RugbyRebels

Lizard wrote:NZ has had no deaths for a week and a weekly rolling average of <2 new cases/day. We drop a level of lockdown tomorrow.

It's still not clear if/when amateur rugby will start. I really hope they can get the kids on the park sometime this season. My 7 year old boy was supposed to have his first season of contact footy this year. He's been sleeping with his brand new, as-yet-unfitted mouthguard by his bed all through lockdown, which began just as pre-season training was supposed to start.

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:

fivepointer wrote:Don't forget to factor in that well known British commonsense. That'll see us through.

English mate. Scots, Welsh and NI aren't in on this

In some respects that's useful as Scotland is perhaps a few weeks behind England, so having a more varied approach has some positives, though there's got to be some concern it's more they're behind London in similar fashion to the North or West of England

...
But Swedish authorities have argued that the country’s higher death rate will appear comparatively lower in hindsight. Efforts to contain the virus are doomed to fail in many countries, and a large percentage of people will be infected in the end. When much of the world experiences a deadly second wave, Sweden will have the worst of the pandemic behind it.
...
There are good reasons for countries to begin easing their restrictions. It will take several years to tally the total number of deaths, bankruptcies, layoffs, suicides, mental health problems, losses to GDP and investments, and other costs attributable not just to the virus but to the measures used to fight it. It should already be obvious, however, that the economic and social costs of lockdowns are enormous: estimates from the OECD suggest that every month of pandemic-related restrictions will shrink the economies of advanced countries by two percent.
...
Sweden’s approach to COVID-19 reflects the country’s distinctive culture, and aspects of it may not be easy to replicate elsewhere. In particular, reliance on official recommendations and individual responsibility may not travel well beyond Scandinavia. Sweden is a special country characterized by high levels of trust—not just between people but between people and government institutions. Swedes were primed to take voluntary recommendations seriously in a way that citizens of other nations may not be
...

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote: English mate. Scots, Welsh and NI aren't in on this

In some respects that's useful as Scotland is perhaps a few weeks behind England, so having a more varied approach has some positives, though there's got to be some concern it's more they're behind London in similar fashion to the North or West of England

Perhaps they're not behind England but on a different track entirely, especially as England is now taking a more lax approach.

Donny osmond wrote:Sweden’s Coronavirus Strategy Will Soon Be the World’s

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles ... -be-worlds

...
But Swedish authorities have argued that the country’s higher death rate will appear comparatively lower in hindsight. Efforts to contain the virus are doomed to fail in many countries, and a large percentage of people will be infected in the end. When much of the world experiences a deadly second wave, Sweden will have the worst of the pandemic behind it.
...
There are good reasons for countries to begin easing their restrictions. It will take several years to tally the total number of deaths, bankruptcies, layoffs, suicides, mental health problems, losses to GDP and investments, and other costs attributable not just to the virus but to the measures used to fight it. It should already be obvious, however, that the economic and social costs of lockdowns are enormous: estimates from the OECD suggest that every month of pandemic-related restrictions will shrink the economies of advanced countries by two percent.
...
Sweden’s approach to COVID-19 reflects the country’s distinctive culture, and aspects of it may not be easy to replicate elsewhere. In particular, reliance on official recommendations and individual responsibility may not travel well beyond Scandinavia. Sweden is a special country characterized by high levels of trust—not just between people but between people and government institutions. Swedes were primed to take voluntary recommendations seriously in a way that citizens of other nations may not be
...

Donny osmond wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Digby wrote:
In some respects that's useful as Scotland is perhaps a few weeks behind England, so having a more varied approach has some positives, though there's got to be some concern it's more they're behind London in similar fashion to the North or West of England

Perhaps they're not behind England but on a different track entirely, especially as England is now taking a more lax approach.

a different track that involves taking the exact same decisions at the exact same time until last Sunday? nah mate, if we're on a different track, it's one that has only just begun, up until now we've been in lock-step with England, just the infection started a week or two later as Digby says.

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Donny osmond wrote:Sweden’s Coronavirus Strategy Will Soon Be the World’s

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles ... -be-worlds

...
But Swedish authorities have argued that the country’s higher death rate will appear comparatively lower in hindsight. Efforts to contain the virus are doomed to fail in many countries, and a large percentage of people will be infected in the end. When much of the world experiences a deadly second wave, Sweden will have the worst of the pandemic behind it.
...
There are good reasons for countries to begin easing their restrictions. It will take several years to tally the total number of deaths, bankruptcies, layoffs, suicides, mental health problems, losses to GDP and investments, and other costs attributable not just to the virus but to the measures used to fight it. It should already be obvious, however, that the economic and social costs of lockdowns are enormous: estimates from the OECD suggest that every month of pandemic-related restrictions will shrink the economies of advanced countries by two percent.
...
Sweden’s approach to COVID-19 reflects the country’s distinctive culture, and aspects of it may not be easy to replicate elsewhere. In particular, reliance on official recommendations and individual responsibility may not travel well beyond Scandinavia. Sweden is a special country characterized by high levels of trust—not just between people but between people and government institutions. Swedes were primed to take voluntary recommendations seriously in a way that citizens of other nations may not be
...

1) If we pursue a herd immunity policy (as Sweden's apparently is), and if current UK levels of infection are approx 10% of the population (as per Eugene's post), then by the end of it the total deaths will be many times what we are currently seeing, making the 250k number very feasible.

2) Sweden's approach may not be the worst in the world, there may be some things we can learn from it, but if you compare any of their numbers with South Korea's (or Singapore's, or NZ's, or Taiwan's) it's odd (to say the least) to recommend it as the strategy to follow.

3) The article in Foreign Affairs was produced by the Swedish Ratio Institute, so may not be taking an entirely unbiased view of Sweden's strategy.

Donny osmond wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Donny osmond wrote:Sweden’s Coronavirus Strategy Will Soon Be the World’s

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles ... -be-worlds

1) If we pursue a herd immunity policy (as Sweden's apparently is), and if current UK levels of infection are approx 10% of the population (as per Eugene's post), then by the end of it the total deaths will be many times what we are currently seeing, making the 250k number very feasible.

2) Sweden's approach may not be the worst in the world, there may be some things we can learn from it, but if you compare any of their numbers with South Korea's (or Singapore's, or NZ's, or Taiwan's) it's odd (to say the least) to recommend it as the strategy to follow.

3) The article in Foreign Affairs was produced by the Swedish Ratio Institute, so may not be taking an entirely unbiased view of Sweden's strategy.

Yeah, sorry, I wasn't approving, just thought it was an interesting point of view. I guess we won't know how effective their strategy has been until after the 2nd or 3rd wave has been and gone and see what the final stats are. I did see something last week from Sweden saying they had failed their elderly population, so I guess its all pretty subjective right now.

Only thing I would say is the phrase "herd immunity" has become a kind of dread phrase that should not be uttered, but it is actually the desirable end result, we're all just going on slightly different paths to get there.

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

morepork wrote:

Donny osmond wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote: 1) If we pursue a herd immunity policy (as Sweden's apparently is), and if current UK levels of infection are approx 10% of the population (as per Eugene's post), then by the end of it the total deaths will be many times what we are currently seeing, making the 250k number very feasible.

2) Sweden's approach may not be the worst in the world, there may be some things we can learn from it, but if you compare any of their numbers with South Korea's (or Singapore's, or NZ's, or Taiwan's) it's odd (to say the least) to recommend it as the strategy to follow.

3) The article in Foreign Affairs was produced by the Swedish Ratio Institute, so may not be taking an entirely unbiased view of Sweden's strategy.

Yeah, sorry, I wasn't approving, just thought it was an interesting point of view. I guess we won't know how effective their strategy has been until after the 2nd or 3rd wave has been and gone and see what the final stats are. I did see something last week from Sweden saying they had failed their elderly population, so I guess its all pretty subjective right now.

Only thing I would say is the phrase "herd immunity" has become a kind of dread phrase that should not be uttered, but it is actually the desirable end result, we're all just going on slightly different paths to get there.

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

Herd immunity is achieved via vaccination, not triaging the susceptible in a population.

Banquo wrote:

morepork wrote:

Donny osmond wrote:Yeah, sorry, I wasn't approving, just thought it was an interesting point of view. I guess we won't know how effective their strategy has been until after the 2nd or 3rd wave has been and gone and see what the final stats are. I did see something last week from Sweden saying they had failed their elderly population, so I guess its all pretty subjective right now.

Only thing I would say is the phrase "herd immunity" has become a kind of dread phrase that should not be uttered, but it is actually the desirable end result, we're all just going on slightly different paths to get there.

Herd immunity is achieved via vaccination, not triaging the susceptible in a population.

Yep- anyone who watched the Beeb's documentaries at the Royal Free/Barnet hospitals will be under no illusion that herd immunity is remotely viable without a viable treatment for the very ill, let alone a vaccine.

morepork wrote:

Donny osmond wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote: 1) If we pursue a herd immunity policy (as Sweden's apparently is), and if current UK levels of infection are approx 10% of the population (as per Eugene's post), then by the end of it the total deaths will be many times what we are currently seeing, making the 250k number very feasible.

2) Sweden's approach may not be the worst in the world, there may be some things we can learn from it, but if you compare any of their numbers with South Korea's (or Singapore's, or NZ's, or Taiwan's) it's odd (to say the least) to recommend it as the strategy to follow.

3) The article in Foreign Affairs was produced by the Swedish Ratio Institute, so may not be taking an entirely unbiased view of Sweden's strategy.

Yeah, sorry, I wasn't approving, just thought it was an interesting point of view. I guess we won't know how effective their strategy has been until after the 2nd or 3rd wave has been and gone and see what the final stats are. I did see something last week from Sweden saying they had failed their elderly population, so I guess its all pretty subjective right now.

Only thing I would say is the phrase "herd immunity" has become a kind of dread phrase that should not be uttered, but it is actually the desirable end result, we're all just going on slightly different paths to get there.

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

Herd immunity is achieved via vaccination, not triaging the susceptible in a population.

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Banquo wrote:

morepork wrote: Herd immunity is achieved via vaccination, not triaging the susceptible in a population.

Yep- anyone who watched the Beeb's documentaries at the Royal Free/Barnet hospitals will be under no illusion that herd immunity is remotely viable without a viable treatment for the very ill, let alone a vaccine.

Definitely preferable to the herd immunity method employed by Europe during the black death.

Ultimately time will tell, but I'd bet a lot of money that Sweden won't finish above South Korea in the "best strategy" league.

For the UK, it seems that we're relaxing the lockdown significantly while 1) R is probably a little below 1 (so that's good), but 2) with the number of infected many times too high for new cases to be dealt with by testing (and with no contact tracing happening, even now). So (unless the people ignore the "return to work" instruction) we surely will be seeing R and the cases, and then a little later, the deaths, rising again.

An open question is whether this strategy has come about through:
a) incompetence + wishful thinking, or
b) callousness + mendacity (ie deliberately aiming for herd immunity whilst denying it)
Who knows? Perhaps in Boris's head there's room for all these things.

Son of Mathonwy wrote: Ultimately time will tell, but I'd bet a lot of money that Sweden won't finish above South Korea in the "best strategy" league.

Donny osmond wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Banquo wrote: Yep- anyone who watched the Beeb's documentaries at the Royal Free/Barnet hospitals will be under no illusion that herd immunity is remotely viable without a viable treatment for the very ill, let alone a vaccine.

Definitely preferable to the herd immunity method employed by Europe during the black death.

Ultimately time will tell, but I'd bet a lot of money that Sweden won't finish above South Korea in the "best strategy" league.

For the UK, it seems that we're relaxing the lockdown significantly while 1) R is probably a little below 1 (so that's good), but 2) with the number of infected many times too high for new cases to be dealt with by testing (and with no contact tracing happening, even now). So (unless the people ignore the "return to work" instruction) we surely will be seeing R and the cases, and then a little later, the deaths, rising again.

An open question is whether this strategy has come about through:
a) incompetence + wishful thinking, or
b) callousness + mendacity (ie deliberately aiming for herd immunity whilst denying it)
Who knows? Perhaps in Boris's head there's room for all these things.

Are those really the only two options? Incompetence or callousness? The failure is pre judged, baked right in to the framing of the question. Perhaps there is slightly more nuance to it? Maybe one or two more things to think about?

Donny osmond wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Donny osmond wrote:Sweden’s Coronavirus Strategy Will Soon Be the World’s

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles ... -be-worlds

1) If we pursue a herd immunity policy (as Sweden's apparently is), and if current UK levels of infection are approx 10% of the population (as per Eugene's post), then by the end of it the total deaths will be many times what we are currently seeing, making the 250k number very feasible.

2) Sweden's approach may not be the worst in the world, there may be some things we can learn from it, but if you compare any of their numbers with South Korea's (or Singapore's, or NZ's, or Taiwan's) it's odd (to say the least) to recommend it as the strategy to follow.

3) The article in Foreign Affairs was produced by the Swedish Ratio Institute, so may not be taking an entirely unbiased view of Sweden's strategy.

Yeah, sorry, I wasn't approving, just thought it was an interesting point of view. I guess we won't know how effective their strategy has been until after the 2nd or 3rd wave has been and gone and see what the final stats are. I did see something last week from Sweden saying they had failed their elderly population, so I guess its all pretty subjective right now.

Only thing I would say is the phrase "herd immunity" has become a kind of dread phrase that should not be uttered, but it is actually the desirable end result, we're all just going on slightly different paths to get there.

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Banquo wrote:

morepork wrote: Herd immunity is achieved via vaccination, not triaging the susceptible in a population.

Yep- anyone who watched the Beeb's documentaries at the Royal Free/Barnet hospitals will be under no illusion that herd immunity is remotely viable without a viable treatment for the very ill, let alone a vaccine.

Definitely preferable to the herd immunity method employed by Europe during the black death.

Ultimately time will tell, but I'd bet a lot of money that Sweden won't finish above South Korea in the "best strategy" league.

For the UK, it seems that we're relaxing the lockdown significantly while 1) R is probably a little below 1 (so that's good), but 2) with the number of infected many times too high for new cases to be dealt with by testing (and with no contact tracing happening, even now). So (unless the people ignore the "return to work" instruction) we surely will be seeing R and the cases, and then a little later, the deaths, rising again.

An open question is whether this strategy has come about through:
a) incompetence + wishful thinking, or
b) callousness + mendacity (ie deliberately aiming for herd immunity whilst denying it)
Who knows? Perhaps in Boris's head there's room for all these things.

Stom wrote:

Donny osmond wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote: 1) If we pursue a herd immunity policy (as Sweden's apparently is), and if current UK levels of infection are approx 10% of the population (as per Eugene's post), then by the end of it the total deaths will be many times what we are currently seeing, making the 250k number very feasible.

2) Sweden's approach may not be the worst in the world, there may be some things we can learn from it, but if you compare any of their numbers with South Korea's (or Singapore's, or NZ's, or Taiwan's) it's odd (to say the least) to recommend it as the strategy to follow.

3) The article in Foreign Affairs was produced by the Swedish Ratio Institute, so may not be taking an entirely unbiased view of Sweden's strategy.

Yeah, sorry, I wasn't approving, just thought it was an interesting point of view. I guess we won't know how effective their strategy has been until after the 2nd or 3rd wave has been and gone and see what the final stats are. I did see something last week from Sweden saying they had failed their elderly population, so I guess its all pretty subjective right now.

Only thing I would say is the phrase "herd immunity" has become a kind of dread phrase that should not be uttered, but it is actually the desirable end result, we're all just going on slightly different paths to get there.

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

There was another of those articles over here and my wife was talking about it.

I have friends living over there and they were not best pleased with the situation. They're not Swedes, the guy is Hungarian, the woman is Mauritian, and they have a little baby.

I don't think they'll come out better than elsewhere but that has to be couched in the idea of personal responsibility. Swedes are just better at it than Brits (or Hungarians for that matter).

If a population cannot control itself, it needs to be controlled. It's like a child: if the child cannot help itself and cuts up the tablecloth, chairs, DVDs, etc...you put the scissors somewhere out of reach.

Sandydragon wrote:

Stom wrote:

Donny osmond wrote:Yeah, sorry, I wasn't approving, just thought it was an interesting point of view. I guess we won't know how effective their strategy has been until after the 2nd or 3rd wave has been and gone and see what the final stats are. I did see something last week from Sweden saying they had failed their elderly population, so I guess its all pretty subjective right now.

Only thing I would say is the phrase "herd immunity" has become a kind of dread phrase that should not be uttered, but it is actually the desirable end result, we're all just going on slightly different paths to get there.

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

There was another of those articles over here and my wife was talking about it.

I have friends living over there and they were not best pleased with the situation. They're not Swedes, the guy is Hungarian, the woman is Mauritian, and they have a little baby.

I don't think they'll come out better than elsewhere but that has to be couched in the idea of personal responsibility. Swedes are just better at it than Brits (or Hungarians for that matter).

If a population cannot control itself, it needs to be controlled. It's like a child: if the child cannot help itself and cuts up the tablecloth, chairs, DVDs, etc...you put the scissors somewhere out of reach.

Different culture and geography in Sweden, plus they don't have a city that's the same global hub that London is. I'm all for learning lessons from other countries but its a mistake to try to copy blindly what others have done.

Stom wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

Stom wrote:
There was another of those articles over here and my wife was talking about it.

I have friends living over there and they were not best pleased with the situation. They're not Swedes, the guy is Hungarian, the woman is Mauritian, and they have a little baby.

I don't think they'll come out better than elsewhere but that has to be couched in the idea of personal responsibility. Swedes are just better at it than Brits (or Hungarians for that matter).

If a population cannot control itself, it needs to be controlled. It's like a child: if the child cannot help itself and cuts up the tablecloth, chairs, DVDs, etc...you put the scissors somewhere out of reach.

Different culture and geography in Sweden, plus they don't have a city that's the same global hub that London is. I'm all for learning lessons from other countries but its a mistake to try to copy blindly what others have done.

I don't think anyone was suggesting to copy them, but yes, I agree. And despite that...Sweden might not come out of this so well.

Sandydragon wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Banquo wrote: Yep- anyone who watched the Beeb's documentaries at the Royal Free/Barnet hospitals will be under no illusion that herd immunity is remotely viable without a viable treatment for the very ill, let alone a vaccine.

Definitely preferable to the herd immunity method employed by Europe during the black death.

Ultimately time will tell, but I'd bet a lot of money that Sweden won't finish above South Korea in the "best strategy" league.

For the UK, it seems that we're relaxing the lockdown significantly while 1) R is probably a little below 1 (so that's good), but 2) with the number of infected many times too high for new cases to be dealt with by testing (and with no contact tracing happening, even now). So (unless the people ignore the "return to work" instruction) we surely will be seeing R and the cases, and then a little later, the deaths, rising again.

An open question is whether this strategy has come about through:
a) incompetence + wishful thinking, or
b) callousness + mendacity (ie deliberately aiming for herd immunity whilst denying it)
Who knows? Perhaps in Boris's head there's room for all these things.

c) Trying to balance the risk recognising that adherence to the lockdown is waning as the death toll drops.

Unless we can eradicate the virus in the UK and then close down borders, or produce a vaccine (or even have drugs which ensure that the impact of the illness doesn't exceed that of a heavy cold/mild flu) then at some point we need to get some activity moving again.

I strongly suspect that these early baby steps may be quickly reversed however if the R rate shoots up significantly.