 |
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Swedish people are much more inclined to listen to government advice. Sweden is a far less densely populated country where people are used to effectively hibernating. In many parts of Sweden there is no daylight at all for days on end in winter.
On the flipside, a glance at the per capita death rate might give some food for thought. They are not performing as well as you might imagine. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I’m not sure it right to judge purely on infection rate. Sure it’s a guide but there a different factors
Population of Sweden 10.5 million
Population of UK 67.8 million
More important the population density showsthere are 10 times the number of people per square km in the uk than Sweden, which in itself lessons the chances of infections
Population density Sweden 24 people per square km
Population density UK 281 people per square km
Sweden largest city (population) stockholm 1.5m
UK largest city (population) London 7.5 million
Sweden second largest city Gothenburg 572,000
6 other uk cities(Birmingham, Liverpool, Nottingham, Sheffield, Bristol, Glasgow) are all bigger population wise
Area of Sweden 158,433 square miles
Area of UK 93,410 square miles
So infections rates are bound to be more prevalent in the uk as we have almost 7 time’s the population of (approx) half the area of Sweden
All info taken from worldomerers.info
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Worse than the USA though and many times worse than China and India. More sparsely populated in a country that basically practices isolation every winter is probably closer to the answer.
Ireland has half the per capita death rate of the UK and we share a land border. They shut down gatherings a week or two before us. But also a more sparsely populated country. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
The big issue with quoting the figures are the deaths reported, being reported to the same standard. Many countries might not state an elderly or seriously Ill person who dies with coronovirus as a death from coronovirus. Unless the same standards are stuck too how can we compare. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
The month where we sat on our hands just watching and waiting for corona to land on our shores was the big mistake. Second song is no worse than a common cold. From then on people weren't going to take it seriously unfortunately.
Even the government didn't take it seriously, reports in media today saying Boris didn't bother going to cobra or corona update meetings. He initiates social distancing then brought everyone into parliament following day  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *adetMan
over a year ago
South of Ipswich |
Unfortunately there is no broad solution that can be applied to every country
Population and population density will play a large part and every government is having to adapt to suit the demographic |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ax777Man
over a year ago
Not here |
"How are Netherlands getting on? Very densely populated if I recall"
The Netherlands has had 3601 deaths so far. That’s 210 deaths per 1 million population compared to the UK’s 228 per 1 million. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I’m not sure it right to judge purely on infection rate. Sure it’s a guide but there a different factors
Population of Sweden 10.5 million
Population of UK 67.8 million
More important the population density showsthere are 10 times the number of people per square km in the uk than Sweden, which in itself lessons the chances of infections
Population density Sweden 24 people per square km
Population density UK 281 people per square km
Sweden largest city (population) stockholm 1.5m
UK largest city (population) London 7.5 million
Sweden second largest city Gothenburg 572,000
6 other uk cities(Birmingham, Liverpool, Nottingham, Sheffield, Bristol, Glasgow) are all bigger population wise
Area of Sweden 158,433 square miles
Area of UK 93,410 square miles
So infections rates are bound to be more prevalent in the uk as we have almost 7 time’s the population of (approx) half the area of Sweden
All info taken from worldomerers.info
"
Exactly this |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I’m not sure it right to judge purely on infection rate. Sure it’s a guide but there a different factors
Population of Sweden 10.5 million
Population of UK 67.8 million
More important the population density showsthere are 10 times the number of people per square km in the uk than Sweden, which in itself lessons the chances of infections
Population density Sweden 24 people per square km
Population density UK 281 people per square km
Sweden largest city (population) stockholm 1.5m
UK largest city (population) London 7.5 million
Sweden second largest city Gothenburg 572,000
6 other uk cities(Birmingham, Liverpool, Nottingham, Sheffield, Bristol, Glasgow) are all bigger population wise
Area of Sweden 158,433 square miles
Area of UK 93,410 square miles
So infections rates are bound to be more prevalent in the uk as we have almost 7 time’s the population of (approx) half the area of Sweden
All info taken from worldomerers.info
"
 Tried to explain the above to someone comparing New Zealand to the UK. When I pointed out that New Zealand was roughly the same size as the UK but they had a population of 5m compared to our 70m (round numbers) theh couldn't see my point.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Yes Sweden appears to fairing rather well through sensible measures. Japan is another country doing OK as well with sensible measures.
What makes you think Sweden is doing well??"
They might have been 30 weeks ago when the last post was made  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Yes Sweden appears to fairing rather well through sensible measures. Japan is another country doing OK as well with sensible measures.
What makes you think Sweden is doing well??
They might have been 30 weeks ago when the last post was made "
A long term view is needed  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
At the peak of their first wave they had a 7 day rolling average of 98 deaths on the 17th April.
They appear to have had a second wave this month when they registered 15 deaths on the 8th November which appears to be dropping now as their latest reported as 11.
Fingers crossed for them. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *D835Man
over a year ago
London |
"At the peak of their first wave they had a 7 day rolling average of 98 deaths on the 17th April.
They appear to have had a second wave this month when they registered 15 deaths on the 8th November which appears to be dropping now as their latest reported as 11.
Fingers crossed for them."
**".........They appear to have had a second wave this month...."**
-----------------------------
They don't 'appear' to have had a second wave.
Sweden is *Definitely* having a second wave just like the rest of western Europe - no difference.
A Second Wave is measured by the rise in infections; and *not* by the number of deaths. Deaths don't precede infections; deaths come *after* infections. It can take weeks before the death figures go up after a rise in infections, so a current low death figure should not necessarily be seen as a good sign.
And to show you that Sweden is indeed having a second wave, you only need to look at their daily infections:
5 September = 171
14 October = 970
28 October = 3,396
5 November = 4,746
13 November = 6,743
Due to the rise in infections (a Second Wave) the following have happened:
- The European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control has marked Sweden with an 'orange alert'
-Local lockdowns have been introduced in the cities of Uppsala and Malmo - something they were reluctant to do in the first wave, but have introduced for the first time since the start of the pandemic.
- Stricter restrictions have also been imposed in 17 of 21 regions by their Public Heath agency.
- Sweden has now been removed from the UK's quarantine-free list
Regarding the local lockdowns, Anders Tegnell Sweden's top epidemiologist said in a recent news conference : “This is the first time we are using this type of guidance and now we will see how effective we can make it.”
Dr Johan Nojd, who leads the infectious diseases department in Uppsala (Sweden), also said: - that if contact tracing shows further links between activities and infections they will not hesitate to impose even tougher measures.
And you think all these measures described above have come about just because of 11 deaths??? Certainly Not.
These tough measures have been taken because Sweden is definitely experiencing a second wave; not 'appearing' to have on as you claim.
Sweden has learnt lessons from its high death toll during the first wave ( the highest among the Nordics). They are not prepared to wait till the death toll runs into hundreds a day before they take action. They have switched from their laissez faire approach during the first wave. Now they are implementing local lockdowns and introducing tougher measures to control the virus - just like their Nordic neighbours have been doing from the get go. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"At the peak of their first wave they had a 7 day rolling average of 98 deaths on the 17th April.
They appear to have had a second wave this month when they registered 15 deaths on the 8th November which appears to be dropping now as their latest reported as 11.
Fingers crossed for them.
**".........They appear to have had a second wave this month...."**
-----------------------------
They don't 'appear' to have had a second wave.
Sweden is *Definitely* having a second wave just like the rest of western Europe - no difference.
A Second Wave is measured by the rise in infections; and *not* by the number of deaths. Deaths don't precede infections; deaths come *after* infections. It can take weeks before the death figures go up after a rise in infections, so a current low death figure should not necessarily be seen as a good sign.
And to show you that Sweden is indeed having a second wave, you only need to look at their daily infections:
5 September = 171
14 October = 970
28 October = 3,396
5 November = 4,746
13 November = 6,743
Due to the rise in infections (a Second Wave) the following have happened:
- The European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control has marked Sweden with an 'orange alert'
-Local lockdowns have been introduced in the cities of Uppsala and Malmo - something they were reluctant to do in the first wave, but have introduced for the first time since the start of the pandemic.
- Stricter restrictions have also been imposed in 17 of 21 regions by their Public Heath agency.
- Sweden has now been removed from the UK's quarantine-free list
Regarding the local lockdowns, Anders Tegnell Sweden's top epidemiologist said in a recent news conference : “This is the first time we are using this type of guidance and now we will see how effective we can make it.”
Dr Johan Nojd, who leads the infectious diseases department in Uppsala (Sweden), also said: - that if contact tracing shows further links between activities and infections they will not hesitate to impose even tougher measures.
And you think all these measures described above have come about just because of 11 deaths??? Certainly Not.
These tough measures have been taken because Sweden is definitely experiencing a second wave; not 'appearing' to have on as you claim.
Sweden has learnt lessons from its high death toll during the first wave ( the highest among the Nordics). They are not prepared to wait till the death toll runs into hundreds a day before they take action. They have switched from their laissez faire approach during the first wave. Now they are implementing local lockdowns and introducing tougher measures to control the virus - just like their Nordic neighbours have been doing from the get go."
I was quoting death numbers, but you knew that.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"At the peak of their first wave they had a 7 day rolling average of 98 deaths on the 17th April.
They appear to have had a second wave this month when they registered 15 deaths on the 8th November which appears to be dropping now as their latest reported as 11.
Fingers crossed for them.
**".........They appear to have had a second wave this month...."**
-----------------------------
They don't 'appear' to have had a second wave.
Sweden is *Definitely* having a second wave just like the rest of western Europe - no difference.
A Second Wave is measured by the rise in infections; and *not* by the number of deaths. Deaths don't precede infections; deaths come *after* infections. It can take weeks before the death figures go up after a rise in infections, so a current low death figure should not necessarily be seen as a good sign.
And to show you that Sweden is indeed having a second wave, you only need to look at their daily infections:
5 September = 171
14 October = 970
28 October = 3,396
5 November = 4,746
13 November = 6,743
Due to the rise in infections (a Second Wave) the following have happened:
- The European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control has marked Sweden with an 'orange alert'
-Local lockdowns have been introduced in the cities of Uppsala and Malmo - something they were reluctant to do in the first wave, but have introduced for the first time since the start of the pandemic.
- Stricter restrictions have also been imposed in 17 of 21 regions by their Public Heath agency.
- Sweden has now been removed from the UK's quarantine-free list
Regarding the local lockdowns, Anders Tegnell Sweden's top epidemiologist said in a recent news conference : “This is the first time we are using this type of guidance and now we will see how effective we can make it.”
Dr Johan Nojd, who leads the infectious diseases department in Uppsala (Sweden), also said: - that if contact tracing shows further links between activities and infections they will not hesitate to impose even tougher measures.
And you think all these measures described above have come about just because of 11 deaths??? Certainly Not.
These tough measures have been taken because Sweden is definitely experiencing a second wave; not 'appearing' to have on as you claim.
Sweden has learnt lessons from its high death toll during the first wave ( the highest among the Nordics). They are not prepared to wait till the death toll runs into hundreds a day before they take action. They have switched from their laissez faire approach during the first wave. Now they are implementing local lockdowns and introducing tougher measures to control the virus - just like their Nordic neighbours have been doing from the get go.
I was quoting death numbers, but you knew that.
"
Deaths are a lagging indicator.....their 7 day and 14 day rates of infection are still rising. Hospitalisations and deaths will increase too in the next 3 weeks or so |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
