Tronhard wrote in post #19050653
Who has been the victim of a smear campaign and they have gone to great pains to demonstrate how they gave warnings based on the information they were given from Chinese authorities.
You might want to check what the WHO figures for Sweden are right now. They went through the roof.
According the the WHO report for 20th April:https://www.who.int …-19.pdf?sfvrsn=fcf0670b_4
Sweden (with a population of 10.23million) has 14,384 cases about 500 of which are new cases and 1540 deaths: that's a mortality rate of about 10.7%, which is very high despite having an advanced health care system.
Their delay in recognizing the need for countermeasures also impacted their testing program, which is very limited (their status on community transmission is "Pending" - i.e. they have no idea) , thus it is likely that there are many unreported cases and levels of community transmission yet to surface or be reported - if much more testing is
done it may well reveal the missing cases and return the mortality rates to the more normal 3-4% of infections. To reach a state of control they will need an extremely strict lock-down policy for some time, and have a massive increase in critical care capability and testing.
NZ's scientists did an early analysis of the scenarios, for example seeking herd immunity through no significant lockdown (alert level 1 - based on herd immunity) compared to a strict and early intervention and isolation (alert Level 4).
The graph, updated from their figures as of April 21, shows how we compared in fact to the projections. Essentially, by going hard and early NZ is surpassing the best projections for control.
The stats as of April 22
On the subject of earlier generations establishing herd immunity as a solution to this pandemic. The levels of death from pandemics were amazingly high. To quote only a few of the major ones:
The Black Death of the 14th century may have reduced the world population from an estimated 475 million to 350–375 million based on figures from the time. That's a mortality rate of almost 60%, and based on the primitive medical response at the time it could be considered resolved by herd immunity.
In history, plagues have wiped out whole populations or reduced them by as much as 80%. The example of the North American first nations in Canada and Alaska had a death rate of 80% from typhoid, without treatment.
What saved many populations was their own isolation, because the a pandemic exhausted its host population before it could reach them. Our modern, highly mobile world has not afforded us that protection. Thus, the Spanish Flu had a mortality of between 50 and 100 million. Again, this was before the age of mores sophisticated medical interventions, such as targeted antibiotics, so one can consider this herd immunity, but we were mobile as combatants and refugees traveled across the globe.
There is a scholarly book on the history of pandemics, their characteristics and results:https://books.google.co.nz …rical%20pandemics&f=false
Herd immunity MAY be established, but the patterns are pretty clear - as we allow travel and interaction, the cost of that immunity increases dramatically. Again look at the numbers for countries that have not tackled this effectively.
What I struggle to understand is the resistance to isolation calls. If one's doctor told an individual to stay home because they were sick, I would expect that the average person, even in the US, would do so. When the medical, health and scientific community say the population should stay at home for a period to reduce the risks and not overload medical resources - both of which save lives - it seems to be viewed as an attack on human rights and becomes a political issue.