I shuddered when Neil Ferguson said “China showed the way…” Wow!!!
That is a very telling statement. Parroting CCP and WHO propaganda and in control of the “Doomsday ” model that influences the political decisions. I bet he is on the list for a fat new Chinese research grant.
The nonsense of this situation is that as both doctors said the goal of any restriction was to ensure the health systems did not get overwhelmed. Sweden has done that just as well as the UK. For myself this is the determining factor of the superior strategy of the Swedish approach.
What Neil Ferguson admits in his interview is that in his model there is no accounting for all the people that will die due to the denial of access to “elective diagnostics and procedures”, you know like chemotherapy for cancer or breast screenings or blood analysis for leukaemia. They, the virtuous Elites, term “elective”, which is very deceptive because to someone with those deadly illnesses they are pretty bloody VITAL and not elective.
Further the new deaths and loss of productivity caused by wrecking economies such as suicide, depression, mental illnesses, alcoholism, drug addiction, IPV…. The list goes on and on. The Swedes in their model see this capped at two winters which is about when the 3rd wave and another lockdown will be hitting every other nation.
Here are the known facts from the analysis of the Swedish model: The Swedes take all lumps up front because people less than 50 years continue as normal. People over 50 make a self assessment for partial or full mitigation. The economy takes a modest hit. In all other models two generations get unending austerity to pay back the debt.
Johan Giesecke and the Swedish model is the model of balanced reason. Both Morality and prosperity so the minimum harm is done to the whole society. The other model is the “Snowflake” model that is to be expected by Neo-Marxist SJW Femanazi CULT members who just love their “Virtue” so much they don’t care what it costs because they are positioned never to pay the price. That will be left to the productive middle class again.
We can at this time switch to the Swedish model and mitigate the years of devastation, but this does not fit the requirement of extreme poverty that will support the Globalists agenda. They need you poor and dependent.
This is by far, your best critique on the problem of Chinese Death Flu. Well done indeed. If only Boris Johnson KS, PM, would follow the Swedish model that you so passionately advocate. It is very similar to the rational, sound, intelligent, advice given by Lord Jonathan Sumption, so along ago now. Sadly we think of Sweden in terms of the Aga and the Volvo, and nothing else!
Martin
4 years ago
I absolutely agree that wrapping up an assessment of which expert ot believe in some kind of moral prejudice is not helpful.
But otherwise you seem to be saying that these are extremes opinions that we can’t judge, and that’s not true. Ideally we check their workings and if they haven’t shown them we should discard their opinion, if only to ensure that experts get in the habit of being open and honest. Less ideally, but still founded in evidence, is to check their assumptions against what the data tells us as it comes in.
If we can’t check their workings – if we don’t have the skills ourselves – we can at least survey the experts available rather than relying on whoever the popular press happens to put in front of us. There are experts, after all, who think even Giesecke may be somewhat more pessimistic.
Andrew Baldwin
4 years ago
I watched both interviews, and this is quite a good summary of what they were about. I thought Ferguson engaged in a cheap shot when he spoke about Giesecke being willing to just let COVID-19 kill off the older people, when that obviously wasn’t what he was calling for. The Giesecke interview didn’t bring up immigrant communities in Sweden having higher infection rates than the native-born population, but that has been discussed by Anders Tegnell, Giesecke’s successor as state epidemiologist, on April 14. Somali-born people in Sweden, who account for less than one percent of the population, account for almost five percent of the infected, which Tegnell claimed was because “these people have not integrated so well into society”. For UK-Sweden comparisons, it is worth remembering that Somalis have only about a quarter as important in the UK population as they are in the Swedish population. Giesecke said that it was only in April 2021 that one will be able to say which country had the best policy, but I suspect people will be poring over the data to see what it says or make it say what they want it to for years to come.
Marco Federighi
4 years ago
Interesting – but both scientists, at least as presented here, leave out the possibility of a “second wave” in the autumn or later. The Giesecke seems to think that once this illneess has passed through society, people will have acquired some sort of immunity and that a second wave, if it came at all, would be far less serious. So far, there is no evidence of that – we don’t know how lond antibodies will last,nor do we know how long any immunity will last: a lifetime? Weeks? Months? As to Ferguson, he seems to discount the possibility of immunity unless a vaccine is found. It seems to me that we know so little about this virus that there is no way, yet, to decide which approach was right.
Commentators whose normal field of interest is politics and culture will, of course, use those as their criteria to pick their epidemiologist, as the author correctly states. An article early today in the Guardian looked at “sceptics” as akin to climate denialist – forgetting that climate science is far more settled. The author of this article talks about the “do-gooder class”, a not very positive term. I doubt that either are looking at the issue dispassionately. Entertaining though.
Simon Flynn
3 years ago
.
‘The merits of Europe[sic]’.
.
Still waiting to hear.
.
I shuddered when Neil Ferguson said “China showed the way…” Wow!!!
That is a very telling statement. Parroting CCP and WHO propaganda and in control of the “Doomsday ” model that influences the political decisions. I bet he is on the list for a fat new Chinese research grant.
The nonsense of this situation is that as both doctors said the goal of any restriction was to ensure the health systems did not get overwhelmed. Sweden has done that just as well as the UK. For myself this is the determining factor of the superior strategy of the Swedish approach.
What Neil Ferguson admits in his interview is that in his model there is no accounting for all the people that will die due to the denial of access to “elective diagnostics and procedures”, you know like chemotherapy for cancer or breast screenings or blood analysis for leukaemia. They, the virtuous Elites, term “elective”, which is very deceptive because to someone with those deadly illnesses they are pretty bloody VITAL and not elective.
Further the new deaths and loss of productivity caused by wrecking economies such as suicide, depression, mental illnesses, alcoholism, drug addiction, IPV…. The list goes on and on. The Swedes in their model see this capped at two winters which is about when the 3rd wave and another lockdown will be hitting every other nation.
Here are the known facts from the analysis of the Swedish model: The Swedes take all lumps up front because people less than 50 years continue as normal. People over 50 make a self assessment for partial or full mitigation. The economy takes a modest hit. In all other models two generations get unending austerity to pay back the debt.
Johan Giesecke and the Swedish model is the model of balanced reason. Both Morality and prosperity so the minimum harm is done to the whole society. The other model is the “Snowflake” model that is to be expected by Neo-Marxist SJW Femanazi CULT members who just love their “Virtue” so much they don’t care what it costs because they are positioned never to pay the price. That will be left to the productive middle class again.
We can at this time switch to the Swedish model and mitigate the years of devastation, but this does not fit the requirement of extreme poverty that will support the Globalists agenda. They need you poor and dependent.
This is by far, your best critique on the problem of Chinese Death Flu. Well done indeed. If only Boris Johnson KS, PM, would follow the Swedish model that you so passionately advocate. It is very similar to the rational, sound, intelligent, advice given by Lord Jonathan Sumption, so along ago now.
Sadly we think of Sweden in terms of the Aga and the Volvo, and nothing else!
I absolutely agree that wrapping up an assessment of which expert ot believe in some kind of moral prejudice is not helpful.
But otherwise you seem to be saying that these are extremes opinions that we can’t judge, and that’s not true. Ideally we check their workings and if they haven’t shown them we should discard their opinion, if only to ensure that experts get in the habit of being open and honest. Less ideally, but still founded in evidence, is to check their assumptions against what the data tells us as it comes in.
If we can’t check their workings – if we don’t have the skills ourselves – we can at least survey the experts available rather than relying on whoever the popular press happens to put in front of us. There are experts, after all, who think even Giesecke may be somewhat more pessimistic.
I watched both interviews, and this is quite a good summary of what they were about. I thought Ferguson engaged in a cheap shot when he spoke about Giesecke being willing to just let COVID-19 kill off the older people, when that obviously wasn’t what he was calling for. The Giesecke interview didn’t bring up immigrant communities in Sweden having higher infection rates than the native-born population, but that has been discussed by Anders Tegnell, Giesecke’s successor as state epidemiologist, on April 14. Somali-born people in Sweden, who account for less than one percent of the population, account for almost five percent of the infected, which Tegnell claimed was because “these people have not integrated so well into society”. For UK-Sweden comparisons, it is worth remembering that Somalis have only about a quarter as important in the UK population as they are in the Swedish population. Giesecke said that it was only in April 2021 that one will be able to say which country had the best policy, but I suspect people will be poring over the data to see what it says or make it say what they want it to for years to come.
Interesting – but both scientists, at least as presented here, leave out the possibility of a “second wave” in the autumn or later. The Giesecke seems to think that once this illneess has passed through society, people will have acquired some sort of immunity and that a second wave, if it came at all, would be far less serious. So far, there is no evidence of that – we don’t know how lond antibodies will last,nor do we know how long any immunity will last: a lifetime? Weeks? Months? As to Ferguson, he seems to discount the possibility of immunity unless a vaccine is found. It seems to me that we know so little about this virus that there is no way, yet, to decide which approach was right.
Commentators whose normal field of interest is politics and culture will, of course, use those as their criteria to pick their epidemiologist, as the author correctly states. An article early today in the Guardian looked at “sceptics” as akin to climate denialist – forgetting that climate science is far more settled. The author of this article talks about the “do-gooder class”, a not very positive term. I doubt that either are looking at the issue dispassionately. Entertaining though.
.
‘The merits of Europe[sic]’.
.
Still waiting to hear.
.