Trump supporters and conspiracy theory - Part 2

[Martin Weidmann]

You ignored every point I made and simply repeated the argument about Sweden's case death rate, which argument I addressed. So let me repeat the facts that you ignored:

* Sweden's crude death rate (the percentage of the population that has died from COVID-19) is lower than that of several other European nations. It is higher than some, lower than others.

* Sweden's daily new deaths have nearly flatlined. It has been months since Sweden had more than 10 new deaths in a day, and on many days there have only been 0, 1, 2, or 3 new deaths, far better than we are doing right now. Compare Sweden's drastic drop in daily new deaths to Michigan's numbers (Michigan and Sweden have nearly the same population size). Or compare Sweden's daily new death numbers to our numbers. Humm, could it be that their approach is proving to be the better one?

* Sweden's case death rate is 5.8%, but the vast majority of those deaths came before July. Our case death rate was between 5% and 6% during the lockdowns. 5.8% is hardly Black Plague territory. A 5.8% case death rate equals a 94.2% survival rate.

* And Sweden's has achieved these things without causing millions of job losses, without force millions of people to use up their life savings, and without shutting down thousands of businesses. 

I notice you snipped out the part about Taiwan's modified herd-immunity approach. Taiwan left their businesses and schools open. Gee, what happened? They have the lowest case death rate of any nation on earth and have had barely cases.

I also notice that you didn't bother to explain why the U.S. case death rate has dropped by over 50% even though many states have reopened and even though the number of cases has skyrocketed. If the lockdown model were correct, we should be seeing catastrophic death numbers, not a drop in both gross death numbers and in the death rate.

Here's a question to spark some thought: Can you name any other pandemic where we shut down half the economy and forced 3/4 of the population to endure lockdowns?

The 1957-1958 Asian Flu pandemic killed 116,000 Americans. With today's population, that would equal 216,000 deaths. 116K was 0.066% of the U.S. population. Our population was 175 million at the time. Our current population is 328.2 million. 0.066% of 328.2 million would be 216,000 deaths. However, in response to the Asian Flu pandemic, we did not panic and did not impose extreme lockdown measures; as a result, we did not put tens of millions of people out of work, did not force thousands of businesses to close, did not close schools all over the country, and did not require people to wear masks. Why did we not panic back then? Why are we panicking now?

* Sweden's crude death rate (the percentage of the population that has died from COVID-19) is lower than that of several other European nations. It is higher than some, lower than others.

Nice try at trying to play down the actual situation. Only four other European countries have a higher rate. All the other countries have lower rates.

* Sweden's daily new deaths have nearly flatlined. It has been months since Sweden had more than 10 new deaths in a day, and on many days there have only been 0, 1, 2, or 3 new deaths, far better than we are doing right now. Compare Sweden's drastic drop in daily new deaths to Michigan's numbers (Michigan and Sweden have nearly the same population size). Or compare Sweden's daily new death numbers to our numbers. Humm, could it be that their approach is proving to be the better one?

Death rates have been lower in many European countries in recent months, despite the infection rates going up again. There's nothing special about Sweden in that regard. You can not compare the death rates of Michigan and Sweden because the size in the population isn't the only factor. Population density in Michigan is 176 per square mile. In Sweden it is 64 per square mile.

* Sweden's case death rate is 5.8%, but the vast majority of those deaths came before July. Our case death rate was between 5% and 6% during the lockdowns. 5.8% is hardly Black Plague territory. A 5.8% case death rate equals a 94.2% survival rate.

Which ignores completely that many people in Sweden stayed at home voluntary despite the authorities not imposing a lockdown.

* And Sweden's has achieved these things without causing millions of job losses, without force millions of people to use up their life savings, and without shutting down thousands of businesses. 

I have Swedish friends. You try to convince them of this being even remotely true and you'll hear their laughter all the way over the ocean. Businesses were indeed not shut down, but many of them suffered nevertheless because of a lack of clients. In June the number of bankruptcies showed a 37% increase during the previous six months compared to the same period a year earlier. Don't let a photo with some people on a terrace fool you. Sweden saw it's economy shirk by 8.6% in three months. The average of all other European countries was only marginally higher at 11.9% and that was mainly caused by the Spanish, French and Italian economies doing badly.

I notice you snipped out the part about Taiwan's modified herd-immunity approach. Taiwan left their businesses and schools open. Gee, what happened? They have the lowest case death rate of any nation on earth and have had barely cases.

I did not comment about Taiwan because I know nothing about it. I have better things to do with my life than to research every country on the planet. But if you want a real succes story, why did you ignore New Zealand? They had a nationwide lockdown and it worked. Only 1935 cases and 25 deaths.

I also notice that you didn't bother to explain why the U.S. case death rate has dropped by over 50% even though many states have reopened and even though the number of cases has skyrocketed.

That's not typical for the USA. In Europe they have the same. I'm no expert but I would say that overall there is a better preparedness now for the virus than there was in the first three months of the year.

If the lockdown model were correct, we should be seeing catastrophic death numbers, not a drop in both gross death numbers and in the death rate.

BS... It has nothing to do with the lockdown model. We're 10 months into this pandemic and a lot has been learned since the beginning. It's only logical that knowing exactly what to do, rather than guessing and trying out methods, is going to have an effect on the death rate. Same thing happened with HIV. In the early days if you contracted HIV it was a death sentence. Over time ways were found to bring the disease under control and now hardly anybody dies from HIV.

Here's a question to spark some thought: Can you name any other pandemic where we shut down half the economy and forced 3/4 of the population to endure lockdowns?

Here's a question for you; Can you name any other virus that was so dangerous and spread so easily as this one?

The 1957-1958 Asian Flu pandemic killed 116,000 Americans. With today's population, that would equal 216,000 deaths. 116K was 0.066% of the U.S. population. Our population was 175 million at the time. Our current population is 328.2 million. 0.066% of 328.2 million would be 216,000 deaths. However, in response to the Asian Flu pandemic, we did not panic and did not impose extreme lockdown measures; as a result, we did not put tens of millions of people out of work, did not force thousands of businesses to close, did not close schools all over the country, and did not require people to wear masks. Why did we not panic back then? Why are we panicking now?

Why did we not panic back then?

I don't know if they did not panic back then. It's a bogus argument because we also do not know how many less deaths there would have been if they had locked down back then, which makes the question a silly one to ask.

You could just as easily ask why there wasn't a lockdown when the Black Death killed up to 200 million people in the 14th century? Why did the American authorities tell people in the 40's and 50's to hide under the kitchen table in case a nuclear bomb exploded? The most likely answer is; lack of knowledge!

Why are we panicking now?

There was panic in the beginning for the same reason; lack of sufficient knowledge. The authorities simply did not know how to handle a pandemic like this. There is no more panic now. Wanting to lock down seriously affected areas is not the result of panic.

Spain has today announced a lock down between 10 PM and 7 AM (to prevent idiots from having dangerous parties), France has already put restrictions on bars and restaurants and so has the Netherlands. Travel restrictions between European countries are once again imposed. And even England is now beginning to see the light with lock downs in certain areas. Do you really think all those countries are doing that for fun? Do you really think they want to destroy their economies? Are could it perhaps be that they already understand something that the USA still needs to learn?

Here's something to consider;

[Michael T. Griffith]

* Sweden's crude death rate (the percentage of the population that has died from COVID-19) is lower than that of several other European nations. It is higher than some, lower than others.

Nice try at trying to play down the actual situation. Only four other European countries have a higher rate. All the other countries have lower rates.

"Only" four? The "actual situation" is that Sweden's crude death rate is lower than that of four other European nations, is close to that of two others, and is higher than that of the remaining nations.

* Sweden's daily new deaths have nearly flatlined. It has been months since Sweden had more than 10 new deaths in a day, and on many days there have only been 0, 1, 2, or 3 new deaths, far better than we are doing right now. Compare Sweden's drastic drop in daily new deaths to Michigan's numbers (Michigan and Sweden have nearly the same population size). Or compare Sweden's daily new death numbers to our numbers. Humm, could it be that their approach is proving to be the better one?

Death rates have been lower in many European countries in recent months, despite the infection rates going up again. There's nothing special about Sweden in that regard. You can not compare the death rates of Michigan and Sweden because the size in the population isn't the only factor. Population density in Michigan is 176 per square mile. In Sweden it is 64 per square mile.

That's a bit lame. Sweden's land area is also twice as large as Michigan's, although its population is nearly identical in size to Michigan's. The fact remains that Sweden's death numbers are far better than Michigan's, even though Michigan, thanks to its safety Nazi governor, is still under numerous lockdown restrictions, and has had one of the strictest lockdowns of any state.

France and Spain have averaged over 100 new deaths per day over the last four weeks. Sweden has averaged 3-4 new deaths per day for the last FOUR MONTHS.

Five months ago, Sweden's critics were predicting thousands of new deaths if Sweden did not impose a lockdown. Obviously, they were wrong, but most of them, like you, can't bring themselves to admit it.

* Sweden's case death rate is 5.8%, but the vast majority of those deaths came before July. Our case death rate was between 5% and 6% during the lockdowns. 5.8% is hardly Black Plague territory. A 5.8% case death rate equals a 94.2% survival rate.

Which ignores completely that many people in Sweden stayed at home voluntary despite the authorities not imposing a lockdown.

Uh-huh. Again, most of Sweden's businesses and schools have never closed. Someone's been patronizing those businesses. And even though most of Sweden's schools have stayed open, there has been no explosion in deaths among students.

* And Sweden's has achieved these things without causing millions of job losses, without force millions of people to use up their life savings, and without shutting down thousands of businesses. 

I have Swedish friends. You try to convince them of this being even remotely true and you'll hear their laughter all the way over the ocean. Businesses were indeed not shut down, but many of them suffered nevertheless because of a lack of clients. In June the number of bankruptcies showed a 37% increase during the previous six months compared to the same period a year earlier. Don't let a photo with some people on a terrace fool you. Sweden saw it's economy shirk by 8.6% in three months. The average of all other European countries was only marginally higher at 11.9% and that was mainly caused by the Spanish, French and Italian economies doing badly.

Uh, 11.9% is 28% higher than 8.6%--that is quite a bit more than "marginally higher." If you got a 28% raise, I'm guessing you would not describe your new salary as "only marginally higher" than your previous salary.

You have proved my point: that Sweden has not suffered as much economic damage as other nations have suffered. No one says Sweden has not suffered at all, but that the economic damage has been considerably less than in nations that imposed lockdowns.

I notice you snipped out the part about Taiwan's modified herd-immunity approach. Taiwan left their businesses and schools open. Gee, what happened? They have the lowest case death rate of any nation on earth and have had barely cases.

I did not comment about Taiwan because I know nothing about it. I have better things to do with my life than to research every country on the planet. But if you want a real succes story, why did you ignore New Zealand? They had a nationwide lockdown and it worked. Only 1935 cases and 25 deaths.

You did not mention New Zealand in your reply, so I did not "ignore" it. New Zealand is an island with a population of barely 4 million spread out over 103,000 square miles. New Zealand also imposed a strict travel ban on March 19--all travel into the country by non-citizens was banned (yet liberals went ape when Trump imposed a ban on travel from China).

How about all the other nations that imposed lockdowns? We both know that New Zealand is the rare exception. The other nations that imposed lockdowns had much different results.

I also notice that you didn't bother to explain why the U.S. case death rate has dropped by over 50% even though many states have reopened and even though the number of cases has skyrocketed.

That's not typical for the USA. In Europe they have the same. I'm no expert but I would say that overall there is a better preparedness now for the virus than there was in the first three months of the year.

"That's not typical for the USA"? Uh, yeah it is: I'm talking about the national case death rate, which has dropped dramatically since many states began to reopen, in spite of the huge jump in cases. Your experts issued innumerable dire warnings that deaths would skyrocket without lockdowns, but the opposite has happened.

If the lockdown model were correct, we should be seeing catastrophic death numbers, not a drop in both gross death numbers and in the death rate.

BS...

No, it is not. Your experts said over and over and over and over again that without lockdowns we would have 2-plus million deaths. How can you not know this? Google it. Your panic-peddling scientists were wrong, but only a few of them have admitted it.

It has nothing to do with the lockdown model. We're 10 months into this pandemic and a lot has been learned since the beginning. It's only logical that knowing exactly what to do, rather than guessing and trying out methods, is going to have an effect on the death rate.

Oh, HOGWASH. It has everything to do with the lockdown model. When some states began to reopen, your "experts" screamed bloody murder that this would lead to a huge jump in deaths. You must be kidding. The fact is that your side has been wrong over and over again, but you won't admit it.

Same thing happened with HIV. In the early days if you contracted HIV it was a death sentence. Over time ways were found to bring the disease under control and now hardly anybody dies from HIV.

This is an absurd argument. Even in the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, if you caught the virus, it was far from being a "death sentence." Even in the worst death-rate months, the death rate was never above 8% nationally, which of course meant the survival rate was 92%. Even among the elderly during the worst death-rate months, the death rate was never above 25%, which meant that even among this highest risk group, the survival rate was at least 75%. This is worlds different from the early days of HIV/AIDS.

Here's a question to spark some thought: Can you name any other pandemic where we shut down half the economy and forced 3/4 of the population to endure lockdowns?

Here's a question for you; Can you name any other virus that was so dangerous and spread so easily as this one?

Yes, I can: the Spanish Flu, the Black Plague, and the Hong Kong Flu.

And, as mentioned, for people aged 0-49, COVID-19 is no more dangerous than the common flu. For ages 50-59, the death rate is 1.49%, which equals a survival rate of 98.51%. You people have recklessly scared half the population to death for no valid reason. For the vast majority of the population, COVID-19 is either less dangerous than the flu, or no more dangerous than the flu, or poses a sub-2% risk of death.

The 1957-1958 Asian Flu pandemic killed 116,000 Americans. With today's population, that would equal 216,000 deaths. 116K was 0.066% of the U.S. population. Our population was 175 million at the time. Our current population is 328.2 million. 0.066% of 328.2 million would be 216,000 deaths. However, in response to the Asian Flu pandemic, we did not panic and did not impose extreme lockdown measures; as a result, we did not put tens of millions of people out of work, did not force thousands of businesses to close, did not close schools all over the country, and did not require people to wear masks. Why did we not panic back then? Why are we panicking now?

Why did we not panic back then?

I don't know if they did not panic back then.

Well you might wanna do a little research. No, we did not panic. We did not close schools, nor shut down half the economy, nor give alarmist and distorted daily reports about it.

It's a silly question to ask. You could also ask why there wasn't a lockdown when the Black Death killed up to 200 million people in the 14th century?

Now that is a truly idiotic argument. The Black Death was far, far deadlier than COVID-19. There's no comparison. Plus, they didn't even understand how the Black Death was spread or how to combat it. So your argument is juvenile.

Why did the American authorities tell people in the 40's and 50's to hide under the kitchen table in case a nuclear bomb exploded? The most likely answer is; lack of knowledge!

Are you in high school or something? A nuclear bomb is not a virus. And for people who were more than 1 mile from Ground Zero, hiding under a table would have been a smart thing to do. Go study Hiroshima and Nagasaki: the farther away people were and the more structures they had between them and the blast, the better their chances of survival were. So American authorities had very good reasons to tell people to hide under tables in case of a nuclear attack.

Why are we panicking now?

There was panic in the beginning for the same reason; lack of sufficient knowledge. The authorities simply did not know how to handle a pandemic like this. There is no more panic now. Wanting to lock down seriously affected areas is not the result of panic.

Oh, that is total nonsense. What planet do you live on? We knew by late February that the vast majority of COVID-19 deaths in China and Italy were among the elderly and the medically ill, and that deaths among children and teens were extremely rare. Yet, your panic-peddling experts ignored these data and insisted on a one-size-fits-all panic approach.

Spain has today announced a lock down between 10 PM and 7 AM (to prevent idiots from having dangerous parties), France has already put restrictions on bars and restaurants and so has the Netherlands. Travel restrictions between European countries are once again imposed. And even England is now beginning to see the light with lock downs in certain areas. Do you really think all those countries are doing that for fun?

They're doing it because their "experts" have learned nothing from the last eight months and refuse to admit they were horribly wrong in the first place. They're doing it because their politicians are as stupid and clueless as are many of our politicians.

I just thank God that we have several governors who have had the nerve and wisdom to ignore the panic peddlers and to follow the real science, not the junk science of quacks like Fauci.

By the way, do you have any idea how many times Fauci has been caught making erroneous claims about viruses?

https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/health/dr-faucis-recurring-nightmares-covid-19-might-be-his-worst-its-sure-not-his

https://justthenews.com/accountability/political-ethics/fauci-says-americans-should-trust-doctors-himself-his-career

[Martin Weidmann]

"Only" four? The "actual situation" is that Sweden's crude death rate is lower than that of four other European nations, is close to that of two others, and is higher than that of the remaining nations.

That's a bit lame. Sweden's land area is also twice as large as Michigan's, although its population is nearly identical in size to Michigan's. The fact remains that Sweden's death numbers are far better than Michigan's, even though Michigan, thanks to its safety Nazi governor, is still under numerous lockdown restrictions, and has had one of the strictest lockdowns of any state.

France and Spain have averaged over 100 new deaths per day over the last four weeks. Sweden has averaged 3-4 new deaths per day for the last FOUR MONTHS.

Five months ago, Sweden's critics were predicting thousands of new deaths if Sweden did not impose a lockdown. Obviously, they were wrong, but most of them, like you, can't bring themselves to admit it.

Uh-huh. Again, most of Sweden's businesses and schools have never closed. Someone's been patronizing those businesses. And even though most of Sweden's schools have stayed open, there has been no explosion in deaths among students.

Uh, 11.9% is 28% higher than 8.6%--that is quite a bit more than "marginally higher." If you got a 28% raise, I'm guessing you would not describe your new salary as "only marginally higher" than your previous salary.

You have proved my point: that Sweden has not suffered as much economic damage as other nations have suffered. No one says Sweden has not suffered at all, but that the economic damage has been considerably less than in nations that imposed lockdowns.

You did not mention New Zealand in your reply, so I did not "ignore" it. New Zealand is an island with a population of barely 4 million spread out over 103,000 square miles. New Zealand also imposed a strict travel ban on March 19--all travel into the country by non-citizens was banned (yet liberals went ape when Trump imposed a ban on travel from China).

How about all the other nations that imposed lockdowns? We both know that New Zealand is the rare exception. The other nations that imposed lockdowns had much different results.

"That's not typical for the USA"? Uh, yeah it is: I'm talking about the national case death rate, which has dropped dramatically since many states began to reopen, in spite of the huge jump in cases. Your experts issued innumerable dire warnings that deaths would skyrocket without lockdowns, but the opposite has happened.

No, it is not. Your experts said over and over and over and over again that without lockdowns we would have 2-plus million deaths. How can you not know this? Google it. Your panic-peddling scientists were wrong, but only a few of them have admitted it.

Oh, HOGWASH. It has everything to do with the lockdown model. When some states began to reopen, your "experts" screamed bloody murder that this would lead to a huge jump in deaths. You must be kidding. The fact is that your side has been wrong over and over again, but you won't admit it.

This is an absurd argument. Even in the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, if you caught the virus, it was far from being a "death sentence." Even in the worst death-rate months, the death rate was never above 8% nationally, which of course meant the survival rate was 92%. Even among the elderly during the worst death-rate months, the death rate was never above 25%, which meant that even among this highest risk group, the survival rate was at least 75%. This is worlds different from the early days of HIV/AIDS.

Yes, I can: the Spanish Flu, the Black Plague, and the Hong Kong Flu.

And, as mentioned, for people aged 0-49, COVID-19 is no more dangerous than the common flu. For ages 50-59, the death rate is 1.49%, which equals a survival rate of 98.51%. You people have recklessly scared half the population to death for no valid reason. For the vast majority of the population, COVID-19 is either less dangerous than the flu, or no more dangerous than the flu, or poses a sub-2% risk of death.

Well you might wanna do a little research. No, we did not panic. We did not close schools, nor shut down half the economy, nor give alarmist and distorted daily reports about it.

Now that is a truly idiotic argument. The Black Death was far, far deadlier than COVID-19. There's no comparison. Plus, they didn't even understand how the Black Death was spread or how to combat it. So your argument is juvenile.

Are you in high school or something? A nuclear bomb is not a virus. And for people who were more than 1 mile from Ground Zero, hiding under a table would have been a smart thing to do. Go study Hiroshima and Nagasaki: the farther away people were and the more structures they had between them and the blast, the better their chances of survival were. So American authorities had very good reasons to tell people to hide under tables in case of a nuclear attack.

Oh, that is total nonsense. What planet do you live on? We knew by late February that the vast majority of COVID-19 deaths in China and Italy were among the elderly and the medically ill, and that deaths among children and teens were extremely rare. Yet, your panic-peddling experts ignored these data and insisted on a one-size-fits-all panic approach.

They're doing it because their "experts" have learned nothing from the last eight months and refuse to admit they were horribly wrong in the first place. They're doing it because their politicians are as stupid and clueless as are many of our politicians.

I just thank God that we have several governors who have had the nerve and wisdom to ignore the panic peddlers and to follow the real science, not the junk science of quacks like Fauci.

By the way, do you have any idea how many times Fauci has been caught making erroneous claims about viruses?

https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/health/dr-faucis-recurring-nightmares-covid-19-might-be-his-worst-its-sure-not-his

https://justthenews.com/accountability/political-ethics/fauci-says-americans-should-trust-doctors-himself-his-career

I know a lost cause when I see one so I'm not going to respond to this self-serving diatribe, except for this;

They're doing it because their "experts" have learned nothing from the last eight months and refuse to admit they were horribly wrong in the first place. They're doing it because their politicians are as stupid and clueless as are many of our politicians.

I just thank God that we have several governors who have had the nerve and wisdom to ignore the panic peddlers and to follow the real science, not the junk science of quacks like Fauci.

There we have it. Calling everybody "stupid and clueless" who doesn't share your selfish pathetic and not supported by evidence or knowledge views and attack one of the world's leading experts on infectious diseases with an outstanding career spanning over 50 years and main advisor to all Presidents since Ronald Reagan because you - a insignificant layman - thinks he knows better.

That really says it all....

Just to remind you of a basic fact; The USA has 4% of the population of the world and over 25% of all the world's covid deaths. Calling nations with far less deaths stupid is...... well, plain stupid!

A few posts ago I wrote;

The bottom line is a simple one. You either;

(1) accept this is a deadly and dangerous virus and everything possible needs to be done to get rid of it as soon as possible and save as many lives as possible in the meantime, or

(2) you give priority to so-called "personal liberty", money and economic gain and simply do not care about the death toll

It's pretty obvious you fall in the (2) category

By the way, do you have any idea how many times Fauci has been caught making erroneous claims about viruses?

According to whom?

And btw... do you have any idea how many times the pathetic Führer has lied in general and about the virus in particular?

It'll go way...... Pffff

[Colin Crow]

To Michael. Some "facts" that need addressing.

Trump's "travel ban" on China did little to prevent widespread community infection. There were about 40,000 nationals who travelled back after the ban. There were individuals who merely bypassed the "ban" by travelling to another country first, particularly European countries, to gain entry into the USA. Also the European countries that were heavily infected early, like Italy, had no such ban before it was too late. You also had early community transmission in Washington state. The virus was already in the country unfortunately. You had no decent testing method, this was due to errors by CDC essentially.a reasonable analogy to Trump's approach was you already has a few burglars in the house so you locked the front door to prevent any more entering. You left the back door open so more could enter and turned the lights out so you could pretend there was no problem.

Your references to Sweden and herd immunity are unsophisticated and you need to be aware that the Swedes have altered their strategy and acknowledged their errors again. What a refreshing approach that is.

You fail to acknowledge the possibility of long term effects on those who have been infected. Some know what they don’t know. We don’t know how long immunity lasts and how many can get reinfected.

The successful approaches to combatting the virus in terms of public health and economic effects, and I include my country Australia in this has been a relatively coordinated approach by federal and state governments. Consistent methods and a mature understanding of the problem by the general population. The keys to any widespread infection are effective testing, where results are known within at least 48 hours and contact tracing. Community spread has to be contained.

The concept of herd immunity in the absence of an effective vaccine that can be distributed quickly and accepted by the population would be a forlorn concept.

PS looking forward to your cheerleading references by Nature and thoughts on the CDC estimates of a in increase of 300,000 deaths in the USA so far this year.

PPS if Fauci is so bad why doesn’t Donald fire him like most of his appointments? He is the leader after all.
Fauci has never claimed perfection or spouted self praise. A behaviour of Trump's that is routinely laughable.

[Colin Crow]

A recent article about Sweden quoting Tengel.

Sweden's top epidemiologist defends coronavirus strategy

"Anders Tegnell, Sweden's chief epidemiologist, defended his country's coronavirus strategy in an interview with the New Statesman, telling the newspaper that Sweden did not pursue "herd immunity" and "definitely had a virtual lockdown" — despite looser restrictions than most countries.

Why it matters: Sweden's more relaxed approach to the pandemic compared to other industrialized countries has been a source of controversy, with many libertarians and conservatives, including Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), arguing that the U.S. should have pursued a similar strategy.

Context: Schools, restaurants, and bars in Sweden were never closed. Masks were not recommended. And while the government did limit public gatherings to 50 people, the restriction did not apply to all circumstances.

The country has seen one of the world's highest mortality rates among wealthy countries — around 58 deaths per 100,000 people, compared to 11.58 in neighboring Denmark, 6.24 in Finland and 5.09 in Norway.
Sweden managed to suppress the spread of the virus after a June peak, but is now seeing a rise in infections like most of Europe.
What he's saying: In the interview, published Monday, Tegnell said, “I want to make it clear, no, we did not lock down like many other countries, but we definitely had a virtual lockdown.”

“Swedes changed their behaviour enormously. We stopped travelling even more than our neighbouring countries. The airports had no flights anywhere, the trains were running at a few per cent of normal service, so there were enormous changes in society," he added.
Tegnell said to suggest the country pursued "herd immunity" would be incorrect. "In common with other countries we’re trying to slow down the spread as much as possible... To imply that we let the disease run free without any measures to try to stop it is not true," he said.
Tegnell said any genuine herd immunity strategy would "rapidly overwhelm your health service and possibly cause a number of deaths indefinitely and leave people with long-term consequences. If you can avoid that I would say that you definitely should.”
Worth noting: On Monday, Sweden's regional health authorities will have more power to ask for recommendations specific to their localities, per The Local Sweden.

Previously, such recommendations were only issued at the national level.
The measures have been described by officials as "strong recommendations," but they're still not legal binding.
Residents may be instructed to avoid public transportation, unnecessary travel outside of a particular region, indoor environments and other places where groups may gather, according to The Local"

https://www.axios.com/sweden-coronavirus-strategy-epidemiologist-02b29922-6040-4b31-aafd-ff4ad01256be.html

[Colin Crow]

In the article posted as criticism of Fauci.

"In an interview with Just the News, Fishbein said this week that Fauci failed to take responsibility for the managers and researchers working below him when signs of trouble emerged, allowing problems to persist until others intervened. "Fauci is all about Fauci," Fishbein said. "He loves being the headline. It’s his ego."

Transpose Trump for Fauci......oh the irony.

Justthenews......John Solomon.....really? And you criticise Nature!

[Richard Smith]

Campaign events for today (just 8 days before the election):

Old Joe:  none

Kantala:  none