Cyprus-Forum.com

[cyprusgrump]

Sweden currently has the highest mortality rate in the world per head of population.

Does it?

According to this site it is San Marino, followed by Belgium Andorra, Spain, Italy, UK, France and then Sweden...?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... -week.html

https://www.ft.com/content/46733256-5a8 ... ce9d4095e4

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/0 ... er-capita/

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/12 ... death-rate

However, Sweden has only had the highest death rate over the past week, with Belgium, Spain, Italy, the UK and France, still ahead over the entire course of the pandemic.

Unlike you to pick and choose facts that suit your argument Erlolz...

[cyprusgrump]

An absolutely typical response.

Indeed, it is like Woolworth Pick 'n' Mix with facts...

[cyprusgrump]

Another Chart Showing Lockdowns Don’t Work

This chart formed part of a presentation by JP Morgan to investors yesterday. It shows infections haven’t increased in those US states that have ended their lockdowns. The JP Morgan analyst told investors: “This means that the pandemic and COVID-19 likely have its own dynamics unrelated to often inconsistent lockdown measures that were being implemented.” NBC’s Carl Quintanilla did a Twitter thread on the presentation yesterday.

[erolz66]

Was is typical is your preference for a selected report based on an unknown and unable number at this point 'r' whilst ignoring the facts that are know. Like Sweden in the latest data we have showing the highest mortality rates in the world over last 7 days. You quibble over that even being true, then ignore it , then come up with a report that talks about R number guesses.

[Londonrake]

I don't know what the situation is here in Cyprus but if you really want to know then today Superdrug in the UK are offering a C-19 antibody test for £69.

https://www.brightonandhoveindependent. ... ne-2859689

Then again:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/0 ... s-testing/

.

[cyprusgrump]

Was is typical is your preference for a selected report based on an unknown and unable number at this point 'r' whilst ignoring the facts that are know. Like Sweden in the latest data we have showing the highest mortality rates in the world over last 7 days. You quibble over that even being true, then ignore it , then come up with a report that talks about R number guesses.

What is hilarious your pompousness, is your insistence that we can only rely on the total death FACTS of the ONS figures (ignoring that they say only a fraction of them are Covid) as a true representation of the state of affairs and then cling to ONE WEEK of figures on Sweden to prove your point!

Hilarious...

[erolz66]

Was is typical is your preference for a selected report based on an unknown and unable number at this point 'r' whilst ignoring the facts that are know. Like Sweden in the latest data we have showing the highest mortality rates in the world over last 7 days. You quibble over that even being true, then ignore it , then come up with a report that talks about R number guesses.

What is hilarious your pompousness, is your insistence that we can only rely on the total death FACTS of the ONS figures (ignoring that they say only a fraction of them are Covid) as a true representation of the state of affairs and then cling to ONE WEEK of figures on Sweden to prove your point!

Hilarious...

Look at what I have said , consistently over and over and not what you make up for your convenience. Start with the know numbers and work out from there. I have never said you can only rely on total deaths all causes. I have simply pointed out how these are measurements of know indisputable facts and thus are the place to start and thus represent something materially different from guess at things like R or IFR. I have never said that Sweden's approach is wrong or will be wrong over medium and long terms. I have said we can not know either way yet. You are the one who claims that Sweden's approach is right, supporting that pre chosen opinion on the basis that it was not showing mortality higher than the UK which did lock down. I am pointing out that this is no longer the case in the most recent period we have numbers for. If this trend continues and Sweden continues to show higher mortality than the UK until its total numbers to date surpass the UK's as well as the last 7 days you will just do exactly what you did when the ONS numbers on total deaths all causes stopped showing what you wanted them to. Which is go from quoting them as proof to ignoring them totally in favour of selected my expert is better than yours reports using numbers that can not be know yet, like 7 or IFR or whatever. What you will never do is change or revise your opinion in light of new and better evidence and numbers.

[erolz66]

To make is simple for the hard of understanding.

CG's position is he knows which horse is going to win the Grand national. My position is he can not know that and no one can know that with certainty yet. 10% in to the race and CG position is my horse is no further behind than any other, see I told you I knew which horse would win. I point out that between 10-12% in to the race his horse has fallen further behind all the others and he quibbles that I am wrong because his horse was not behind over the entire 12 % of the race to date, only in the last 2% of it and then goes of and finds an 'expert' that is backing his horse to win the race whilst ignoring the fact that there 100 other experts backing different horses to win. My prediction can not be wrong because I am making no prediction. I am saying that no one can KNOW which horse will win in the face of CG claiming he does know, has always known and in the face of his denial that just selecting experts that guess the same horse as him whilst ignoring all others is the definition of confirmation bias.

[Tim Drayton]

Tim's argument was it would have been better to lock up only those at highest risk, to a degree much greater degree of restrictions on their freedom, for a much longer period time all whilst we had and have only partial information on who is actually at highest risk, whilst the rest of us sought 'herd immunity' without a vaccine. ...

Straw men, yet again. That is a contortion of what I was arguing. Even so, let's accept it at face value. Let's create a false dichotomy, too, and assume there are only two alternatives:

1. Lock up the whole of society, destroying the economy in the process and thus ushering in a deep depression that could well last a decade and will claim countless lives from such things as suicides, poverty-related poor health, poor health care services due to the lack of funds to finance them, perhaps even deaths from starvation.

2. Lock up those who are vulnerable (I used the term "isolate" in fact but let's leave that to one side) and let the rest, that is the under 50's who are in good health, continue to go about their business meaning that the bulk of those who are economically active continue to work and create wealth and pay taxes.With the economy functioning there will then be more resources that can be concentrated on looking after and protecting those who are at risk, indeed, some of those from the low-risk group could be recruited into jobs focussed on caring for and serving the needs of those who have to be isolated (I prefer that word and there are ways this could be administered to make it less draconian) rather than needlessly being locked up at home.

Balance the human suffering under each option against the benefits, and you decide which one comes out on top.

[Londonrake]

Erolz. I don't normally get involved in these "debates" but indulge me in a short rewind.

At 1239 today, in response to your claim that "Sweden currently has the highest mortality rate in the world per head of population." CG posted a link to disprove it: Worldmeter. Basically a rolling, live updated spreadsheet showing a full array of Covid-19 stats for every country in the world. Let me help:

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/#countries

If you have the time - and I'm talking here not only to a man who gives the impression of sitting, fingers hovering over the keyboard awaiting the next post to challenge, all and every day, but also somebody who regularly trawls back through page after page to dig up quotes which he thinks trip up an adversary. Let's not mention taking the trouble to count smileys over umpteen pages - here's one for you- Anyway, if you have the time you will find that his list of countries in Europe with worse records than Sweden is valid. Invest more and you might discover others outside of Europa with pretty horrendous records. Why would you though?

I get the impression you gave it no more than a passing glance. You didn't try to refute or even refer to it. Thus my observation that it was an absolutely typical Erolz response. It proved you wrong - so you ignored it. What you in fact did was to post 4 links to news sheets, which, with banner headlines, at face value would seem to reinforce your point. Two, masters of hyperbole tabloids, the DM/DE and the FT/DT. All 4 actually talking about "a rolling average over the past 7 days".

I realised, quite early on in the Brexit saga, that you're a man who enjoys absolutely any argument, with absolutely any person, and usually absolutely interminably. To you the subject isn't really what matters, it's winning the argument. Were it not for the spelling and (mostly) lack of foul-mouthed posts I would suspect you of being the reincarnated Lordo in a spa.

I admire Tim's tenacity but have thought for quite a while that where you're concerned he's just wasting his time. There will never been any sort of accord. You're somebody who never gives up - a master of the long, boring impenetrable obfuscation when cornered - and, sooner or later I suspect he will give up the effort. At which point I imagine you'll think that you've won something. It's a depressingly familiar scenario.