Today I Heard My First . . . . .
ChatterBank0 min ago
Was Sweden Right After All?
No compulsory lockdown there. Roundly criticised by its neighbours.
However the countries which protected its citizens from the virus previously are now seeing growing numbers of cases while Sweden’s is now by comparison very low.
https:/
However the countries which protected its citizens from the virus previously are now seeing growing numbers of cases while Sweden’s is now by comparison very low.
https:/
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by ichkeria. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
You can't really compare Sweden with the UK, as Sweden has a small population and much more space, so their population density is simply not comparable. And they have nothing equivalent to the streets of terraced housing in our industrial towns and large cities. I'm doubtful that, what apparently worked there, would have worked here.
// Yes, Sweden probably has got it right. I think it likely that the scaremongerers who insisted that scientific advice was the only way to go were grossly mistaken. //
Whether or not Sweden has got it right only time will tell, although it's looking good so far, but the second sentence is highly misleading. Sweden's policy on Covid-19 was set by its scientists, not its politicians.
Whether or not Sweden has got it right only time will tell, although it's looking good so far, but the second sentence is highly misleading. Sweden's policy on Covid-19 was set by its scientists, not its politicians.
Sweden did introduce various small-scale restrictions, but the primary difference I think was that it relied on its citizens to observe the measures, and the citizens relied on its government and the independent Public Health Agency, who had the sole responsibility for determining what measures, if any, to take.
It might be said, then, that Sweden's "success" has come from making sure that politicians were kept well away from any of the key decisions at all, and they were left solely to scientists.
It might be said, then, that Sweden's "success" has come from making sure that politicians were kept well away from any of the key decisions at all, and they were left solely to scientists.
I pity ANY government worldwide to know what to do for the best. It's un-chartered waters for everyone.
My opinion is that UK has not been great at it BUT...I'd have hated to be ones in power making the call. There's so many unknowns with this virus.
I do think tho that the worst is going to be the worldwide economies - more folk will die from poverty after this all crashed than from cover.
My opinion is that UK has not been great at it BUT...I'd have hated to be ones in power making the call. There's so many unknowns with this virus.
I do think tho that the worst is going to be the worldwide economies - more folk will die from poverty after this all crashed than from cover.
I think agree with jim in that I think some countries have been much better than us at following advice and guidance. We seem to have more than our fair share of people who disagree with measures on political grounds because they dislike / distrust Hancock, Johnson etc. Maybe if the government had appointed a cross party committee working with scientists more people would have accepted restrictions.
However you can't leave things just to scientists- from a pure science point have view we could have locked down for 2 years but someone has to say no, that won't work economically or socially
However you can't leave things just to scientists- from a pure science point have view we could have locked down for 2 years but someone has to say no, that won't work economically or socially
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.