Welcome to NexusFi: the best trading community on the planet, with over 150,000 members Sign Up Now for Free
Genuine reviews from real traders, not fake reviews from stealth vendors
Quality education from leading professional traders
We are a friendly, helpful, and positive community
We do not tolerate rude behavior, trolling, or vendors advertising in posts
We are here to help, just let us know what you need
You'll need to register in order to view the content of the threads and start contributing to our community. It's free for basic access, or support us by becoming an Elite Member -- see if you qualify for a discount below.
-- Big Mike, Site Administrator
(If you already have an account, login at the top of the page)
This is an opinion piece and it is quite pessimistic, but unfortunately it is by a Harvard epidemiologist, who just might understand what he is talking about.
I understand completely why well-intentioned people do not want any more of this virus lockdown, and I do not either. The reasons are varied, and some may be more solid than others, but the fact is that it sucks.
I am of the view that the virus has been under-reacted to, rather than over-reacted to, although I would be very happy if I turn out to be wrong.
Unfortunately, we will not know until we see how it goes, longer-term, and probably not until after the restrictions have been loosened and we see how that goes. This is sort of like playing Russian roulette -- you don't know if there was a bullet in the chamber until you've blown your brains out.
There will be, at some point, one or more treatments, and at a later point, one or more vaccines. So it's not forever.
I know that the subject brings out strong reactions for people, and it does for me too. But I am settled in for the long haul.
I hope everyone stays safe, and I would love to be wrong.
Bob.
When one door closes, another opens.
-- Cervantes, Don Quixote
The spread suggests that it is unrealistic for the United States, Europe and the rest of the world to return to the way they were anytime soon, even if viral curves appear to flatten.
R.I.P. Roy Goldberg (srgtroy), 1965-2023.
Please visit [url="https://nexusfi.com/off-topic/60226-srgtroy-r-i-p-brotha.html[/url] for more information.
1. Sweden virologist se clear signs of flock immunity in poplulation. 2. Antibody tests from 250 retirement homes in diffrent locations shows that 33% already have anti bodies, 20 % are infected with and without antibodies . The remaing are negtive. 99% of the infected have none or minor symtoms .
If this is so Covid-19 death rate in sweden should be less the 0.01% in reality.
Putting this here purely fwiw, in a forum open to varied perspectives. I've no interest in debating. Don't shoot the messenger. Tired of the whole topic, as I try to keep up to date minimally. By that I mean it's too easy to be consumed by the enormity of it all and neglect focusing on things in our control. Better things to do in the few hours we have each day.
I gather this has developed quite an audience in the few days it's been out. Some of the Comments are of value as well. Better than the Subheading read I think is to listen to this man for a spell and make up your own mind about him and his words.
Youtube title: ''Why lockdowns are the wrong policy - Swedish expert Prof. Johan Giesecke''
Subheading: “That was one of the more extraordinary interviews we have done here at UnHerd. Professor Johan Giesecke, one of the world’s most senior epidemiologists, advisor to the Swedish Government (he hired Anders Tegnell who is currently directing Swedish strategy), the first Chief Scientist of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, and an advisor to the director general of the WHO, lays out with typically Swedish bluntness why he thinks: - UK policy on lockdown and other European countries are not evidence-based -
The correct policy is to protect the old and the frail only -
This will eventually lead to herd immunity as a “by-product” -
The initial UK response, before the “180 degree U-turn”, was better -
The Imperial College paper was “not very good” and he has never seen an unpublished paper have so much policy impact - The paper was very much too pessimistic - Any such models are a dubious basis for public policy anyway -
The flattening of the curve is due to the most vulnerable dying first as much as the lockdown - The results will eventually be similar for all countries -
Covid-19 is a “mild disease” and similar to the flu, and it was the novelty of the disease that scared people. -
The actual fatality rate of Covid-19 is the region of 0.1% - At least 50% of the population of both the UK and Sweden will be shown to have already had the disease when mass antibody testing becomes available”
