- This topic has 618 replies, 21 voices, and was last updated 2 years, 8 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Gosh, whoever could have predicted this?
Of course, the good old Guardian wants us to believe it was caused by Covid.
Lockdowns and scaremongering, both gleefully promoted by the former newspaper, cannot possibly have had anything to do with it. Oh no!
But even advisers to Sage now admit they got it badly wrong. He will be the first of many as they start to frantically distance themselves from such a catastrophic policy:
The Guardian are asking for a £1 donation. It’s quite a serious amount of money, and at a push I could live off that for two days ( giving up my mentally healthy coffee ). I have subscribed to The Telegraph ( online )for that amount of money and get 3 months usage.
I am just about to pick up my free physical copy of the Daily Mail ( I look a lot at the pictures ) and wouldn’t be natural reader of this paper but my pocket reads it for me.https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/feb/21/boris-johnson-covid-restrictions-england
I’m not usually the first person to agree with Simon ‘Brexit’ Jenkins but he’s written a few things recently that I can’t argue with and this is one of them. Shame there’s no comments open.
I haven’t got the time to read the article properly but I noticed it mentioned Sweden again and how it hasn’t been as badly affected financially as other countries because it didn’t lock down the way that other countries did. But I’ve read throughout the pandemic that Sweden did impose quite a lot of measures and it’s a myth that Sweden has sailed through the pandemic without taking away any of its citizens freedoms.
Cork I get a daily newsletter from Nature.com. It’s not an arty farty nature tree
hugging thing, it gives relevant reports on all fields of discussion, politics, science,
opinion, news, research analysis, books and culture and lots besides. To be honest I
think it sounds right up your street. The newsletter gives you many small resumes, and
gives a read time for the report should you choose to click on the full report. I think
they are really well switched on without an agenda.I read a report, albeit August last year, which gives a different viewpoint as to the
Swedish model, and the timings of the eventual lockdown. It’s reports, and others (those
of the BMJ), show that their (Sweden’s) number of deaths per head was way higher then their
neighbours Denmark and Finland who didn’t leave it to individuals to decide, they locked down
quicker than the UK. The report viewed that if the UK followed the Swedish model, they would have
a higher percentage of deaths. Had they taken the Danish model they would have had fewer deaths.https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-95699-9
Up to you mate, take a look at it or not, it is quite long, but it is factual based on actual
numbers. I think your reporter on the Gaurdian perhaps has his own agenda as his figures are way
off. The BMJ report I spoke about has quotes from the a scientist working on the Swedish government
stratagy. He says that they would not do the same again.I think everyone, scientists, politicians and the public all need to look at all the facts so
that this never happens again. I think everyone thought they were doing the right thing, just
that some were more right than others.“Shame there’s no comments open.”
There is a reason for that. The Guardian commenting brigade want lockdown to continue forever. Anyone who suggests otherwise is greeted with fury. Jenkins would be subjected to a tidal wave of abuse if comments were permitted.
We should be careful about comparing countries. Sweden has more in common with Poland and Lithuania than it does with its Scandinavian neighbours. When compared to those countries it has done well.
I agree it is not entirely right to say Sweden had no lockdown. However, it had far less restrictions than the rest of Europe and crucially kept its schools open. It also trusted its people. Trust that was so badly lacking here, from a political class which it later transpired did not believe in the petty, draconian rules it was imposing on everyone and clearly had no intention of following itself.
Sweden was a very useful control against the experiment of lockdown. If lockdown worked and Sweden was being stupid and reckless, the bodies should have piled up. They did not. The country is in the lowest half of European covid deaths.
This article is of interest in how Sweden dealt with the pandemic:
https://unherd.com/2021/11/how-sweden-swerved-covid-disaster/
I think the key line is “The mistake the American authorities made (during Prohibition) was to underestimate the complexity of society.”
I believe this is what happened with lockdowns. They are a crude, simplistic, superficial technique. The idea they can defeat a respiratory virus and stop people from dying is crazy. That is before the damage they do is taken into consideration.
The evidence is all there. They were a total disaster. It was clear from an early stage they were catastrophic and doing far more harm than good.
It really needed a prominent politician to have the guts to stand up and admit the policy was a mistake. I think if someone had done that after about a month, the public would have accepted their honesty. However, the longer it went on the more difficult it became to end. The political class doubled down on their mistake and the situation dragged on.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.