If there was unspecified socio/cultural/economic effects that benefited Sweden by the end, they weren't shown to be having any effect at the start, which they should have done if they actually existed.
COVID-19 (Coronavirus) discussion
- Thread starter ThundyCat
- Start date
It is kind of the other way around - it allowed them to take the approach they did at the start and not have a far worse situation early on than they did, they naturally had some of the effects of lockdowns.
Not sure you understand. Prior to lockdowns, Sweden was on the same trajectory as other european nations - this unspecified thing they have that nobody can pin point didn't show to be having any impact on the spread of covid at the time, after lockdowns elsewhere they then largely had the same peak and subsequent fall in cases, without anywhere near the same level of draconian intervention. If there was a geniuine impact on covid spread with this "thing", their curve would have been flattened from day 0 of the pandemic.
This gets complicated because short of total lockdown or conditions which mimic it eventually prevalence will reach a level which will see a spike in cases, the exact point differing by country, there is also other modifiers like seasonal factors, new variants, spreader events, etc.
Sweden continued to see a rise after other places around it started to come down due to implementing lockdowns, but that rise was subdued compared to the spike which could have happened - unfortunately there aren't perfect analogues to compare against but as can be seen by places like Brazil even in the early days without anything stopping it spread would quickly spike, we then had a seasonal impact on the spread of the virus before the winter of 20/21 where most places spiked once lockdown measures were reduced. The UK firebreak lockdown of Oct 2020 producing a notable feature in the graphs.
If i was a tin foil hatter, i'd say staff had been told to put COVID down as the cause for ICU patients in 2020 to raise the fear figures up. Hmmm pause for thought
@Lord-Jaffa a mask/science denier? How do firefighters operate?
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Jul 2004
- Posts
- 7,136
Full face powered respirator is defo the same as a cloth hanky that's man handled all day and put into pockets/handbags and worn again.
Data says they did nothing for kids, I wear a FFP3 for my work thats properly face fit (Half Mask and Full Face powered) be salty more though.
Last edited:
Who said otherwise?
So proper masks work, it's face coverings that there isn't any proof for.
I think we agree, so I'm not sure why you found FFP mask rating funny?
I find it odd that with all the things that the Government did wrong, 'masks' are the one people still cling on to, after all this time it's still a big deal to them.
Most people took their jabs and have moved on, those who felt really strongly still post denialist stuff (especially on Twitter) to try and prove a point where nobody cares except like minded nutjobs.
Problem is the limits of the different types of masks and people and even the governments weird stubbornness as to working with that.
Basic masks work in situations involving crowd mobility, when all parties are wearing masks and distancing is involved as per the example I've used previously if shopping in a supermarket. They don't work for example if someone is sitting in and/or working around an office for 8 hours, or if people are sitting watching a theatre performance for 2-3 hours (I had to facepalm at that one).
N95/P2 work for say if you are doing a 10-15 minute consultation on someone in a medical setting or sitting for 1-2 hours on a train with passengers reasonably spaced, but again won't stand up to sitting in close proximity for several hours.
FFP3 or similar will give robust protection for much more intimate and longer periods.
Obviously there are issues with adherence, application and procedures, etc. and in critical situations the usefulness is much eroded if not fit tested and so on, but if people work with it they will significantly reduce transmission of a disease of this kind of nature which benefits everyone and can avoid the pressures which might lead to a lockdown, etc.
On the flip side when schools first went back and some rhinoviruses started to circulate the procedures in schools did very little to reduce the spread, but then those viruses are also very easily spread via surfaces/touch compared to COVID as it turns out. The other side of that is, colds in general and especially flu saw a massive hit from measures intended to combat COVID, ironically even more so than COVID did, with the flu season at the start of the pandemic shortened by something like 6 weeks IIRC.
Last edited:
An interesting piece about the Cochrane study here:
www.vox.com
Regarding the studies in the review:
Instead, most of them looked at flu transmission in normal conditions, and many of them were about other interventions like hand-washing. Only two of the studies are about Covid and masking in particular.
Furthermore, neither of those studies looked directly at whether people wear masks, but instead at whether people were encouraged or told to wear masks by researchers. If telling people to wear masks doesn’t lead to reduced infections, it may be because masks just don’t work, or it could be because people don’t wear masks when they’re told, or aren’t wearing them correctly.
There’s no clear way to distinguish between those possibilities without more original research — which is not what a meta-analysis of existing work can do.
The new scientific review on masks and Covid isn’t what you think
A meta-analysis seeks to be the last word on the effectiveness of masks, but finding answers in science isn’t that easy.
www.vox.com
Regarding the studies in the review:
Instead, most of them looked at flu transmission in normal conditions, and many of them were about other interventions like hand-washing. Only two of the studies are about Covid and masking in particular.
Furthermore, neither of those studies looked directly at whether people wear masks, but instead at whether people were encouraged or told to wear masks by researchers. If telling people to wear masks doesn’t lead to reduced infections, it may be because masks just don’t work, or it could be because people don’t wear masks when they’re told, or aren’t wearing them correctly.
There’s no clear way to distinguish between those possibilities without more original research — which is not what a meta-analysis of existing work can do.
Also people just token wearing masks without caring as to the reasons and limits - I saw so many people wearing a basic mask but then standing in a huddle nattering for 20+ minutes, etc.
Some people, including friends of mine, took the jabs and have ended up with life debilitating injuries. Fortunately they lived, many didn't.
If i was a tin foil hatter, i'd say staff had been told to put COVID down as the cause for ICU patients in 2020 to raise the fear figures up. Hmmm pause for thought
You appear to be of the view that COVID-19 is not as dangerous as the official figures show, that you personally know multiple people that "have ended up with life debilitating injuries" from the COVID-19 vaccine and also that "many" died from receiving the COVID-19 vaccination.
Are you claiming that the official studies showing the vaccines to be safe (well, as safe as they can be) are lies and that the vaccine is more harmful than the disease itself?
And how many of them also had covid?
IIRC the stats are that you were by a something like an order of magnitude more likely to have a bad covid case, as most of the "side effects" of the vaccine were very minor and rare versions of what were common and major issues if you got infected.
There are also a lot of "oh they died after the jab" stories where the person who died, did so before they had the jab, after they'd already had covid, whilst they also had something else seriously wrong with them.
If you look at some of the farcebook pages you'd see claims that athletes who had heart attacks on the sports fields back before the vaccine was a thing were due to the vaccine, and in some cases where it happened before covid was even a rumour.
i am of the view that C19 is as not dangerous as the official figures show but I have previously stated that covid has killed many people.
I have never claimed to know that many people have died from the vaccine, however i did post many links from verified sources siting many deaths of people who had taken the vaccine. Maybe you missed those link or ignored them
I can post the links of verified deaths related to the covid "vaccine" if you would like to peruse.
However, i do, whether you like or believe it or not, have friends who are suffering serious injuries from the covid 19 vax. But we cannot call it vaccine because surprise surprise they changed the definition of the word vaccinated during the pandemic.