 Poster: A snowHead
|
| Quote: |
As someone who rents out an upmarket holiday let.....
We usually rent out the summer weeks for £1,400 per week. Last year it got to £2,100. At the moment it is £2,800. |
At those prices, glad that you confirmed that it's not a dive ringingmaster 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| mountainaddict wrote: |
| Quote: |
As someone who rents out an upmarket holiday let.....
We usually rent out the summer weeks for £1,400 per week. Last year it got to £2,100. At the moment it is £2,800. |
At those prices, glad that you confirmed that it's not a dive ringingmaster |
Eye of the beholder... and all that jazz
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
| Quote: |
Everywhere is going to book up fast this year so book now - if you need to buy a tent to camp then get that ordered, they will sell out to
|
@Boris, Agreed. For me it’s a real quandary. I can’t imagine a year without getting away in the van. But last year, in the small window when it was allowed, the demand was so high that the busyness of my favourite sites was such that it negated the whole raison d’être of it. There was little “getting away from it” to be had. Wild camping wasn't an option, probably won’t be again this season.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Update on UK travel restrictions aimed against covid variants.
There was an informative debate on channel 4 news this evening between a rebellious backbench MP and Devi Sridhar, professor of public health at Edinbugh university. She is a VERY significant person as the scots First Minister seems to take her advice fully and enforce it strictly within Scotland. Prof Sridhar also states in public what other scientific advisors probably say to the various governments in private.
The MP was arguing that governments don't ban travel and social mixing in the hope of reducing annual flu deaths from 20000 to zero, so nor should they think they can do so for covid. Prof Sridhar said he was just having a childish tantrum and she didn't see why people should get so fussed about doing without foreign holidays. She said people would regard such a ban as a price worth paying for more social freedom internally, once covid rates are very low.
Although she emphasised the need to prevent leisure travel this summer, she didn't say anything about when or how that perceived need would ever change.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
I’ve just seen the interview. It seemed KG-M didn’t really challenge her the way he did to the MP, neither did he challenge her with the points he made about accepting a certain number of deaths (like every other infection around) or long term sustainability. She just seemed to be given a free hand to make the points she wanted to. She has consistently argued for a zero COvid policy, but interestingly has never done the same for flu, pneumonia and the like.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| Quote: |
Eye of the beholder... and all that jazz
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The CEO of IATA was on the radio yesterday talking about its IATA TravelPass App which he said should be ready by the end of March.
It's being developed and tested in conjunction with 18 major airlines and governments around the world, and provides details of all exit and entry rules for all countries, a list of certified labs providing tests and vaccinations in each country, and a mechanism to store validated test/vaccination certificates. When asked about the UK he said, yes, they'd been talking to UK officials and the discussions were "very productive".
So, my analysis of this is that by April, there will be a workable mechanism for electronic Vaccination & Test Passports (or whatever term you find acceptable) for international flights.
I suspect the focus will then be on what the rules are across different countries, rather than the mechanics of the certificates themselves. But so far, I've not come across any similar initiative as advanced (or even planned) for the Channel Tunnel and ferries. So I predict a call from non-flying travellers and freight operators for an equivalent to the IATA TravelPass App and it's supporting arrangements. I can see freight drivers in particular benefiting from a 'terrestrial' version of the TravelPass app in order to streamline trans-national journeys.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@peerless ploughman, "The MP was arguing that governments don't ban travel and social mixing in the hope of reducing annual flu deaths from 20000 to zero, so nor should they think they can do so for covid."
It's not the same. We have 100,000 deaths WITH restrictions - imagine what it would look like without them!
Imagine what flu deaths would look like without annual vaccinations.
Flu stresses the NHS in winter, but not to the extent that Covid has constantly.
414,000 people have been hospitalised in the UK with Covid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| Quote: |
We have 100,000 deaths WITH restrictions - imagine what it would look like without them!
|
That's the unknown - either 500000 as per Fergurson predictions or exactly the same, given that for all lockdowns infections peaked just before lockdown.
The original flatten the curve was never about preventing deaths - just spreading them out over a longer period
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Flue is much less infectious than COID.
Flu R0 ~ 1.5
COVID R0 ~ 4.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
I think that the IATA app, and any non IATA equivalent for road, rail and sea transport, is very interesting. However, it needs to be secure as there are already lots of fake Covid test certificates being used to try to enter the UK at present.
Moving to an online trusted source would be one way to avoid this but there would need to be 100% confidence in the information contained in the app...and it needs to be verifiable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
| Boris wrote: |
| Quote: |
We have 100,000 deaths WITH restrictions - imagine what it would look like without them!
|
That's the unknown - .... or exactly the same, given that for all lockdowns infections peaked just before lockdown.
|
Except that's cowd00, as explained here (amongst other sceptic untruths) https://fullfact.org/health/can-we-believe-lockdown-sceptics/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| peerless ploughman wrote: |
Update on UK travel restrictions aimed against covid variants.
There was an informative debate on channel 4 news this evening between a rebellious backbench MP and Devi Sridhar, professor of public health at Edinbugh university. She is a VERY significant person as the scots First Minister seems to take her advice fully and enforce it strictly within Scotland. Prof Sridhar also states in public what other scientific advisors probably say to the various governments in private.
The MP was arguing that governments don't ban travel and social mixing in the hope of reducing annual flu deaths from 20000 to zero, so nor should they think they can do so for covid. Prof Sridhar said he was just having a childish tantrum and she didn't see why people should get so fussed about doing without foreign holidays. She said people would regard such a ban as a price worth paying for more social freedom internally, once covid rates are very low.
Although she emphasised the need to prevent leisure travel this summer, she didn't say anything about when or how that perceived need would ever change. |
Sridhar is a charlatan. Look closely at her background. Student to Professor in the academic equivalent of about two weeks. The only thing she brings to anything is perhaps lots of funding.
Sturgeon uses her because she is an independence supporter or a UK hater. Not sure which notion is stronger but you have to be at least one of those to get any even a quasi-public appointment in Scotland these days. Much of her comment is basically Sturgeon good Johnson bad.
Alas your view of this is correct though, whilst she remains in a position of influence none of the Scots  s will be using their passport.
Her horse may soon be shot but she'll just latch onto a new one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| Pejoli wrote: |
| Boris wrote: |
| Quote: |
We have 100,000 deaths WITH restrictions - imagine what it would look like without them!
|
That's the unknown - .... or exactly the same, given that for all lockdowns infections peaked just before lockdown.
|
Except that's cowd00, as explained here (amongst other sceptic untruths) https://fullfact.org/health/can-we-believe-lockdown-sceptics/ |
Not as much cowd00 as assuming that anything is anything just because fullfact or any other similar organisation say it is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
@Pejoli, The Zoe app has been pretty consistent with reporting of trends -they estimate that peak of infections was around 3rd Jan. Three days before lockdown started.
How much different it would have been without I don't know - none of know - I certainly don't.
I don't think you can control a virus, from personal observation this lockdown has been nowhere near as tight as others. So whether it has made a difference, or just spread the deaths over a longer period, I don't know the answer to. There are arguments each way.
For avoidance of doubt - I'm not a covid denier or a lockdown sceptic, I actually think this lockdown could have been imposed earlier rather than messing about with Tiers. But I don't know what difference it has made overall
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| Boris wrote: |
@Pejoli, The Zoe app has been pretty consistent with reporting of trends -they estimate that peak of infections was around 3rd Jan. Three days before lockdown started.
How much different it would have been without I don't know - none of know - I certainly don't.
I don't think you can control a virus, from personal observation this lockdown has been nowhere near as tight as others. So whether it has made a difference, or just spread the deaths over a longer period, I don't know the answer to. There are arguments each way.
For avoidance of doubt - I'm not a covid denier or a lockdown sceptic, I actually think this lockdown could have been imposed earlier rather than messing about with Tiers. But I don't know what difference it has made overall |
Those are good points, though I think Zoe is probably over-representing the public minded people who bother to have the app and record the info in the first place - and I would suggest exactly the sort of people who would be taking sensible precautions ahead of any official action requiring them to do so (certainly what we did).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| Boris wrote: |
| The Zoe app has been pretty consistent with reporting of trends -they estimate that peak of infections was around 3rd Jan. Three days before lockdown started. |
Lockdown is not a binary state, with either no restrictions or tight lockdown with nothing in between. All of the country was in various stages of tiered restrictions before the announcement of Lockdown 3, for us in London there was virtually no difference between that lockdown and what came before it. Once the flexibility for Christmas was cancelled we were pretty much in lockdown already, not that we had done much in the first part of December. I think this was pretty much the same for Lockdown 1, with significant changes to social contact in the week or two before the government announced a formal lockdown. Less footfall in shops, far less use of public transport, much less traffic on the roads, significantly more people working from home.
The "lockdown doesn't work" argument seems to me to be one of the dumber things said during the pandemic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
The "lockdown doesn't work because we had to have a second and a third lockdown" argument always amuses me. Like saying "putting petrol in my car does not work because I have to fill it again" .
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
@ringingmaster, Not heard that not before, will have to steal it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
@ringingmaster, Very good!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| dode wrote: |
| Quote: |
Everywhere is going to book up fast this year so book now - if you need to buy a tent to camp then get that ordered, they will sell out to
|
@Boris, Agreed. For me it’s a real quandary. I can’t imagine a year without getting away in the van. But last year, in the small window when it was allowed, the demand was so high that the busyness of my favourite sites was such that it negated the whole raison d’être of it. There was little “getting away from it” to be had. Wild camping wasn't an option, probably won’t be again this season. |
To be honest, the last thing I want to do in the summer is holiday in the UK with loads of other Brits in a crowded "beauty spot" or "tourist destination" and spend a fortune doing so.
This isn't because I don't like going holiday in the UK or some of the fantistic destinations we have but I don't see the point of visiting them when everyone else is there!
If going abroad is impractical or impossible but UK restrictions are eased then the next best option for me is to stay in London on holiday! Should be a great time to visit all the attractions here since it should be empty with no international visitors and everyone else going to Cornwall and the Lakes etc. Museums empty, tables in any restaurant you fancy and aside from eating out as desired, it would be free...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| DrNo wrote: |
| If going abroad is impractical or impossible but UK restrictions are eased then the next best option for me is to stay in London on holiday! Should be a great time to visit all the attractions here since it should be empty with no international visitors and everyone else going to Cornwall and the Lakes etc. Museums empty, tables in any restaurant you fancy and aside from eating out as desired, it would be free... |
I was surprised how 'unfrustrating' staying at home was last summer. The weather was kind, which made a huge difference, and we had a much more leisurely few weeks than we'd have with a typical summer holiday, but it was nice to do a few day trips, spend some time with family. I'd cope with that again this summer if I had to, but the following year would need to be a return to a normal holiday pattern for us.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On the point about other deaths / other threats to the NHS, I don't dispute that covid is worse than flu.
But the hardline anti-travel authorities/advisors are not arguing for getting covid down to the level of threat posed by flu. Instead, they want zero covid. They don't always use that exact term. They usually prefer to say that UK should do the same as New Zealand.
The implication is ongoing quarantine so strict as to amount to a ban on most international holidays, including ski trips shorter than a couple of months. For several years at least. Maybe for as long as there is any significant level of covid anywhere in the world. Which could be forever, as in some countries it wont be practicable to vaccinate the population fully against all covid variants.
Prof Sridhar made it quite clear, she doesn't see why people should fuss about foreign holidays.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| Boris wrote: |
| Quote: |
We have 100,000 deaths WITH restrictions - imagine what it would look like without them!
|
That's the unknown - either 500000 as per Fergurson predictions or exactly the same, given that for all lockdowns infections peaked just before lockdown.
The original flatten the curve was never about preventing deaths - just spreading them out over a longer period |
Wrong the flatten of the curve has reduced the number of deaths.
There is very good evidence that without medical intervention the death rate jumps dramatically. If you don't flatten the curve then the health facilities run out of capacity and boom. The NHS this year has come within a whisker of running out of capacity, and has had to shuffle patients about the country in order to avoid that. If all those ten's of thousands of people over the last 12 months that have had just oxygen like de Pfeffel, had presented with in short period because there is no point in a lockdown, almost all would be dead.
So to given an idea what that would mean let's look at the figures. In the UK 121,674 people have died with COVID-19 on the death certificate. There have been 414,258 people admitted to hospital with COVID-19. If you don't need oxygen then you are not going to get hospitalised. Even if you did there are an unrecorded number of people who where given oxygen by paramedics for several hours (I know of more than one case personally) who would also likely have died without that treatment which would have been unavailable for most without a lockdown.
Let's say 95% of those would die if we had not flattened the curve (probably an underestimate), so that would have been at least 515,000 deaths. However it would have been worse than that because no lockdown would have lead to many more people getting infected. All of a sudden that 500,000 from Prof. Fergurson is looking a very accurate prediction of what would have happened without a lockdown (and remember it was a prediction of what would happen without a lockdown).
Add into the mix a complete breakdown of funeral arrangements and mass graves and it is looking very unpleasant. With millions of people sick at the same time breakdown in the food supply chain and provision of critical services would have been a very distinct possibility.
Finally if with people dropping like flies you think the rest of us would have carried on like normal going to the pub etc. you are on the crack pipe. People would have stopped doing many of the things banned in the lockdown anyway so the actual economic effect of locking down is less than the lockdown sceptics are arguing as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@jabuzzard, Absolute nonsense, no one knows as it didn't play out that way all we know is it's been a poo-poo show from start to, I would say finish but it's never going to.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| peerless ploughman wrote: |
The implication is ongoing quarantine so strict as to amount to a ban on most international holidays, including ski trips shorter than a couple of months. For several years at least. Maybe for as long as there is any significant level of covid anywhere in the world. Which could be forever, as in some countries it wont be practicable to vaccinate the population fully against all covid variants. |
Sadly I don't think this is impossible.
I did wonder if this is why Handoncock risked such opprobrium with his 10 year sentence plan the other day. The 'red list' may become countries with poor vaccine performance as much as if not more than those with outbreaks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
[quote="Boris"]
| Quote: |
| The original flatten the curve was never about preventing deaths - just spreading them out over a longer period |
Flattening the curve over a longer period has a big advantage. It reduced the number of initial deaths, allowing the NHS time to find effective treatments for later cases.
It also reduced the number of deaths until the vaccine could be rolled out. This will prevent a large number of people from even joining the curve.
How many thousands would have died in the first few month, who survived because the curve was flattened?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Boris wrote: |
| ... for all lockdowns infections peaked just before lockdown. |
Can't see where you got that from. The current lockdown started 4th Jan and measured cases peaked 9/10 Jan. Looks like cause and effect given the 3-5 day incubation period plus delays in getting a test.
The November lockdown didn't peak until 15 Nov, though in that point the curve of case numbers was distorted by quite a lot of the country having fairly severe restrictions applied earlier (the one that made the greatest effect was closing hospitality).
The original lockdown is more difficult to assess, given how poor testing was at that point (it should have been representative if not accurate in November and January). But deaths peaked 13/14 April corresponding to a 3 week lag after lockdown which is pretty much what the doctors say the timecourse is in those severely affected cases.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| Quote: |
Prof Sridhar made it quite clear, she doesn't see why people should fuss about foreign holidays.
|
If forfeiting foreign holidays is what's required to return to some sort of normal life at home then it's hard to disagree
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| James77 wrote: |
| @jabuzzard, Absolute nonsense, no one knows as it didn't play out that way all we know is it's been a poo-poo show from start to, I would say finish but it's never going to. |
Which bit is absolute nonsense? Is it absolute nonsense that if you don't get proper medical treatment when severely ill with COVID-19 the death rate is much much higher? Is it absolute nonsense that with a much higher R number than the flu COVID-19 would result in many many many more people being ill at the same time?
If you don't accept those two realities than it is impossible to have a rational argument based in facts. However for people who work in facts and logical reasoning, the inevitable consequence of those two facts is that if you don't have a lock down you would end up will millions of people ill at the same time, the health services would be overrun and people who would have survived had they just been given oxygen (aka just about everyone admitted to hospital with COVID-19) would die. This would be spread over a short time period so not only would the health services be overwhelmed but so would the funeral services so it's mass graves. These are the logical outcome of the facts about the disease if you don't have a lockdown. You can do more detailed modelling if you want that brings in hospital capacity and other things, but basically no lockdown would have seen a collapse of the health service, mass burials and at least half a million dead probably many more.
What you are arguing is because one didn't drop the apple we don't know that it would have fallen to the floor. Most people don't have to drop the apple to know that it would fall.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
The "You can't know how the alternatives would have panned-out" philosophy has a couple of major flaws.
First, it's logical end-point is never to review outcomes and 'learn lessons' - on the basis that you can't know if the downsides would have been avoided with another approach.
Second, we have modern examples of other epidemics and historical examples of earlier epidemics - Covid isn't any sort of 'surprise', other than in the fine detail of how it's progressed. Everything has progressed exactly as you'd expect, given previous epidemics like Ebola, SARS, Swine 'Flu, Spanish 'Flu and many others. So we can know how other approaches would have turned out, because we have plenty of examples to look at.
I do appreciate that the economic consequences of the Pandemic have been devastating for many people. Or at best, highly stressful and costly. But that would have been the case whichever countermeasure strategy was taken. There is no alternative, parallel universe in chich we could have 'isolated the vulnerable and let everyone else carry on as normal' - it was never an option. Nor where we can lift all restrictions as soon as the 20% of the population over 65 is vaccinated (because herd immunity needs 1. about 75% vaccinated and 2. low levels of infection being maintained). And so on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
While I was guilty of contributing to this thread drift, there are plenty of threads running elsewhere on benefits or otherwise of lockdown. Might be sensible to return here to whether the season is likely to happen?
Almost certainly not is my reluctant conclusion
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
Reflecting on it, no, it doesn't seem likely, because you'll have to satisfy a pretty long list of requirements:
1. Had the 1st and 2nd Vaccination doses
2. Able to afford the time/money for any tests
3. The UK Illegality for non-essential travel will need to be lifted
4. The Destination will need to be open to foreigners.
5. Destination quarantine will need to be of acceptable duration (or waived for those Certified)
6. Your travel insurance will need to be valid, if you can get it at all
7. An international Test/Vaccination Passport scheme will need to be in place (a la IATA's TravelPass)
8. You'll need to be able to handle being stranded if the rules change at short notice
9. You're OK with any returning quarantine imposed by the UK (or the UK waives for those Certified).
I think that [1] is going to be the big issue, because even if you personally don't care about getting covid, both your destination country and your insurer are going to insist you are fully vaccinated. And with 12 weeks before the 2nd dose, there will be very few people who are double-dosed.
So I suppose a few people who have already been double-dosed, or who are soon to be, may find that it unlocks all the other conditions as well. In which case I imagine the main dependency is on individual countries putting quarantine aside for those fully-vaccinated and with tests. I suspect that for leisure travel, being fully vaccinated (2x doses) is going to be a very easy rule to apply. It's simple, and certifiable, and many people are going to satisfy it by the summer. But not by the end of the ski season.
It's easy to forget that just because TOs are happy to take your money and book you now for a summer holiday, this doesn't mean that governments are going to let you in. Not without you being fully vaccinated, which is probably the easiest and safest rule for them to apply. For many countries, hotel quarantining can't possibly be scaled-up to handle summer levels of foreign tourists and citizens returning from holiday. So the only option is to insist on full vaccination.
But by next season, I'd say the odds are that while covid won't have gone away, and we won't be 'back to normal', vaccination and certification will be well-enough established for people to be able to travel without quarantine and to get full travel insurance cover. But people will need to accept that without taking up the offer of vaccination, they are unlikely to be able to travel abroad for leisure. Which I hope will convince younger people that it's definitely worth having the vaccine, even if the odds of serious illness without it is low for them. And that while vaccine sceptics may have reservations, they'll concede to being vaccinated because they have no alternative if they want to go abroad, just like those covid sceptics I know who, perversely, have no qualms about taking the Yellow Fever vaccine for travel to Africa.
Last edited by Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see? on Fri 12-02-21 16:25; edited 8 times in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| Boris wrote: |
While I was guilty of contributing to this thread drift, there are plenty of threads running elsewhere on benefits or otherwise of lockdown. Might be sensible to return here to whether the season is likely to happen?
Almost certainly not is my reluctant conclusion |
Yes, I agree, perhaps verging on definitely not. Right now I'd be grateful for some hope for next season.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| jabuzzard wrote: |
| James77 wrote: |
| @jabuzzard, Absolute nonsense, no one knows as it didn't play out that way all we know is it's been a poo-poo show from start to, I would say finish but it's never going to. |
Which bit is absolute nonsense? Is it absolute nonsense that if you don't get proper medical treatment when severely ill with COVID-19 the death rate is much much higher? Is it absolute nonsense that with a much higher R number than the flu COVID-19 would result in many many many more people being ill at the same time?
If you don't accept those two realities than it is impossible to have a rational argument based in facts. However for people who work in facts and logical reasoning, the inevitable consequence of those two facts is that if you don't have a lock down you would end up will millions of people ill at the same time, the health services would be overrun and people who would have survived had they just been given oxygen (aka just about everyone admitted to hospital with COVID-19) would die. This would be spread over a short time period so not only would the health services be overwhelmed but so would the funeral services so it's mass graves. These are the logical outcome of the facts about the disease if you don't have a lockdown. You can do more detailed modelling if you want that brings in hospital capacity and other things, but basically no lockdown would have seen a collapse of the health service, mass burials and at least half a million dead probably many more.
What you are arguing is because one didn't drop the apple we don't know that it would have fallen to the floor. Most people don't have to drop the apple to know that it would fall. |
You have no idea...
Clearly millions of Swedish citizens are strewn across the streets of Stockholm, Gothenburg, Orebro and Uppsalla, dead and left for all to see, while the terminally ill 30yrs old vixens are staggering around begging for food...
If you have no idea about numbers, don't start a debate which involves numbers...
Or go back and hide in the cellar, because COVID... 
same in
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
@cheburator,
The Nordic countries have the massive advantage of being very sparsely populated that means they will always do better with a disease that hits crowded cities badly.
See if you can spot the difference in deaths per million of population:
Norway: 109
Finland: 128
Denmark: 393
Sweden: 1,226
In December "Sweden’s Nordic neighbours Finland and Norway offering emergency medical assistance as Stockholm’s hospitals have been overwhelmed, infections and deaths have spiked dramatically upward, and the King of Sweden has made an unprecedented criticism of the government’s bungled strategy."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At the risk of adding fuel to the fire, I would say that just because countries share a border does not mean they should be directly compared. Portugal v Spain? Belgium v Germany? Germany v Denmark? Italy v Austria? etc.
Like us, Sweden had high numbers of skiers in the Alps during February. Norway and Finland did not. Hence, they had far more Covid entering their country early last year, before the other Sandis closed their borders. Malmo had far lower levels of Covid than Stockholm-probably because their half term break was a week before Stockholm and the rest of most of the EU countries.
From the radio silence about Sweden this year, I would imagine things have calmed down quite a lot now. We only hear it mentioned when numbers are going up, not when they are going down.
Finally, Sweden is actually just as urbanised as the UK-although the household structures tend to be different. Most of it if full of trees and little else.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sweden has a better spread of wealth than the UK. Deaths in the UK unfortunately are higher in area of deprivation; multi generational households; and BAME communities. And the levels of obesity are lower with the associated ill-health co-morbidities.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| LaForet wrote: |
| There is no alternative, parallel universe in chich we could have 'isolated the vulnerable and let everyone else carry on as normal' - it was never an option. |
It was the favoured and planned response for all nations until the completely novel method of total Lockdowns somehow became in vogue. Here is our plan, which we immediately tore up and leapt off the lockdown cliff instead.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/213717/dh_131040.pdf
https://www.theguardian.com/world/ng-interactive/2020/feb/27/what-are-the-uks-plans-for-dealing-with-a-pandemic-virus
This was anticipating several hundred thousand deaths. No lockdown, no cancellation of large events, no closing of schools, etc.
We seem to forget that Lockdowns did not exist as a policy concept before all this started. In fact, they were explicitly to be avoided. What you think of as a ridiculous notion was what the entire world was planning to do originally, and what you and everyone else would have nodded and agreed with 18 months ago if the topic came up. But within weeks everyone seemed to "know" that lockdowns were, oh yes, absolutely the correct approach. Yes, yes obviously. I do wonder where people download their opinions from.
Commentary:
https://lockdownsceptics.org/2021/01/22/latest-news-262/#what-happened-to-plan-a
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@iopjkl, herd (pun.) you were crossing lockdowns to access your skiing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
