Pandemic started in a lab:

[probinson]

I'd expect them to still be experiencing an excess death rate due to Covid in 2023. The pandemic isn't over.
Sweden killed a lot of their vulnerable in 2020. So those ones aren't alive anymore to be statistics in 2023.
Sweden have had 1,540 Covid deaths so far in the 4 months of 2023.
Australia have had 1,748 Covid deaths so far in the 4 months of 2023.

Sweden's population is 10.4 million, Australia's is 25.7 million, so Australia is 2.47 times bigger than Sweden.
If we were to multiply Sweden's Covid death tally by 2.47 we would get 3,805. So proportionately speaking Sweden in 2023 is fairing way, way worse than Australia even though Sweden has already killed off a fair chuck of their elderly or vulnerable plus others.

In total Sweden has had 23,913 Covid deaths where Australia has had 19,936 Covid deaths.
Remember that Australia has 2.47 times the population as Sweden. So at the death rate Sweden experienced, you'd expect Australia to have 23,913x2.47 = 59,065 but instead Australia have had only 19,936.

In terms of this pandemic Sweden are letting their people die at massive rates. It is very sad, but also very sad that people like yourself are running across the internet spreading misinformation and trying to convince people that Sweden's do nothing approach is the poster child.

This whole post (indeed, your entire position) is reliant on a foolishly myopic focus on COVID to the exclusion of all other causes of death.

The fact of the matter is, Sweden is experiencing lower excess deaths than almost anywhere in the world. The only way you "win" this argument is by focusing on COVID deaths and ignoring escalating deaths in younger people from all other causes. That's what public health experts did, and now they're paying the price. And sadly, there are people like you spreading misinformation in an attempt to justify the foolish mitigation measures that have resulted in record all-cause death numbers in the countries that implemented them.

 

[rambot]

I see a lot of talk about "excess death rates".
I'm not necessarily excited to get into the conversation but, given you can choose any countries to compare on this website, perhaps this can be helpful for the discussion:

Excess mortality during the Coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19)

 

[probinson]

I see a lot of talk about "excess death rates".
I'm not necessarily excited to get into the conversation but, given you can choose any countries to compare on this website, perhaps this can be helpful for the discussion:

Excess mortality during the Coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19)

Thanks for the link. I often reference charts from Our World in Data.

I'd also highly recommend this site, which is good for comparing countries and the various ways morality is tracked.

Watching Worldwide Mortality Data For You - Mortality Watch

We aggregate mortality data from muliple sources to generate daily updated mortality charts. Select from 120 countries and many different chart types.

www.mortality.watch

 

[stevil]

This whole post (indeed, your entire position) is reliant on a foolishly myopic focus on COVID to the exclusion of all other causes of death.

The fact of the matter is, Sweden is experiencing lower excess deaths than almost anywhere in the world. The only way you "win" this argument is by focusing on COVID deaths and ignoring escalating deaths in younger people from all other causes. That's what public health experts did, and now they're paying the price. And sadly, there are people like you spreading misinformation in an attempt to justify the foolish mitigation measures that have resulted in record all-cause death numbers in the countries that implemented them.

We are talking about the Covid pandemic, and the use of vaccines and masks and social distancing and lockdowns to save lives during the pandemic.

We could have a conversation about Sweden's falling rate of deaths since 2000 but that would be a different topic entirely.

If you think that somehow lockdowns or mask wearing in the past is now causing deaths then you would need to establish how we recognise a death as being a consequence of past lockdowns or mask wearing and then how we can go to the data to see if there is any truth to this.

Thus far, in the countries I have investigated e.g. NZ, Finland, Norway and Denmark there is an extremely high correlation between the excess deaths experienced in 2022 and the deaths attributed to Covid, so high in fact that I would deem your claim to be utter nonsense.

I am open to data, but you have not presented anything relevant. Lately you have now pointed to Australia and UK, but without providing any details on what type of deaths you think are relevant and how they might be tied to lockdowns and mask wearing from prior to 2022.

 

[probinson]

We are talking about the Covid pandemic, and the use of vaccines and masks and social distancing and lockdowns to save lives during the pandemic.

No, that's what you're talking about. I am talking about all-cause deaths, because in public health, the goal ought to be to save lives from ALL causes and not just a singular disease. "Saving lives" from one cause while losing them to other causes isn't "saving lives" at all.

If you think that somehow lockdowns or mask wearing in the past is now causing deaths then you would need to establish how we recognise a death as being a consequence of past lockdowns or mask wearing and then how we can go to the data to see if there is any truth to this.

How about increases in mental health issues. Suicides. Deaths from loneliness in isolation. Missed diagnoses from other diseases because people were too afraid to go to the doctor and/or hospital.

Thus far, in the countries I have investigated e.g. NZ, Finland, Norway and Denmark there is an extremely high correlation between the excess deaths experienced in 2022 and the deaths attributed to Covid, so high in fact that I would deem your claim to be utter nonsense.

In Australia, which you said you looked at in another post but is now missing from your list, the article talks about increasing mortality rates amongst younger people. The UK is seeing the same thing. This is concerning. You can call it "utter nonsense" if you like, but it is the reality nonetheless.

I am open to data,

I do not believe you are.

but you have not presented anything relevant. Lately you have now pointed to Australia and UK, but without providing any details on what type of deaths you think are relevant and how they might be tied to lockdowns and mask wearing from prior to 2022.

To be clear, I don't think wearing masks is directly attributable to deaths (although there is a new study out suggesting that there is a correlation between increased mask wearing and increased stillbirths Face masks may raise risk of stillbirths, study warns). However, masking served as a driver of fear to discourage people from seeking medical attention when they needed it. Lockdowns, on the other hand, have had dire consequences, particularly in third-world countries. Consider those dying of hunger as a result of lockdowns.

After months of lockdown, countries around the world are starting to reopen. And yet still, the death toll from COVID-19 keeps rising. By the end of June, a little over 500,000 people had succumbed to the disease.​

​

But that could be a drop in the ocean compared to the humanitarian fallout. “We’ve seen 400,000 die from COVID-19,” David Beasley, the Executive Director of the World Food Programme, warned in June. “We could see 300,000 die a day, for several months, if we don’t handle this right.”​

​

COVID-related hunger could kill more people than the virus | UN Global Compact

unglobalcompact.org

​

​

With regards to masking, it is nothing short of hypocritical that large cities like New York and San Francisco have gone to great lengths to ban plastic straws and bags in an ostensible effort to cut back on pollution, while simultaneously encouraging their citizens to wear masks everywhere they went for years on end, resulting in 1.6 BILLION disposable masks in our oceans in 2020 alone that will take 450 YEARS to biodegrade. I can only imagine how many masks are in the ocean now.

As I've said repeatedly, there are opportunity costs to everything. Lockdowns did not "save lives". It traded them to other causes.

 

[stevil]

With regards to masking, it is nothing short of hypocritical that large cities like New York and San Francisco have gone to great lengths to ban plastic straws and bags in an ostensible effort to cut back on pollution, while simultaneously encouraging their citizens to wear masks everywhere they went for years on end, resulting in 1.6 BILLION disposable masks in our oceans in 2020 alone that will take 450 YEARS to biodegrade. I can only imagine how many masks are in the ocean now.

It's certainly weird trying to work out how someone can think like the above.
Of course it is important to try to reduce plastic as it is a pollutant on the earth.
Of course it is important to try to save human lives, as us humans tend to value human life.

If we need masks to save lives but recognise that the cost of the masks is more pollutants, most reasonable people would say, well that cost is unfortunate but we need the masks, so lets do it.

Reasonable people wouldn't then say, well since we are polluting the earth with masks, lets not bother with trying to reduce plastic straws and plastic bags.

It is obvious to most people that during a global pandemic we should use and promote masks and also continue with our efforts to remove plastic straws and plastic bags.
I find your "point" or criticism above really really bizzare.

 

[KCfromNC]

When one is uncertain about something, they might use the word "may".

Yes, but the post you're responding to was showing that "they" used it but the post removed it when retelling the story.
And given this post's inability to explain why, that omission is starting to look intentional. Something of a pattern, it seems.

 

[KCfromNC]

here were other vaccines mentioned. You focused on the flu vaccine.

I gave a single example showing your previous post was wrong. Others posted additional examples showing how wrong it was, there was no need for me to pile on with more ... which would then just be ignored in favor of personal attacks such as the ones below.

No need to do that. You're doing a fine job all on your own without my help.

Ah yes, when the fact turn against one's case, start posting made up insults about the people pointing out the facts.

 

[KCfromNC]

I'm not sure data showing your previous posts to be misleading is supposed to be funny.

Here is the same chart with the data from 2019 shown.

View attachment 330393

Nothing is being "hidden". As you can see, New Zealand has not had a lower ASMR than Sweden since before the beginning of the pandemic.

It also shows a large bump in deaths in 2020 in Sweden which weren't seen in countries which took a different approach towards mitigating the pandemic.

Instead of pretending like I have something to hide, perhaps try engaging in the discussion in earnest.

Hey look, attempting to call me dishonest for pointing out a graph that was crafted to hide a large jump in pandemic deaths in Sweden compared to other countries.

That's pretty good evidence that there's no legitimate explanation for the decision to try and hide that data point.

 

[KCfromNC]

So we're supposed to believe that vaccines result in a 10x lower chance of death (a completely fabricated statistic oft repeated throughout this thread), but excess death numbers are up after the population has achieved >90% vaccination, and that is why excess deaths are higher than we've seen since WWII?

Personally, I don't really care what you believe. The data shows what it does regardless of who tries to bury their head in the sand about the facts.

Have you ever heard of survivor bias? Here's a great 7-minute video that shows how studies showing a much lower mortality rate for the vaccinated are perhaps nothing more than a statistical illusion.

I wish I were someone who felt that a single youtube video which agreed with what I wished were true made actual scientific research disappear. It would make believing whatever I wanted so much easier.

 

[KCfromNC]

This whole post (indeed, your entire position) is reliant on a foolishly myopic focus on COVID to the exclusion of all other causes of death.

Wow, focusing on covid deaths in a thread about the pandemic. That's unconscionable.
Or bringing it up is just an attempt to imply that other posters are doing something dishonest without actually having to go through the work of making up a concrete personal attack.

The fact of the matter is, Sweden is experiencing lower excess deaths than almost anywhere in the world.

I can't help but notice the switch from death rates to deaths after the post which patiently explained that Australia is more populous that Sweden. I guess that's progress?

The only way you "win" this argument is by focusing on COVID deaths and ignoring escalating deaths in younger people from all other causes.

Remind us again : how is talking about the facts surrounding covid deaths in a thread about the pandemic somehow a losing strategy?

 

[KCfromNC]

It's certainly weird trying to work out how someone can think like the above.

Not that hard - there's a certain political party in the US which is mainly focused on "owning" the other side. That typically includes knee jerk contrarianism to anything the other side proposes, whether it is reducing the use of plastics or reasonable responses to a deadly global pandemic. The reaction comes first, the rationalizations for the feelings come second.

I mean, I guess there's some relationship, in the sense that pandemic mitigation measures and environmental fixes both cost big companies money. But that's typically hidden from the consumers of the messaging.

Anyway, sometimes that rationalization short circuits and you see the cracks in the approach - for example here, the data showing a clear jump in death rates due to their approach to the pandemic, so quick, change the subject to another talking point to quiet the cognitive dissonance. When that's another vaguely pandemic related talking point it's harder to spot, but sometimes the process breaks down and we get complaints about straws or gay penguins or the type of mustard a president used or some other nonsense conservative talking point.

It's why we rarely see posts like "current vaccines are not worth the risk, so let's try to find reasonable ways to mitigate the disease such as using masks, limiting contact when possible while we figure out safer ones". It's all just "own the libs" at the core rather than some coherent attempt at solving problems. I mean, it's why we have lots of investigations into some random guy's laptop rather than a comprehensive fiscal policy to address inflation.

 

[probinson]

It's certainly weird trying to work out how someone can think like the above.

Not sure why. Probably because you are still under the delusion that masking is efficacious to reducing viral spread.

Of course it is important to try to reduce plastic as it is a pollutant on the earth.

Indeed.

Of course it is important to try to save human lives, as us humans tend to value human life.

Masks don't save human lives. Apparently you've not gotten the memo.

Just yesterday, Fauci said in an interview in the New York Times that masking at the population level "maybe" was 10% effective. That's a whole lot of plastic waste for such a marginal benefit.

If we need masks to save lives

We don't. Wearing a lucky charm around your neck would be just as effective.

but recognise that the cost of the masks is more pollutants, most reasonable people would say, well that cost is unfortunate but we need the masks, so lets do it.

Interesting. It does seem you understand opportunity costs after all when it fits in your narrative. I would strongly disagree that dumping BILLIONS of masks in the ocean is a worthwhile tradeoff for reducing viral spread by "maybe" 10%.

Reasonable people wouldn't then say, well since we are polluting the earth with masks, lets not bother with trying to reduce plastic straws and plastic bags.

"Reasonable people" would realize that masks don't stop viral transmission and would stop polluting the oceans with BILLIONS of useless masks.

It is obvious to most people that during a global pandemic we should use and promote masks

It is not, and we should not. Masking was a visible form of virtue signaling that did nothing except create tens of thousands of tons of plastic waste in the ocean. There isn't even a correlation between masking and reduced cases, much less any causal inference.

and also continue with our efforts to remove plastic straws and plastic bags.
I find your "point" or criticism above really really bizzare.

I find most of what you say really bizarre, so at least we have that in common.

 

[probinson]

The data shows what it does regardless of who tries to bury their head in the sand about the facts.

Oh, the irony.

 

[probinson]

Wow, focusing on covid deaths in a thread about the pandemic. That's unconscionable.

Don't you think it's important to consider opportunity costs? If deaths occur as a result of mitigation measures (and they did), aren't those just as important as people who died from COVID?

Or bringing it up is just an attempt to imply that other posters are doing something dishonest

I'm not "implying" anything. I'm saying that in order to make many of these arguments, you have to ignore all-cause death rates.

It would be nice if you actually engaged in the discussion instead of constantly casting aspersions, which is seemingly the only way you know how to discuss anything.

 

[probinson]

Not that hard - there's a certain political party in the US which is mainly focused on "owning" the other side.

Here you go politicizing the discussion again.

That typically includes knee jerk contrarianism to anything the other side proposes, whether it is reducing the use of plastics or reasonable responses to a deadly global pandemic. The reaction comes first, the rationalizations for the feelings come second.

Your babbling attempts at psychoanalyses are always pure comedy gold.

 

[stevil]

It is not, and we should not. Masking was a visible form of virtue signaling that did nothing except create tens of thousands of tons of plastic waste in the ocean. There isn't even a correlation between masking and reduced cases, much less any causal inference.

I don't watch Tucker on Fox "News" so I didn't get that memo. Instead I got the CDC and WHO guidelines and the USA and NZ taskforce guidelines.

 

[probinson]

I wish I were someone who felt that a single youtube video which agreed with what I wished were true made actual scientific research disappear. It would make believing whatever I wanted so much easier.

I noticed how you didn't address the salient point about the problem of survivor bias in the video and how it can artificially increase the apparent efficacy of the vaccine. I guess it's just easier to make flippant, snarky comments than it is to have rational, objective discussions.

 

[probinson]

I don't watch Tucker on Fox "News"

Neither do I.

so I didn't get that memo.

Cochrane Review on masking:

Wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of influenza‐like illness (ILI)/COVID‐19 like illness compared to not wearing masks (risk ratio (RR) 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84 to 1.09; 9 trials, 276,917 participants; moderate‐certainty evidence. Wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of laboratory‐confirmed influenza/SARS‐CoV‐2 compared to not wearing masks (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.42; 6 trials, 13,919 participants; moderate‐certainty evidence).​

​

...​

​

The use of a N95/P2 respirators compared to medical/surgical masks probably makes little or no difference for the objective and more precise outcome of laboratory‐confirmed influenza infection (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.34; 5 trials, 8407 participants; moderate‐certainty evidence). Restricting pooling to healthcare workers made no difference to the overall findings.​

​

https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD006207.pub6/full?s=08

​

​

Dr. Fauci in the New York Times interview yesterday:

"From a broad public-health standpoint, at the population level, masks work at the margins — maybe 10 percent."​

​

Dr. Fauci Looks Back: ‘Something Clearly Went Wrong’ (Published 2023)

In his most extensive interview yet, Anthony Fauci wrestles with the hard lessons of the pandemic — and the decisions that will define his legacy.

www.nytimes.com

​

​

I'm not sure why you're so determined to continue to politicize this. Even the much lionized Fauci admits that masks MIGHT have only made a 10% difference. Maybe.

Instead I got the CDD and WHO guidelines and the USA and NZ taskforce guidelines.

You do know that the CDC and the WHO didn't even agree on masking guidance, right? At no point did the WHO recommend masking children while the CDC recommended mask mandates for two-year olds in the US, and some of those child-masking mandates are STILL enforced at various schools.

So I'm not sure saying that you follow these agency's guidelines, which don't even agree with each other and are conflicting in some cases, is the flex you think it is.

 

[stevil]

Not that hard - there's a certain political party in the US which is mainly focused on "owning" the other side. That typically includes knee jerk contrarianism to anything the other side proposes, whether it is reducing the use of plastics or reasonable responses to a deadly global pandemic. The reaction comes first, the rationalizations for the feelings come second.

I mean, I guess there's some relationship, in the sense that pandemic mitigation measures and environmental fixes both cost big companies money. But that's typically hidden from the consumers of the messaging.

Anyway, sometimes that rationalization short circuits and you see the cracks in the approach - for example here, the data showing a clear jump in death rates due to their approach to the pandemic, so quick, change the subject to another talking point to quiet the cognitive dissonance. When that's another vaguely pandemic related talking point it's harder to spot, but sometimes the process breaks down and we get complaints about straws or gay penguins or the type of mustard a president used or some other nonsense conservative talking point.

It's why we rarely see posts like "current vaccines are not worth the risk, so let's try to find reasonable ways to mitigate the disease such as using masks, limiting contact when possible while we figure out safer ones". It's all just "own the libs" at the core rather than some coherent attempt at solving problems. I mean, it's why we have lots of investigations into some random guy's laptop rather than a comprehensive fiscal policy to address inflation.

Yes, I see that on Fox News. All the time they are generalising about "the left", "the socialists" "The radical left". They are not often specific. And I see it with some Republican politicians, obviously MTG, and Boebert and DeSantis with his political theatre antics rather than real policies that matter.
There is a huge difference between the media and the politicians on left (and centre) and the right in USA it seems. The right try to paint things that are neutral as being the left, such as most mainstream media outlets. But those that they try to paint, they don't generalise about the right like Fox news does. When they present the news they are very specific, and factual. e.g. they report that the FBI is investigating the Trump campaign for corroborating in the 2016 election, or the report that Donald Trump Jr had a secret meeting in Trump tower with Russians to discuss dirt on Clinton, the don't say "the right", they are specific about specific people and events.

But what I struggle with is to see how common people in mass in USA go along with this. It's so obvious that Fox News is totally corrupt. Having Hannity up on stage at a Trump rally, speaking even, to encourage his fans, rather than in the press box reporting on the news. Fox News opinion hosts complaining night after night about vaccine mandates all the while themselves, their families being vaccinated and the Fox News workplace requiring everyone to be vaccinated,.
And then how the common people in mass in USA think Trump is fighting for them against the elites, even when he lets the Jan 6 insurrectionist plebs rot in jail, but pardons his elite wealthy friends e.g. Bannon from stealling from the Build a wall fund which was donations by the plebs, pardons Roger Stone for his involvement in Jan 6, pardons his son's father in law, pardon's Piro's father. Rushes around pardoning elites and letting the plebs that fight for him ROT in jail.
But I also struggle with the common people who supposedly are prolife, fighting tooth and nail against vaccines, masks, social distancing during a deadly global pandemic, fighting to say the Sweden do nothing approach was terrific, when clearly it led to at least 10,000 more dead people than otherwise would have been the case.