Have We Been Had? (Addendum)

A reader pointed me to a Times of Israel article (linked below) which, to some, appears to refute the favorable results of Sweden’s non-lockdown approach. I am thankful to the reader for the tip because the article helps illustrate some of the points made in earlier posts on quarantine as well as last week’s post. Specifically, the article illustrates the power of what we used to call “peer pressure” and, also, the rush to create amnesia about the projections which convinced most governments to shut down.

In the second of my series of posts on “The Bible and Quarantine” (Part 2) I noted how Sweden’s approach has been opposed by every major country in the West, not to say the world. Even President Trump, not known for jumping on bandwagons, leapt onto this one with a whoop and a holler, denouncing Sweden’s non-lockdown (link below).

“Sweden has been criticized, attacked, mocked, and despised…. Two weeks ago a group of 22 ‘scientists’ attacked the officials of Sweden’s department of health, demanding the Swedish government discard the directives of that department and impose the measures all the other countries have imposed. They implied that the Swedish population had been willfully deluded by ignorant authorities and by an epidemiologist who has been seduced by his sudden fame….”

“A French journalist may have let the cat out of the bag when, while interviewing a Swedish epidemiologist, he said, ‘…it’s almost as if we want Sweden to fail because then we’d know the fools are they and not us.”

So, now when Professor Lockdown himself expresses admiration for Sweden’s approach (Here), well, we must not have that. So The Times of Israel publishes an article titled, “Sweden Admits Virus Response Could Have Been Better, Though Not Quite Sure How.”

Notice the sleight of hand: “could have been better….” So I, as a reader, assume that they, after all, suffered the 80,000 to 90,000 deaths that were projected if no lockdown were imposed. But no, they have suffered “…4,468 deaths linked to COVID-19….”

Most of us want to be liked, even Swedish epidemiologists such as Dr. Tegnell. Assuming the aforementioned newspaper quoted Dr. Tegnell correctly and in context (and I make no claims that it did), he comes across as “reconsidering his unique approach” given the “high death toll.” World pressure can be effective.

But let us take a closer look at that “high death toll.”

Per the article, “Sweden’s rate of 43.24 deaths per 100,000 inhabitants is lower than Spain’s (58.06) and Italy’s (55.39) ….” But, wait: Spain and Italy had full lockdowns. Sweden’s rate is lower, with no lockdown.

“…but [Sweden’s rate] is higher than the reported rates in the United States (32.14) and Brazil (14.29)….”

Per Wikipedia, in Brazil, only two of her 27 states locked down. And her president has been urging citizens to ignore lockdown orders. Measurements in Brazil are questionable, but 14.29 is a very low rate considering that most of her states did not lockdown and lockdowns are being ignored in the rest.

As for the USA, comparisons to overall numbers are misleading, because each of our states handled it differently. For example, South Dakota had no lockdown, for which the governor was loudly denounced. The death rate there is currently 7.34 per 100,000 inhabitants, with no lockdown, which is far lower than the USA’s overall rate.

New York, with a full lockdown has a comparable death rate of 121.40 per 100,000 inhabitants, which is almost triple that of Sweden’s. Michigan, whose population is comparable to that of Sweden, has a death rate of 56.20, which is higher than Sweden’s, despite one of the most draconian lockdowns in the country.

In sum, comparing death rates can be very misleading since one must take into account population densities and other factors, including age of the inhabitants, comorbidities, and more.

More importantly, it would appear the media assumes most of us suffer amnesia and have forgotten that the lockdowns were triggered, not by death rates, but by truly frightening projections, such as 500,000 deaths in Britain and 2.2 Million deaths in the USA. Now that such projections have been shown to be grossly wrong, instead of focusing our analyses on how we decided to shut down the earth’s economies based on almost criminally bad data, we have moved the goal posts and are now focusing on “death rates” between countries. Not to mention the minimal focus on the devastation wreaked on nursing homes and assisted living facilities.

Which brings us to the matter the Swedes themselves admit they could have done better: addressing the failure “…to protect the country’s elderly and nursing home residents.”

That is a major fault in many places in the world. By some estimates, over half of USA deaths “linked to COVID-19” were in nursing homes or assisted living facilities (Here). This is an outrage. But this has nothing to do with the draconian lockdowns imposed on us. New York Governor Cuomo had been ordering nursing homes to accepts COVID patients. Don’t hold your breath for The Times of Israel, to run stories on that.

One more citation from the post on quarantine: “The English models (to which most other countries adhered) anticipated that [in Sweden] there’d be 8 Thousand to 9 Thousand patients requiring intensive care. The actual numbers are a fraction of that: 530. The hospitals are not overwhelmed.” So much for “flattening the curve.” 

The fact is that no leading country in the world would have shut down its entire economy on the basis of 4,468 projected deaths. Instead, they would have focused their efforts on reducing those deaths using other means, including taking special care of the elderly, nursing homes, and assisted living facilities.

Have we been had?

Sweden in the time of COVID-19

https://www.timesofisrael.com/sweden-admits-virus-response-could-have-been-better

https://www.onenewspage.com/n/Politics/1zlreqwnfg/Trump-criticizes-Sweden-no-lockdown-stance-after.htm

https://www.rt.com/usa/489951-cuomo-nursing-homes-deaths-mandate/

Have We Been Had?

One of the most oft heard refrains in my childhood in Venezuela had to do with disappointments with “democracy.” It was roughly along the lines of, “We’ve been had.” Use of the phrase would invariably result in very animated discussions (not to say heated arguments) about the merits and demerits of the Pérez Jiménez and Juan Vicente Gómez (here and here, for example) regimes versus Rómulo Betancourt and following (see herehere, and here as examples). This blog has written much about both eras and will continue to do so. However, the refrain’s Spanish version has been on my mind for several months now. Since the virus panic, to be precise.

This blog has several posts on the panic: hereherehere; and here.

It would appear that the riots and looting taking place in cities across the United States have pushed the virus off the American news for now. Or perhaps for good.

Yet, while American cities were burning, several virus-related stories were quietly reported.

First, across the pond, in London, a certain professor, known to the world as Professor Lockdown, was being questioned on his opinions regarding Sweden’s rejection of his lockdown prescriptions and whether maybe-perhaps-could-it-be-that his draconian recipes, which were followed by the UK, the USA, and most of the rest of the world, except Sweden, may have been a tad excessive.

Second, some mainstream media reports surfaced, albeit surreptitiously, about the stratospheric death rates in nursing homes, to wit: close to half (maybe more than half) of total US virus deaths took place in nursing homes.

And, third, a large number of public health officials wrote an open letter in effect encouraging “protesting” despite the lockdown restrictions in place, which they had strongly urged, and still urge, upon all law-abiding Americans. So, lockdown is absolutely necessary … unless you decide to riot.

This post extracts from each of the stories alluded to above. [Comments by me are in brackets]. 

The stories are linked below.

From The Telegraph (London)

The scientist behind lockdown in the UK has admitted that Sweden has achieved roughly the same suppression of coronavirus without draconian restrictions.

Neil Ferguson , who became known as “professor lockdown” after convincing Boris Johnson to radically curtail everyday freedoms, acknowledged that, despite relying on “quite similar science”, the Swedish authorities had “got a long way to the same effect” without a full lockdown. [And, for good measure, if they achieved “herd immunity,” any second waves will have little impact on them, unlike the rest of us. See here]

Sweden has adopted a far softer approach to Covid-19 than elsewhere in Europe, introducing voluntary social-distancing measures and keeping restaurants and bars and many schools open.

The Daily Mail (UK)

The professor whose grim warning that 500,000 Brits [and 2.2 million Americans] may die from Covid-19 without action triggered lockdown has admitted Sweden may have suppressed its outbreak as well as Britain — without imposing the draconian measures. 

Professor Neil Ferguson, of Imperial College London, revealed he had the ‘greatest respect’ for the Scandinavian nation, which has managed to suffer fewer deaths per capita than the UK.

He made the comments at a House of Lord Science and Technology Committee today during his first public appearance since flouting stay at home rules to have secret trysts with his married mistress last month.

The epidemiologist — dubbed Professor Lockdown — has come under fire for his modeling which predicted half a million Britons could die from Covid-19 and heavily influenced the UK’s decision to rush into a nationwide quarantine.

Professor Ferguson appeared to praise Sweden for keeping infections low without the economically crippling curbs and said ‘they have gone quite a long way to [achieving] the same effect.’

[He] admitted that lockdowns are ‘very crude’ policies and scientists would like to have ‘a much more targeted approach with less economic impact’;

“I have the greatest respect for scientists there [in Sweden]. They came to a different policy conclusion but based really on quite similar science.”

‘They make the argument that countries will find it very hard to really stop second waves… I don’t agree with it but scientifically they are not that far from scientists in any country in the world.”

Professor Ferguson was quizzed about why Sweden had recorded such few deaths without imposing lockdown, and faced questions about whether the economically-crippling measures were necessary in the UK.

[And what newfangled theory did Sweden apply to this pandemic that had the same, or better, health results as the punitive lockdowns imposed on the rest of us and without the economic catastrophe? Some new, cutting edge research, perhaps? Why, no. They, wittingly or unwittingly, applied the Bible’s requirements: quarantine the sick; leave the rest of us alone. See posts herehere, and here.]

USA Today

Over the last three months, more than 40,600 long-term care residents and workers have died of COVID-19 — about 40% of the nation’s death toll attributed to the coronavirus, according to an analysis of state data gathered  by USA TODAY. That number eclipses a count released Monday by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), the federal government’s first attempt at a comprehensive tally. CMS said 25,923 residents had died, but its number only includes federally regulated nursing homes, not assisted living facilities.

Even USA TODAY’s larger total — which amounts to roughly 450 COVID-19 elder care facility deaths per day — is an undercount. Seven states did not provide the number of deaths in long-term care. And New York, the state with the most resident deaths, doesn’t include those who had been transferred to hospitals in its count of long-term care fatalities.

[The article goes on to tell about families whose loved ones died in nursing homes because the homes had been ordered to accepts patients infected with the virus: “I would be at peace … but this did not have to happen,” was how one grieving daughter put it.]

[Given that almost half the total virus-related deaths in the USA have taken place in nursing homes {and that number is understated, according to USA Today}, tell me again: why was most of the country locked down? And why did state governors, such as the much-vaunted Governor Cuomo, order such facilities to admit virus infected patients, thereby sentencing such patients and the entire nursing facility to death?]

In Michigan, the state health department for months failed to track COVID-19 cases in its more than 1,000 assisted living facilities. A spokeswoman said the state began collecting that information on May 22 but doesn’t have plans to release it publicly at this time.

[Imagine that: the Michigan governor won’t release the data. Let them eat cake, I guess.]

In New York, the state’s official count of long-term care residents who have died doesn’t include those transferred to hospitals or other health care settings. 

In Pennsylvania, officials released a list of 557 facilities with COVID-19 cases for the first time on May 19. Almost immediately, the state health care association said the list was riddled with mistakes and demanded the errors be fixed. State officials made numerous updates to the data, including lowering the number of deaths and cases at some facilities.

[Why am I not surprised?]

Open Letter (NPR)

Infectious Disease Experts [“Experts”. I am sick of that term, aren’t you?] publish an open letter [encouraging “protests”.]

The letter was started by infectious disease experts [sic] at the University of Washington [the same university whose models, along with those from Professor Lockdown, the government had been using to inform policymaking that proved to be wrong over and over again].

Initially written by infectious disease experts [sic] at the University of Washington, the letter cited a number of systemic problems, from the disproportionately high rate at which black people have been killed by police in the U.S. [this is false, by the way] to disparities in life expectancy and other vital categories — including black Americans’ higher death rate from the coronavirus. […]

Local governments should not break up crowded demonstrations “under the guise of maintaining public health,” the experts [sic] said in their open letter. They urged law enforcement agencies not to use tear gas, smoke and other irritants, saying they could make people more susceptible to infection and worsen existing health conditions.”

The public health experts [sic!] noted the ‘potential for COVID-19 cases to rise in the days to come, according to NPR, and suggested access to testing and care in these communities be increased.

[So we must stay home. Except that we can go out, walk, and run should-to-shoulder with a mob. And throw bricks. “No” to church. “Yes” to riots. I really trust these public health officials, don’t you?]

Have we been had?

A troglodyte’s counsel: you and I have a duty to look askance at any “expert” advice which contradicts the Bible, no matter from whom such advice proceeds

All articles referred to above are linked below.

I’ll take Sweden.

‘Prof Lockdown’ Neil Ferguson admits Sweden used same science as UK

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8379769/Professor-Lockdown-Neil-Ferguson-admits-greatest-respect-Sweden.html

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/investigations/2020/06/01/coronavirus-nursing-home-deaths-top-40-600/5273075002/

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Jyfn4Wd2i6bRi12ePghMHtX3ys1b7K1A/view

Can we trust Covid modelling? More evidence from Sweden | The SpectatorJohan NorbergAt last we’re getting a debate about Covid-19 modelling. When people finally got to look under the hood of the f…

Analysis of both the Imperial College and the University of Washington COVID-19 models.