Sweden’s cases surge, government tightens restrictions

[spliff(TONE)]

Is this your first day here? Since when have I stuck my neck out for someone just because they're on the same side of the aisle? I'm not even IN the aisle at this point. But virtually every time you call me 'super defensive' (ok, this might be your first use of super), YOU'VE been closer to defensive than I was.

Dude, I have no interest in debating this point further. I know I haven't been defensive, with the caveat of defending my religious beliefs, and you say you're not being defensive. What you refer to as calling a spade a spade, while you don't see it that way, comes off as being contentious. Again, that's my opinion from my viewpoint, just like commenting as I do in various conversations you've suggested I'm sticking my neck out for people in is sharing an opinion from my viewpoint...after all, they're not private conversations, as you yourself have reminded me a time or two.

As I already intimated, if you really read through the last day of this thread and felt it was appropriate to only call out me for being contentious then you are clueless and/or extremely biased. Don't know what else to tell you.

[SiteWolf]

As I already intimated, if you really read through the last day of this thread and felt it was appropriate to only call out me for being contentious then you are clueless and/or extremely biased. Don't know what else to tell you.

Well, you could have just said 'sure, I could have been more civil but it wasn't just me.'
Instead it's always the other guy at fault, but never you, followed by various unneeded derogatory terms like liar and clueless.

[nastynice]

There's lots of studies out that have shown that herd immunity in this time frame just wouldn't have happened. 70% of a population is a lot of people. And having antibodies disappear after 6 months in some cases wouldn't be help the cause.

As far as antibodies disappearing, sure, I can't make a definitive comment one way or another.

But I feel very confident we would ve at herd immunity by now if we left this whole thing unchecked.

From what I read (if I remember correct) NYC reached about 20% infection rate by the end of their earlier outbreak. I can believe it, given they were at above 2,000 deaths per day for about a week.

Exponential growth means every "x" days the number of daily cases doubles, so if they were at 2,000 a day, unchecked this thing would've been 4,000 a day in about 4 days (I believe that was their growth rate at the time) rather than leveling out for that week and then decreasing.

The reason it leveled out is because we locked down a couple weeks earlier, it curbed the spread big time. If we didnt, the spread would've continued on the same trajectory until running through the population.

I could be wrong, but im just not seeing how it could be possible to not be at herd immunity by now with zero distance protocol in place.

*one thing that probably sheds some light on this (as I reference theory a lot) is the details of Sweden, how exactly were they moving, how did they avoid spread for so long? They didnt lockdown but were they following certain behaviors,protocols, etc?,

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

[spliff(TONE)]

Well, you could have just said 'sure, I could have been more civil but it wasn't just me.'
Instead it's always the other guy at fault, but never you, followed by various unneeded derogatory terms like liar and clueless.

Sure, I could have said that. Instead I said what I felt was more appropriate. Thanks for trying to play referee though.

[zookman65]

As far as antibodies disappearing, sure, I can't make a definitive comment one way or another.

But I feel very confident we would ve at herd immunity by now if we left this whole thing unchecked.

From what I read (if I remember correct) NYC reached about 20% infection rate by the end of their earlier outbreak. I can believe it, given they were at above 2,000 deaths per day for about a week.

Exponential growth means every "x" days the number of daily cases doubles, so if they were at 2,000 a day, unchecked this thing would've been 4,000 a day in about 4 days (I believe that was their growth rate at the time) rather than leveling out for that week and then decreasing.

The reason it leveled out is because we locked down a couple weeks earlier, it curbed the spread big time. If we didnt, the spread would've continued on the same trajectory until running through the population.

I could be wrong, but im just not seeing how it could be possible to not be at herd immunity by now with zero distance protocol in place.

*one thing that probably sheds some light on this (as I reference theory a lot) is the details of Sweden, how exactly were they moving, how did they avoid spread for so long? They didnt lockdown but were they following certain behaviors,protocols, etc?,

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

And what affect would letting the virus run through the population unchecked have? A collective chicken pox party as it were.. Could the medical system have handled that? With just a few percent of the population actively infected right now, Covid hospitalizations just his 90,000 today. Let's be honest if we know what we know now we would have shut down high risk activities like bars and attending sporting events, concerts etc but would have had a national mask mandate enforced by all 50 governors, including the anti-science GOP governors and left the economy mostly open.

[catman]

As far as antibodies disappearing, sure, I can't make a definitive comment one way or another.

But I feel very confident we would ve at herd immunity by now if we left this whole thing unchecked.

From what I read (if I remember correct) NYC reached about 20% infection rate by the end of their earlier outbreak. I can believe it, given they were at above 2,000 deaths per day for about a week.

Exponential growth means every "x" days the number of daily cases doubles, so if they were at 2,000 a day, unchecked this thing would've been 4,000 a day in about 4 days (I believe that was their growth rate at the time) rather than leveling out for that week and then decreasing.

The reason it leveled out is because we locked down a couple weeks earlier, it curbed the spread big time. If we didnt, the spread would've continued on the same trajectory until running through the population.

I could be wrong, but im just not seeing how it could be possible to not be at herd immunity by now with zero distance protocol in place.

*one thing that probably sheds some light on this (as I reference theory a lot) is the details of Sweden, how exactly were they moving, how did they avoid spread for so long? They didnt lockdown but were they following certain behaviors,protocols, etc?,

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

I am 7 months out from Covid infection and, from what the place I donate plasma says, I still have antibodies. I have no idea how long they will remain in place, but they are still there.

[nastynice]

And what affect would letting the virus run through the population unchecked have? A collective chicken pox party as it were.. Could the medical system have handled that? With just a few percent of the population actively infected right now, Covid hospitalizations just his 90,000 today. Let's be honest if we know what we know now we would have shut down high risk activities like bars and attending sporting events, concerts etc but would have had a national mask mandate enforced by all 50 governors, including the anti-science GOP governors and left the economy mostly open.

Given that.we saw wuhans outbreak, we DID know then what we know now.

No letting it run through unchecked would have had the worst overall result as far as patient outcomes because the system would be overloaded.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk