So New Zealand's response was just random chance and makes little sense to praise?
No - their PM and their people have handled this amazingly well.
SARS CoV-2 coronavirus / Covid-19 (No tin foil hat silliness please)
- Thread starter Don't Kill Bill
- Start date
No - their PM and their people have handled this amazingly well.
I would say they were dealt a better hand and played it well.
Seems a bit silly praising NZ when they are probably the best-positioned nation to deal with summat like this. Remote, island, low population, good healthcare, well-educated people, decent government.
Another poster earlier in the thread gave a list of a good dozen factors about NZ itself that would have definitely played a major hand in their success, in terms of society/social scene/culture etc. They definitely handled it immaculately but they also had a very strong base from which to start. Funnily enough, that's something that's thrown at Sweden too - lower population density, a bit less 'social' as a society in general etc. The general feeling is "well it could only work like that in Sweden because of x,y,z....." but x,y,z are also huge contributing factors in NZ.
They could have also played it oppositely and totally fecked it up.
Of course their response was excellent. And the UK's response has in many ways been total crap.
They should be praised, just as the Tories should be lambasted.
But the original poster is correct. People want to jump to direct comparisons (I've seen the Ireland UK on here a bunch of times) and this makes no sense to me.
New Zealand is actually bigger than the UK, with roughly 7% of its population (or for easier reference, half the population of London). Not rocket science to say their population density is significantly less than it is in the UK.
Not to mention that the UK gets roughly NZ's annual number of international visitors every month.
These direct comparisons are just so off to me.
For what it's worth, I'm not comparing NZ to the UK. I'm simply pointing out that "random chance" shouldn't be cited to offset praise for good policy.
They could, just as much as another country dealt a bad hand could have played it well but be criticised for "handling it terribly" because their numbers are big when there is a possibility their numbers were a consequence of luck and as I said individual circumstances related to their country/population, seed cases etc etc.
Here in Switzerland the lock down is almost at an end.
From 11th May, Restaurants, all Shops and stores will open. Schools will go back. Public tansport will go back to normal and there will be a reopening of the border (not sure this is a great idea).
I could be wrong but it seems the only places to remain closed will be bars.
From 11th May, Restaurants, all Shops and stores will open. Schools will go back. Public tansport will go back to normal and there will be a reopening of the border (not sure this is a great idea).
I could be wrong but it seems the only places to remain closed will be bars.
Yeah, considering the policies they implemented, I seriously doubt that they'd have been characterized as that.
Excellent news. I would imagine it would be better to delay opening the borders for a few more weeks, and bars yeah my friend who's living there is expecting maybe late summer for those.
Actually, I don't think we should or can.
And that is an overly emotive approach to something that, at the highest levels, I am hoping is not led by emotion but by a utilitarian, scientific approach. Tell that to the families of the extra 400 deaths. Ok. What are we telling the families that are going to default on their mortgages and end up on the street? How about the families who'll lose their businesses forever? How about the patients not getting treatment for other things because we've directed all attention to Covid? What do we tell the cancer sufferer in normal times who isn't getting the newest drug because their insurance doesn't cover it? Or because its not included in the NICE drugs as its too expensive? What about all the extra people worldwide who'll be pushed into poverty, which we know worsens health outcomes? What are we telling all of these people?
I saw someone got jumped on earlier in this thread for saying he feels some people seem to have an almost morbid excitement for how bad this is getting and people almost revelling in lockdown. I don't necessarily agree with this but I do think some people are almost desperate for Sweden to fail. My question is, why? If their approach works for them, amazing. If we can find a way to keep a hold on the virus, not overwhelm their healthcare system and not crush their economy (fundamentally the thing that pays for things like the healthcare system), superb. If some other countries can do a similar model, even better. We're already starting to see i China that perhaps this isn't quite as simple as lockdown and end the outbreak.
I feel some people (not referring to you) are taking such an authoritative approach to this problem which, let us be completely honest, nobody knows how it will play out in the long term. I will put my hand up and admit I completely misread the threat initially.
Sometimes, what seems the most humane approach, most obvious one at the time, is not always the best one. A slightly niche example but the Biafran civil war is often pointed out as perhaps the first example of concerted international non-governmental humanitarian action. How can it be bad? All we were doing was helping poor, innocent, starving kids caught up in a war not of their own doing. Yet what it actually did was prolong the suffering and probably caused more damage overall than no intervention.
We have to be careful to consider all options and not become ideological zealots to one policy or another.
True. And like I said, they've done a very good job.
I just think these direct comparisons in general, whether its China or SK, Japan, UK, Sweden or Denmark are very difficult. Doesn't mean we can't praise or criticise...but we have to understand there are more nuances than just the raw figures.
NZ especially has a lot of natural advantages in these situations, its why so many of these rich end of world prep nutters buy their bunkers there.
Good post, agree with it all. Sweden felt this was best for them, so far it hasn't been a catastrophe - it could have been better but so could everything apart from a few countries.
I wasn't talking about NZ, I said "just as another country" but I would argue that the policies implemented by any country are largely dictated by the circumstances it has been dealt and by factoring in it's own individual circumstances.
In other news on the frontline, my trust, one of the richest in the UK, one of the most well prepared, which started preparing for this well before most others (and seemingly even the government) did....is now asking us to preserve surgical gowns to be washed and reused.
Getting pretty grim. At least our numbers are starting to go down.
Getting pretty grim. At least our numbers are starting to go down.
I dont belive any (working) gouverment wants anybody to die from this or wish ill on the people living in their country. They all do what they think are the best for most imo. It seems like a very over the top respons to what a wrote.
Another danger of the "Sweden is doing well" narrative is that the right wing nutters here in the US are using it to fuel their protests against our state governments lockdown measures.
What those dumbasses don't look at is that if we were at Sweden's deaths per million, we'd already be over 80,000 confirmed deaths.
What those dumbasses don't look at is that if we were at Sweden's deaths per million, we'd already be over 80,000 confirmed deaths.
The geographic/demographic/connectivity variations are known in advance, though. Hence you could argue that a country like England should have shut down earlier/more aggressively than the likes of Ireland or New Zealand. And the fact that the opposite happened has been a big factor in your grim statistics.
My main beef with inter-country comparisons has always been the different way in which data is collected. Completely pointless comparing cases between two countries, only one of which does any kind of extensive community testing. Likewise comparing deaths when one country records only covid deaths in hospitals. Then there’s the way that per capita analysis favours big countries, with mortality rates diluted by regions the epidemic has not yet reached (hence the US has relatively low deaths per million, despite being an absolute train wreck) In a smaller country the epidemic can spread to every corner in a couple of weeks.
I do agree that luck plays a part, mind you. Just a handful of superspreaders can create thousands of infections downstream. So there’s a fine line between success and failure.
I'd expect Sweden to have a bit more tourism and other business visitors in and out than other Nordic countries.
In terms of comparing Sweden to other small nations, using Ireland they seem equal at this point in relation to population and deaths, ~5m ~10m pop 1.2k and 2.4k deaths, but have had a different way of going about it although it must be said there's been a huge drop off in Sweden's shops as people don't risk it anyway. Belgium have had about 3500 hospital deaths and per head is equivalent to 20000 UK deaths but more condensed than Sweden and part of a busy western European thoroughfare of all aspects of travel, small and big countries in this area have been hit hard initially and those off the beaten tracks haven't
In terms of comparing Sweden to other small nations, using Ireland they seem equal at this point in relation to population and deaths, ~5m ~10m pop 1.2k and 2.4k deaths, but have had a different way of going about it although it must be said there's been a huge drop off in Sweden's shops as people don't risk it anyway. Belgium have had about 3500 hospital deaths and per head is equivalent to 20000 UK deaths but more condensed than Sweden and part of a busy western European thoroughfare of all aspects of travel, small and big countries in this area have been hit hard initially and those off the beaten tracks haven't
It was abundantly clear there was an undertone to your posts regarding Sweden, now the curtain is pulled back.
How the same approach would work or the fear of it being used as a poster child for policy implementation you disagree with in your country should not be taken into consideration when discussing how well Sweden is or isn't doing.
There isn't an undertone. I think what they're doing is wrong on its own 'merit'.
In addition to that, idiots in the US are taking that wrong policy and running with it.
Yippee
Have they asked you to bake your N95 masks in an oven at 70C so you can reuse them yet? Was a serious suggestion doing the rounds in Ireland.
How is this Sweden's fault though? So what are you saying, that every country should follow the same policy as the USA because if they don't, it might make nutters in America start causing trouble?
Judging by the majority of those protesting, I would bet that less than 5% of them even know the country of Sweden exists let alone has any knowledge of their approach to the pandemic.
Idiots in the US have nothing to do with Sweden or their policies. There is a very clear undertone, an understandable one but one that doesn't belong in the conversation it was introduced into. You are judging Sweden's policies from a "I don't want that here" viewpoint, so your views on it are skewed at best.
I don't think anybody knows enough about this virus to be able to say any policy (removing extremes) is right or wrong.
This is the crux of it. The counter response isn't to Sweden itself but to the fringe right who are misusing it to try and justify an agenda. They misrepresent the context but also it seems to me even the style of lockdown Sweden employed which isn't life as normal.
I certainly don't wish what we are doing on countries that are implementing better policies. I also don't want us adopting one that is worse.
And I've posted before, I believe that Sweden's touting of their own policy is a way to deflect from their Nordic neighbors doing differently and showing lower numbers.
And judging by how posts about Sweden are going viral in Trump-land, I'd say you were mistaken.
I'm assuming you think it is some kind of complex thought that I'm incapable of to believe that Sweden's policy is poor on its own merit, while also not wanting that same poor policy implemented in the US...?
Because if idiots in the US weren't using it as fuel for protests, I'd still think Sweden's policy was poor.
Just a billionaire... so, yeah... a twat.Another right-wing nutter, I presume.
Sweden say half their deaths include care homes. What are USA's care home deaths?
Absolutely, he is a disgusting human being that needs to be cancelled immediately.
He thought smoking weed with Joe Rogan will make him look cool to the progressive young minds of the world, what a jerk.
Ha. That's a good question. The government just a couple of days ago started requiring nursing homes to report presumed and confirmed Covid cases to the CDC.
I don't think you are looking at it with clear eyes, no. To add I think you are too definitive when it's not a subject where definitive views fit very well in this space in time.
I'm also not sure how closely you are looking to form your opinions when you make statements like "I believe that Sweden's touting of their own policy is a way to deflect from their Nordic neighbors doing differently and showing lower numbers".
As I said, there is a randomness to the starting numbers and the immediate growth for every country but even if we for purpose gave every country the same number of seed cases and the same demographics then it stands to reason a country with a less strict policy will have higher numbers than a country which has opted to (seemingly in majority of cases short term) implement more strict policies.
Sweden having higher numbers of cases than neighbouring countries is not a consequence (solely at least) of them doing a bad job, it is a consequence (partially at least) of them going a different route. A route you say with one hand they are "touting" and one the other hand are using it to "deflect". This would be akin to blowing a whistle to attract attention and then telling people "don't look here look over there" Sweden know they are under the microscope.
Well, I think I'd know my mind better than you, but to each his own.
Could be really high, 35-50%. Sweden might be doing much better using your per million comparison then.
The issue is so much of the data that we are looking at is confusing at best, unreliable at worst.
Sweden is getting plaudits and criticism at the same time? People want to look at the US as not doing a good job, but there are states that have done an amazing job. Just for shits and giggles, lets compare Sweden (11M population in 173k square miles) to a state like Texas (30M population in 268k square miles). At this time, Sweden (2,462) has nearly 4 times the amount of deaths as Texas (690), and only has ~ 1/3 of the population of Texas. Sweden has 244 deaths per 1M population while Texas has 29 deaths per 1M population.
What is driving me insane is how do we apply this type of infromation from all these different countries when it provides no clear story?
I can certainly understand why people in a state like Texas want to get back working, especially when the total deaths from Corona is significantly less than deaths from influenza. At the same time, I can fully understand why people in NY or MI think they need to extend shelter in place orders. The more I research and try to understand, the more I want to put my head through a wall.
Sweden is getting plaudits and criticism at the same time? People want to look at the US as not doing a good job, but there are states that have done an amazing job. Just for shits and giggles, lets compare Sweden (11M population in 173k square miles) to a state like Texas (30M population in 268k square miles). At this time, Sweden (2,462) has nearly 4 times the amount of deaths as Texas (690), and only has ~ 1/3 of the population of Texas. Sweden has 244 deaths per 1M population while Texas has 29 deaths per 1M population.
What is driving me insane is how do we apply this type of infromation from all these different countries when it provides no clear story?
I can certainly understand why people in a state like Texas want to get back working, especially when the total deaths from Corona is significantly less than deaths from influenza. At the same time, I can fully understand why people in NY or MI think they need to extend shelter in place orders. The more I research and try to understand, the more I want to put my head through a wall.