Obligatory in Denmark on public transport since August 15th. In Norway it has been the recommendation since August 14th.
I don’t at all follow what you are saying. You mean they are trying to suppress cases like all the countries with mask mandates? Did you have certain ones in mind?
Oh, and how is Denmark doing at the moment?
I honestly am not sure how I can make it simpler.
- Sweden for a long time maintained that their method for everything was correct.
- Sweden actively said that “masks don’t work”.
- Because of this the prevailing attitude amongst Swedes when asked about masks is “they don’t work”.
- This is because the discussion here has been purely about protection of the wearer, not of other people.
- Suddenly, months after all other countries, Sweden has magically started thinking that maybe they do work and is recommending them in certain circumstances.
Additionally:
- Someone said that this was normal for the Nordic regions.
- I pointed out that Masks have been recommended (or obliged) in Denmark and Norway since August.
Well, not to be picky but the August recommendation in Norway was to wear a mask during rush hour on public transport. That is a rather weak mask order. Though you didn’t mention Finland, they seem to be taking mask recommendations seriously.
But that is going to be the recommendation in Sweden (public transport at peak times), which is coming in to effect on January 7th. Which is a slight bit after August 14th.
I didn’t mention Finland as I mistakenly thought I was replying to a post mentioning Scandinavia rather than the Nordics.
They have been candid about their failings all along, in particular with regard to protecting their most vulnerable populations in the beginning – which I might add, though it is beside the point, stands out as almost literally unique in the world, which is something I for one have great respect for.
On masks, what they have said is that there is scant evidence that masks do work, at least in any relevant practical sense. That is not quite the same thing as what you just claimed. And I might add, this time very much germane to the point, that the overwhelming majority of data from all over the world supports their point of view.
No they haven’t. That is at best a comically bad misunderstanding, but more likely to be blindly pushing an agenda. They have been in complete denial for months. The press, which as I am assuming you don’t speak Swedish and therefore have not been reading, have been complicit in this. Rarely were things questioned. They are being candid now once the damage has been done (for a second time, mind. Things quietened down extensively over the summer, mainly due to the Swedish practice of disappearing out into the countryside for Summer, but now they’ve let it get out of hand. Again.).
And again, as you apparently didn’t read what I wrote. I’ll even put it in a paragraph separately and in bold so maybe you’ll see it:
1. Sweden actively said that “masks don’t work”.
2. Because of this the prevailing attitude amongst Swedes when asked about masks is “they don’t work”.
3. This is because the discussion here has been purely about protection of the wearer, not of other people.
Note part three. That’s the really important bit. Because all of those studies that say the jury is out on them helping, like the Danish one that recently concluded, have only dealt with whether they protect the wearer. People that actually understand what is going on and aren’t blindly pushing an agenda realise that why we should wear masks is to protect other people. And this kind of requires lots of people to do it. I wear mine, despite it being effectively pointless here, because I am trying to normalise the wearing of one. I know it is unlikely to protect me much (although I recently got my hands on my Airinum mask, which I have had on preorder for months, that will).
I see a certain person has found another thread to drop turds all over @Saytwo - please go to the pit thread that has been involked in your name where further appropriate discussion may take place
I’d keep the description of the people but change the part after ‘realise’ to ‘that there is no credible evidence that wearing masks protects other people’.
I know you disagree with that, and I understand that you’re willing to wear your own not in an attempt to protect yourself but as part of a sort of mission (I will not use the term ‘agenda’), but I also know you cannot prove it. It seems to make sense, I guess, that propping up some sort of barrier might keep something from getting to the other side of it. But that’s all you have, the seem. And science doesn’t trade in seems.
The CDC’s official page on the usage of masks has links to 45 articles, papers and studies regarding this. They all follow the same pattern, which is why the CDC is using them as references. Masks reduce community infection by filtering out droplets containing the virus.
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/more/masking-science-sars-cov2.html
But yeah, you keep on saying there is no evidence.
Your failure to accept the invitation does not reflect well upon you @saytwo. Yours is the classic response to a situation where you have nothing of value or any sincerity to defend, instead you flounce out and declare yourself to be ‘above’ other posters, but in fact what it reveals is that you are like the king with no clothes, your arguments and false claims have been called out and undermined by reputable and verifiable quotes, whilst all of yours have been found to be out of date or simply false.
You have no credible position to defend, not even of simple mistake and credulity - your postings have - I feel - been correctly identified in outlook by the poster known as @Cervaise and you simply do not have anyting with which to refute that assessment.
It is very difficult to truly discuss why you are the poster that you appear to be because you are unwilling to attend and comment in a place that has been assembled just for your honour.
Your unwillingness to do so reveals to me and perhaps to others, that you know your points are worthless, that your debating points are egregiously errant, that you have not at any time been debating with any integrity or honesty, and furthermore you understand that very well - so you have simply run away to hide exactly like the schoolchild that you claim other posters to be.
So, to keep this a little on the thread topic - why is it that you claim to know more about events in Sweden and the policies therof than a native of that nation who is on the spot, has access to all the broadcast and printed media in that nation - whereas you are not native to that nation, cannot speak or read Swedish and seem somehow to believe that you have more insight than @Amanset - if nothing else it is extremely discourteous to fail to acknowledge that poster’s much more direct and personal knowledge of the situation if their own country?
I’ll leave ‘discourteous’ to you and friends. And I’ve never run away from any thread I’ve posted in, so you know where you can find me. Assuming you wish to try to do so with intellect and not wounded vitriol, that is.
As for Sweden, I’ve followed them very closely from the beginning, including sometimes reading sources in translation. I have full confidence that I am more closely connected to the situation than a significant portion of their citizens are.
But of course, this matter – this question of which type of response was better suited to the challenge at hand – is as much about dozens of other countries than it is about Sweden. If you think my observations that the virus has pretty well been able to write its own score in country after country all over the world, if you think that observation is outdated, then I think it is you who needs to keep up with the news.
For an opposing point of view, you may wish to consider this recent opinion piece:
The prevailing image of disaster and catastrophe — journalist Garry Linnell says Sweden has been “ravaged” — is sensationalist rubbish, reflecting poor numeracy, poor vocabulary or perhaps a desire to promote what I call health fascism.
The ‘poor numeracy’ part is the one that rings truest to me. That’s at the very heart of the misguided, even if well intentioned, response we’ve seen the world over. And it’s certainly no stranger on these boards. No stranger at all.
in case anyone is lulled into thinking there is a credible strand of journalism that supports Say Two’s perspective, please be aware that The Australian is Rupert Murdoch’s flagship newspaper, and one he props up as a soapbox to provide Fox News-like railing in the Australian political sphere. If The Australian said it was Wednesday, I’d check somewhere else just to make sure.
Credibility of The Australian in an argument of this sort is probably somewhere around the same as a note from SayTwo’s mother.
This is a couple days old. It looks like some of the experts were hoping for a lockdown. It doesn’t look like they got one.
ETA: Back in the beginning of the pandemic, some people argued that the success or failure of a government policy hinged on whether the hospitals were overrun. Stockholm’s hospitals are now overrun.
Hopefully, by this point, everyone has wised up and nobody is making this mistake.
Here you can look at another viewpoint some of you seem likely to dismiss out of hand. It’s from a doctor in Sweden, I believe, so on the surface it would seem to meet your standards for evidence. But he doesn’t see things quite the way some of you do, so he’ll never get a chance, despite the facts (?) he offers here.
Here’s the response to that, from Dr Rushworth in the report linked above:
Here in Stockholm, the number of people being treated in hospital for covid has been stable since late November, with around 800 people being treated simultaneously for covid in hospitals (in spring around 1,100 people were simultaneously being treated for covid in Stockholm at the peak).
Since the total number of hospital beds in Stockholm is around 3,850, it should be plain to everyone that the healthcare system has never been close to being overwhelmed, in spite of claims to the contrary in media. And while it is true that hospitals are currently at 100% capacity, it is false to claim that that situation is in any way unusual. Sweden has among the lowest number of hospital beds per 100,000 population in Europe, and the hospitals are always running at 100% capacity this time of year.
Overall, the situation is no more serious now than it was in spring, at least if you look at deaths, ICU-admissions, and hospitalizations. During the spring peak, 2,350 people were being treated simultaneously for covid in hospitals in Sweden as a whole. At present, 2,500 people are being treated in hospitals for covid, but, as mentioned, these 2,500 are on average less sick than the 2,350 being treated in spring, which is likely why deaths are lower even though hospitalizations are up a bit. Another data point in support of this is that at present, 290 people are being treated for covid in Intensive Care Units (where the very sickest people end up). In spring, that number was 550.
Here’s a discussion of school closings – which, again, are an important part of measuring the success or failure of a given response. (Unless you take the stance that nothing at all matters besides the number of people who have perished while covid-positive, and without regard to their age or health at that.) It is none too kind on the US, contrasting its approach with that of Europe.
It closes with this:
The American death toll will rightly be cited as the main indictment of the U.S. government’s handling of the pandemic. But what has happened in schools is an astonishing public-policy failure of its own.
And so I ask you: Do you agree that what has happened to students is an ‘astonishing public-policy failure’? And if you do, how do you factor that into an assessment of Sweden’s ‘epic fail’ response, given that they managed to protect their children in this regard?