Coronavirus

[Nelly-Szoboszlai]

4 minutes ago, Jairzinho said:

Hearing rumours that people in favour of the lockdowns in order to minimise deaths are aware that other factors may exist during a pandemic and that all countries aren't identical in every single way.

 

I'm hearing from reliable sources that it wasn't over by winter. 

[TheHowieLama]

Don't really want to wade too far into this sophomoric discussion but it looks suspiciously like two waves there - for both countries.

[Bjornebye]

4 minutes ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

What was exactly the same is that cases rose and fell in Sweden at exactly the same time as they did here.

 

The (misleading, already debunked) point about population density is irelevant here.

 

If lockdown is responsible for the rise and fall in cases, why did they rise and fall in Sweden at exactly the same time as us when they never locked down?

Avoided my question yet again. They are not comparable. The density issue is absolutely relevant when discussing a virus and to suggest otherwise is pathetic. They didn't rise and fall at 'exactly' the same time either. You're all over the place as usual. 

[Strontium]

3 minutes ago, Bjornebye said:

Avoided my question yet again. They are not comparable. The density issue is absolutely relevant when discussing a virus to suggest otherwise is pathetic. They didn't rise and fall at 'exactly' the same time either. You're all over the place as usual. 

 

On 02/05/2021 at 04:42, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

Population density, if it was relevant at all (it isn't here, because Swedish cities are every bit as population dense as British cities), would be relevant in a discussion about the total death rate, not the timing of fluctuations in the death rate.

 

If you're unwilling to even accept basic facts as illustrated in the graph above, then there is no discussion to be had here.

[Bjornebye]

4 minutes ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

 

Population density, if it was relevant at all (it isn't here, because Swedish cities are every bit as population dense as British cities), would be relevant in a discussion about the total death rate, not the timing of fluctuations in the death rate.

 

If you're unwilling to even accept basic facts as illustrated in the graph above, then there is no discussion to be had here.

Ignored my question again.

 

So not 'exactly' the same at all then. Also, stop lying about the density issue. It is relevant. You only want to dismiss it because it fully exposes your pathetic argument as absolute bollocks. Thanks. 

[Curly]

14 minutes ago, Nelly-Torres said:

Dishonest. Slimy. Etc, etc... 

But weren’t you being dishonest with the post where you said it was a lie to say Sweden haven’t had a lockdown? They haven’t, and that article confirmed that, as much as it tried to wrap the info up into being so convoluted you’d think they had a lockdown maybe?

 

Im not on Twitter of Facebook and only really come on here for the info I get. SD makes the point that everything is politicised now and I agree - if you think this you’re that, if you believe that you’re a whatever. It’s pretty shite.

[johnsusername]

13 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

Lets be honest - the Swedes are a little smarter than Brits - also a tad more courteous with a bit more societal/communal nous.

So, win-win for them. 

The Swedes are real super troopers, which is why they didn't need to send out an SOS, and it looks like they're the Covid winners who will take it all. 

[Curly]

15 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

Lets be honest - the Swedes are a little smarter than Brits

Are they?

[Nelly-Szoboszlai]

1 minute ago, belarus said:

But weren’t you being dishonest with the post where you said it was a lie to say Sweden haven’t had a lockdown? They haven’t, and that article confirmed that, as much as it tried to wrap the info up into being so convoluted you’d think they had a lockdown maybe?

 

Im not on Twitter of Facebook and only really come on here for the info I get. SD makes the point that everything is politicised now and I agree - if you think this you’re that, if you believe that you’re a whatever. It’s pretty shite.

I said it was a lie to say no lockdown and/or to suggest that they just ploughed on like normal. And, yet, people still seem to be implying that nothing changed in Sweden. It did. It's an undeniable fact. 

[TheHowieLama]

Just now, johnsusername said:

The Swedes are real super troopers, which is why they didn't need to send out an SOS, and it looks like they're the Covid winners who will take it all. 

They are better looking as well and their accents are ace. Still, cold rainy weekday nights in Stoke.

[TheHowieLama]

2 minutes ago, belarus said:

Are they?

Yes.

[Curly]

3 minutes ago, Nelly-Torres said:

I said it was a lie to say no lockdown and/or to suggest that they just ploughed on like normal. And, yet, people still seem to be implying that nothing changed in Sweden. It did. It's an undeniable fact. 

You’re doing it again though - you’re sticking to your point by reverting back to saying something changed, and that was behaviours. There was no lockdown, whether no lockdown is right or wrong. I’m not advocating a point here, in fact I’m of the belief that lockdowns worked in the UK and controlled the spread, bought us time and saved lives, while obviously having other negative effects in a multitude of ways.

 

The way you’re sticking to your point is the way the others are sticking to theirs with saying there was no measures taken and they continued as normal to fit their argument.

[Mudface]

16 minutes ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

If you understood the point, you'd know the question has ALREADY BEEN ANSWERED.

 

Okay, let's try it another way. If implementing lockdown is responsible for deaths dropping in the UK, and lifting the lockdown is responsible for deaths rising in the UK, why did deaths rise and fall in Sweden at exactly the same time?

Simple answer- they didn't and you haven't 'answered' anything. The graphs look superficially similar, but then you'd expect to see that for most countries. You get the initial wave, deaths reduce as restrictions- whether mandated or not- take effect, then there's a lull over the Summer which you'd expect for a respiratory disease, and finally the second wave kicks in.

 

 

As an example, here's Denmark's gaph-

 

 

And the US's-

 

 

However, Sweden's death rate from May onwards fell much more slowly than the UK's, and the UK's death rate started picking up again from about mid-September, almost two months before Sweden's did- I remember various articles around that time lauding Sweden as having defeated the virus and various attempts to make out that everyone had already had it.

 

Additionally, we can also see the effect of the mini-lockdown we had in the Autumn, with deaths plateauing towards the end of November for a bit before ballooning again once that was lifted. Deaths didn't rise and fall at the exact same time at all.

 

So much for your self-professed ability to 'interpret data', all you've done is seen a couple of charts that look vaguely the same. Correlation without causation indeed.

 

[Curly]

8 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

Yes.

Hmm...

[Bruce Spanner]

3 minutes ago, belarus said:

Hmm...

But population density we win hands down, how else can you explain the last few years politically? 

[TheHowieLama]

6 minutes ago, belarus said:

Hmm...

Oh hun, I have bad news.

[Nelly-Szoboszlai]

10 minutes ago, belarus said:

You’re doing it again though - you’re sticking to your point by reverting back to saying something changed, and that was behaviours. There was no lockdown, whether no lockdown is right or wrong. I’m not advocating a point here, in fact I’m of the belief that lockdowns worked in the UK and controlled the spread, bought us time and saved lives, while obviously having other negative effects in a multitude of ways.

 

The way you’re sticking to your point is the way the others are sticking to theirs with saying there was no measures taken and they continued as normal to fit their argument.

Of course I'm doing it again. I'm correctly describing what happened in Sweden. What do you want me to do? Make things up? 

[Curly]

Just now, TheHowieLama said:

Oh hun, I have bad news.

What is it? That you realise sweeping and unsubstantiated generalisations aren’t very helpful?

[Curly]

5 minutes ago, Bruce Spanner said:

But population density we win hands down, how else can you explain the last few years politically? 

What do you mean there mate? Sorry, not followed the flow there - apologies 

[Curly]

1 minute ago, Nelly-Torres said:

Of course I'm doing it again. I'm correctly describing what happened in Sweden. What do you want me to do? Make things up? 

You are making things up - you said in the first post that it was a lie to say Sweden didn’t have a lockdown. It isn’t a lie at all - they didn’t have a lockdown. That’s it. All other branches off that are moot at this point.

[TheHowieLama]

4 minutes ago, belarus said:

What is it? That you realise sweeping and unsubstantiated generalisations aren’t very helpful?

Well, of course there is that, and the fact that Swedes are better looking, smarter, care more about their community while having a cooler accent.

[Nelly-Szoboszlai]

4 minutes ago, belarus said:

You are making things up - you said in the first post that it was a lie to say Sweden didn’t have a lockdown. It isn’t a lie at all - they didn’t have a lockdown. That’s it. All other branches off that are moot at this point.

I thought I'd clearly explained what my post meant. I apologise if you've struggled to understand it. 

[Nelly-Szoboszlai]

19 minutes ago, Mudface said:

Simple answer- they didn't and you haven't 'answered' anything. The graphs look superficially similar, but then you'd expect to see that for most countries. You get the initial wave, deaths reduce as restrictions- whether mandated or not- take effect, then there's a lull over the Summer which you'd expect for a respiratory disease, and finally the second wave kicks in.

 

 

As an example, here's Denmark's gaph-

 

 

And the US's-

 

 

However, Sweden's death rate from May onwards fell much more slowly than the UK's, and the UK's death rate started picking up again from about mid-September, almost two months before Sweden's did- I remember various articles around that time lauding Sweden as having defeated the virus and various attempts to make out that everyone had already had it.

 

Additionally, we can also see the effect of the mini-lockdown we had in the Autumn, with deaths plateauing towards the end of November for a bit before ballooning again once that was lifted. Deaths didn't rise and fall at the exact same time at all.

 

So much for your self-professed ability to 'interpret data', all you've done is seen a couple of charts that look vaguely the same. Correlation without causation indeed.

 

This. 

Will. 

Be. 

Ignored. 

[Bruce Spanner]

6 minutes ago, belarus said:

What do you mean there mate? Sorry, not followed the flow there - apologies 

It was a very funny joke about the evidence the UK population were dense as they’d voted for Brexit and Boris.

 

It was quite good.

[Strontium]

21 minutes ago, Mudface said:

Simple answer- they didn't and you haven't 'answered' anything. The graphs look superficially similar, but then you'd expect to see that for most countries. You get the initial wave, deaths reduce as restrictions- whether mandated or not- take effect, then there's a lull over the Summer which you'd expect for a respiratory disease, and finally the second wave kicks in.

 

 

As an example, here's Denmark's gaph-

 

 

And the US's-

 

 

However, Sweden's death rate from May onwards fell much more slowly than the UK's, and the UK's death rate started picking up again from about mid-September, almost two months before Sweden's did- I remember various articles around that time lauding Sweden as having defeated the virus and various attempts to make out that everyone had already had it.

 

Additionally, we can also see the effect of the mini-lockdown we had in the Autumn, with deaths plateauing towards the end of November for a bit before ballooning again once that was lifted. Deaths didn't rise and fall at the exact same time at all.

 

So much for your self-professed ability to 'interpret data', all you've done is seen a couple of charts that look vaguely the same. Correlation without causation indeed.

 

 

So many words to say fuck all.

 

You must be really pissed off that Sweden suffered less than we did despite not subjecting their citizens to draconian measures.

 

Unfortunately the giant plot hole is that if you'd "expect" to see cases rising and falling around the same time irrespective of whether restrictions were mandated or not, why bother mandating them? And then argue until you are blue in the face that those mandated restrictions were the reason cases rose and fell, when you've just argued that cases would rise and fall regardless!