@diedpretty said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1151195) said:@cochise said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1151141) said:@diedpretty said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1151110) said:@cochise said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1151095) said:@Tiger5150 said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1151093) said:@cochise said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1151092) said:@Tiger5150 said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1151090) said:@tigger said in [Coronavirus Outbreak](/post/1151072) said:The discussion you guys have been having around the Swedish response has been very interesting.
The Swedish health authorities argue that none of us will know whether or not their response was correct for at least another two years. The logic being that the disease will sweep through in recurring waves and the Swedes will be largely immune to those subsequent waves by virtue of having built up herd immunity (and protected their economy as a by-product) whilst countries that haven't built up immunity will be continually impacted.
It strikes me that the Swedish response is fundamentally pessimistic in that it assumes that the disease will continually run rampant without any effective response by mankind.
Our response appears to be far more optimistic. Suppress the disease as much as possible now in the hope that:
(a) A vaccine will be created or,
(b) Medications will be created to relieve the severe symptoms and immune responses that result in a high death rate
The Swedes may still be right but it seems to me that they have opted for the worst case scenario. Nor do I think that it will protect their economy when all of the major economies around them are tanking.
I definitely prefer the Australian and New Zealand responses to the pandemic.
The responses in the UK, the USA and some other European and South American countries appear to have simply been incompetent rather than a considered alternative.
I agree with pretty much you have posted and it summarises a lot of what I was arguing with Mike about last night. It will be at least a couple of years before we know if Sweden got it right or wrong. If I had to bet I'd say probably wrong, but it is simply not clear cut.
Along the same lines, there is a horror scenario that I havent seen discussed but is certainly possible. Australians are understandably patting ourselves on the back on how well we have controlled this outbreak. What if we never get a vaccine or effective treatment for the virus but once you get it you remain immune? This will mean that the virus will rip through the population of the rest of the world effectively until they reach herd immunity. This is exactly what happened with the Spanish Flu.
If this ends up being the scenario, we are in big trouble because the world will have reached herd immunity and will be able to open up totally, including international travel, meanwhile Aus & NZ will be sitting here totally exposed with minimal immunity and effectively isolated from the rest of the world. We would have a very difficult decision to make whether to stay isolated or effectively adopt the Swedish strategy 2 or 3 years later with much pain.
I dont think this scenario is the most likely, but it is certainly possible.
There are still so many variables at the moment, the best research at the time was to lockdown and buy yourself time, we have bought ourselves time and are opening up. To me this indicates we are just going to deal with outbreaks as they occur because we have used this time to prepare to combat this. I do not see us reversing and heading back into lockdowns as I believe our leaders think they are ready for the second wave.
I agree, and dont misunderstand my post, I am very grateful that the Aus Govt & Aussie people did what they did, but noone knows how this will turn out and the fact that the rest of the worlds experience with it is so very different to ours is not necessarily a good thing for us in the long run.
No matter what happens, out initial response has saved lives as the time we have bought has allowed our health system to be more prepared to deal with this and even if we get to a point where we are overwhelmed it will be at a much later point then would have been 2 months ago.
Yep 149,900 of them.
Not necessarily, if our numbers now go through the roof and 20000 people die, that is still better than the 150000 first predicted.
i know - just having a bit of tongue in cheek fun. There is no doubt the restrictions we had plus the bonus of being a geographically isolated country has really kept the deaths to a very low figure. I would be horrified if we had 20000 deaths. If things get out of hand when the restrictions are fully removed then we will no doubt go back in to lockdown. **How prepared people are to do that is the question.**
I suppose it depends on how much you value your family and friends. Honestly from a personal point of view, i don't worry about me, but my family in particular, i'd do anything it took to protect them.