paulry

I'm not going to sit and read through those stats without any interpretation and opinion to argue for or against. Feel free to add interpretation and opinion and maybe we can come back to it.

In the meantime, the article that you refuse to sit and watch and listen through has stats AND interpretation AND opinion. Still not interested?

Jsmth321

Yale School of Public Health saliva test for COVID has received emergency approval from the FDA, it's been used by the NBA as part of the trial.

Sure beats a swab up the nose.

Article Here

Giantaxe

You claimed it was "Interesting virus related news and stats in relation Sweden and Switzerland". Given you provided no substantiation of why you thought it was interesting, I asked you a question about said stats on Sweden and pointed out the vast discrepancy between the death rate in Sweden and its neighbours and asked your opinion on it. To me it's pretty clear that Sweden's non-shutdown policy - which the video appears to be lauding - has caused a level of death an order of magnitude - or more - higher than its neighbours. Do you agree?

Jsmth321

I do suppose having some on hand before this pandemic started would help.. Masks were not something I ever needed so never had any stocked up around the apartment.

I shouldn't have listened to the health experts in January and February when they kept saying no need for masks, by the time they said wear masks, they were in short supply and hard to find.

Steerpike

I just mentioned this in another post/thread, but for me at least, 'watching' - actually, 'listening' - to something on my laptop is not at all a productive experience. You are asking for feedback, but how do you provide that feedback if the source is audio/video, and not text? What I mean is - let's say 5 minutes into the 7 minute video, there is a statement or statistic that's worthy of discussion here? One would have to listen carefully, and transcribe the statistic. Eg, imagine you HEAR "1.23% of people from xxxx experienced blah blah, while 4.56% of people from yyy experienced ... " you now have to listen again and transcribe. Any serious information outlet should provide a transcript at the very least. My g/f is a TV watcher, not a computer user, so she has the TV on while I 'browse'. I can't easily listen to you tube vids unless I put on headphones, which is a pain for me. So ... do you have a transcript of the video you are presenting?

Steerpike

OK, despite my reluctance to listen and transcribe, I'll give it a go. First issue with that video is this (1:30 mark) 'sweden has far fewer deaths per capita than UK ...' . Looking at a respected stats site - https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/#countries - I see UK's deaths per capita is 609 while Sweden's is 572. Is that really 'far fewer'? It's almost the same. Germany is 111, and Australia is ... 16 !!

Then, at the 2:36 mark, they quote a Swedish doctor saying all the Covid19 patients have disappeared; "I haven't seen a single Covid patient in a month". But looking at another stats site, I see that Sweden still has a higher daily rate of new cases, per capita, than UK (from - An interactive visualization of the exponential spread of COVID-19 | 91-DIVOC )

So to suggest you haven't seen a single patient in over a month seems a bit excessive (maybe he's been on vacation or he's got his head in the sand?).

Since it's a pain in the ass to have to keep going back and forth, watching, typing, etc I'm going to stop now and see if you have anything meaningful to say in this regard before I go on...

Steerpike

OK, I have a bit more time to try to finish this off, since no one has replied in the meantime ...

At the 3 minute mark - "practically speaking, Covid-19 is over and done with'. How does that jive with the chart above showing a slight increase in cases? Or with the following chart from the other site, showing a gradual increase in new cases:



I happen to think the discussion about Sweden is very valid, and provides a lot of useful information since Sweden has truly taken a different path, but the video you are referencing seems to be stretching the truth, don't you think? Actually, the US is practically doing a 'Sweden', with it's pathetic attempts at lockdown and early re-openings.

This convinces me more than ever that people who produce YouTube videos really do have something to hide; they give you a 5 minute 'burst' of information, lie after lie after lie, and it's really difficult to respond unless you are willing to really work at it - compared to reading and responding to a text article.

PS - the second half of the video is all about hydroxychloroquine and Switzerland; I have so little knowledge of that whole subject, I'll give it a miss. Again, if there were a written version, it may be worth posting.

Giantaxe

It's one of those meaningless throwaway anecdotes that ignore the actual facts of the bigger picture. Rather like the "hydroxychloroquine saved my life" comments that ignore the fact that there's not a single randomized controlled trial that's yet shown a clinical benefit to that drug. In other words, a comment may be true without being usefully relevant.

jimenato

It's weird.

It's almost as if paulry has to read someone else's opinion and adopt it - that he's incapable of (or uncomfortable with) assessing facts and forming an opinion of his own.

paulry

This article indicates that where HCQ was allowed and encouraged the case fatality rates are significantly lower:

https://techstartups.com/2020/07/23/...surgeons-says/

paulry

Particularly when it comes to the CCP virus, we are all juggling with many different and varied bits of data from very many sources. None of us has access to 100% reliable and consistent information. I think we'll find that the truth lays somewhere between all of the so-called "facts".

paulry

My take on it is the UK for all it's sacrifices does not appear to be in a drastically better position than Sweden but the former has trashed it's economy and unless an effective vaccination is found first the UK's approach has been a complete failure. I agree that in some respects the USA's situation is not a million miles different to that in Sweden other than the former's flip flopping and lack of inter state unity-of-approach - not to mention BLM (which also screwed things up for the UK).

It looks like all countries will eventually reach herd immunity and for very varying reasons with different results. We wont know the true cost until global herd immunity and/or effective vaccination regimes are rolled out but right now it looks like Sweden may have taken the correct approach.

As for hydroxychloroquine, there is a written article a few posts up-thread that suggests HCQ has been effective in reducing CCP virus-related deaths.

macliam

So, because Jack starved from not eating an Apple, Jim shouldn't eat his Pear? Looking at raw numbers is a fool's game - the multiple factors underlying infection are far too complicated to make sweeping generalizations. Sweden's level of infection - and particularly it's mortality through the pandemic - is vastly higher than that of all its neighbours (in a relatively homogenous population), suggesting its approach was simply wrong. The UK demonstrably dropped it's rate of infection due to actions taken and thus avoided a meltdown in the NHS, which would have resulted in a much higher mortality rate. The only argument here is when the actions commenced, or if they were correctly focused. There is still insufficient information regarding the many variables that underpin the level of symptomatic infection, so it's impossible to say how much government intervention has changed the numbers..... except that doing nothing appears to be a very bad idea.

How do you figure that "It looks like all countries will eventually reach herd immunity"? As yet, there is no indication of the level of immunity that might be provided by prior infection or vaccination..... and the percentage of the population that must exhibit an effective immunity to the virus in order for "herd immunity" to be reached is extremely high, even if possible. We are learning more about the virus, but as usual in these situations, what we learn often disproves things we thought we knew before... such as the belief that younger people were likely to avoid infection or display few symptoms, or that age alone is a factor in survival on infection. Given the extreme variability of parameters used in reporting, it is still hard to see a definite pattern..... so studies merely demonstrate what they demonstrate.

Likewise, the effects of various treatments is merely a demonstration of the non-specificity of drugs and individual variation..... combined with the difficulty in ensuring totally controlled test parameters in a clinical environment. You are dealing with sick people, who are different, have different susceptabilities and will display similar, but different, symptoms to a variable viral load (try equalising any or all of those factors across the sample available in a given clinical population). Then you provide a given dose of a drug..... but how often will this be in an entirely consistent cocktail for all available patients, given their different reactions? In the end, some people may appear to react positively to the regime and others may not...... but whether any of the trials can produce statitically valid results, given the variability of the baseline and the interactions of all medication given, is questionable. The issue with a virus that has many different impacts on the body (respiratory, coronary, renal and the "thick blood" syndrome to name but a few) is that a medicament with a successful action on one symptom can have negative impacts on others.... and the patient's survival may become dependent on which impact "stronger" in their particular case. When frontline ICU doctors cannot say why patient A survives whilst patient B dies, suggesting that anything is a silver bullet is, frankly, dangerous.

spouse of scouse

There's probably more evidence that shows taking hydroxychloroquine kills, than there is saying is saves lives

BristolUK

So essentially another example of lies and misinformation in Paulry's videos and he's always asking what parts people disagree with.
The content is probably a reasonable answer.