At least not in the sense that so many people want to present it as a way to play the blame game. The fact is, and I don't say this coldly, but the elderly are generally on their way out. Death is a necessary part of life, it comes for us all. Why are we pointing the finger at Covid and pandemic responses for people dying when they have already lived for 70 years and came to a slightly earlier end because of an unforeseen new virus?
You make this sound like septuagenarians are expandable... :?

And at the same time, in the USA those are the people you consider best fit to become leaders of the free world.
Donald Trump is 74, Mitch McConnel 78, Pence technically 61, but looks like way over 70...
Joe Biden 77, Bernie Sanders 79, Elizabeth Warren 71, Nancy Pelosi 80...
:|
Instead, why aren't we pointing a finger squarely at those in power for not dumping the same level of financial resources that they have into combatting Covid-19 into figuring out how to cure cancer?

The rich, high and mighty, powerful, individuals who want to vaccinate the planet (although many of them also sit on committees that want to see the earth depopulated) in favor of better health don't get as loud and vocal over cancer? Why?
Oh, but they do.

A recent study of Swedish women born 1998 or earlier shows that the HPV vaccine is highly effective in preventing cervical cancer.

Women who had recieved the vaccine after the age of 17 were 52 % less likely to get cervical cancer than those who had not had the vaccine.
Women who had the vaccine prior to their 17th birthday had an 88 % risk reduction compared to those who had not had the vaccine.
The difference in outcome depending on at what age you got the vaccine is most likely due to some of those getting the vaccine later having already been infected before they got the shots. Thus the aim should be to vaccinate children before they become sexually active.

There was also a 93 % reduction in genital warts.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1917338


And still there are parents that opt out of having their children vaccinated! :evil:

I cannot fathom what kind of parent it takes to wish cancer on their children. :|


Also....

Whatever you do, always give 100 %!
Except when donating blood.
Post Reply