"But the strategy has also resulted in Sweden having one of the highest death rates in the world, at 56.4 per 100,000, and it’s unclear whether the economy will fare much better than in neighboring Denmark and Norway, which initially imposed strict lockdowns and have seen substantially lower fatalities.
“We do not know how the virus strategy will affect the economies in the long run,” said Nordea economist Torbjorn Isaksson in emailed comments. “Our Nordic neighbors locked down but may be able to open up and normalize faster.”
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...-bad-in-europe
FACTS:
Swedens deaths = 5744
Massachusetts deaths = 8638
Oh and Sweden has 3 million more people.
Yeah, Sweden did it worse @)
"But the strategy has also resulted in Sweden having one of the highest death rates in the world, at 56.4 per 100,000, and it’s unclear whether the economy will fare much better than in neighboring Denmark and Norway, which initially imposed strict lockdowns and have seen substantially lower fatalities.
“We do not know how the virus strategy will affect the economies in the long run,” said Nordea economist Torbjorn Isaksson in emailed comments. “Our Nordic neighbors locked down but may be able to open up and normalize faster.”
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...-bad-in-europe
Who "handled" it better? Or whose "approach" was better? If your question is the latter, that remains to be seen. And may never be known for a certainty.
"But the strategy has also resulted in Sweden having one of the highest death rates in the world, at 56.4 per 100,000, and it’s unclear whether the economy will fare much better than in neighboring Denmark and Norway, which initially imposed strict lockdowns and have seen substantially lower fatalities.
“We do not know how the virus strategy will affect the economies in the long run,” said Nordea economist Torbjorn Isaksson in emailed comments. “Our Nordic neighbors locked down but may be able to open up and normalize faster.”
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...-bad-in-europe
Who "handled" it better? Or whose "approach" was better? If your question is the latter, that remains to be seen. And may never be known for a certainty.
"But the strategy has also resulted in Sweden having one of the highest death rates in the world, at 56.4 per 100,000, and it’s unclear whether the economy will fare much better than in neighboring Denmark and Norway, which initially imposed strict lockdowns and have seen substantially lower fatalities.
“We do not know how the virus strategy will affect the economies in the long run,” said Nordea economist Torbjorn Isaksson in emailed comments. “Our Nordic neighbors locked down but may be able to open up and normalize faster.”
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...-bad-in-europe
What a fag
60-70% required for herd immunity was a theory.
As science is showing, anyone who has had a common cold (type of coronavirus) is showing to have their T cells respond quickly to combating this before illness occurs, so the needed herd immunity is likely much less than 60-70%, more like 20-30% before you'd see the virus stop spreading.
Knowing that, knowing that we don't need 60% of the country to get this to slow the spread, it makes battling through it and not locking down the clearly logical choice.
That's why Sweden is operating as normal, without masks, and has almost no new death.
We should be so lucky to get to where Sweden is now. But we won't get there with liberal lockdowns.
FACTS:
Swedens deaths = 5744
Massachusetts deaths = 8638
Oh and Sweden has 3 million more people.
Yeah, Sweden did it worse @)
They only regurgitate what their handlers tell them to regurgitate
And they want us to think they're smart
Priceless
FACTS:
Swedens deaths = 5744
Massachusetts deaths = 8638
Oh and Sweden has 3 million more people.
Yeah, Sweden did it worse @)
Sweden wasn't infested with large numbers of infected people from China, Iran, Italy, etc, as the USA was early on before international travel was shut down. Reverse their locations - put Sweden where NY or other high infection zones in the US were - and you'ld see how worse off Sweden would have been and how much better off NY, etc, would have been. Better to compare Sweden with its neighboring countries to get a better guage of how it's doing relative to another approach.
"But the strategy has also resulted in Sweden having one of the highest death rates in the world, at 56.4 per 100,000, and it’s unclear whether the economy will fare much better than in neighboring Denmark and Norway, which initially imposed strict lockdowns and have seen substantially lower fatalities.
“We do not know how the virus strategy will affect the economies in the long run,” said Nordea economist Torbjorn Isaksson in emailed comments. “Our Nordic neighbors locked down but may be able to open up and normalize faster.”
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...-bad-in-europe
