How is Sweden doing with COVID-19 today?

2600 bro wrote:

Looks a lot like a lot of US states before the latest set of restrictions. Oh wait your video is ALSO from before the latest set of restrictions in Serbia. Must be an honest mistake - you aren't trying to be intentionally deceiving are you :)

x people wrote:

Lol. Not much had actually changed. Nothing is closed and no one wears masks outside.

People hug and kiss and do not care about distancing. They don't enforce it. Likelyy even quicker than in the spring they, like most other folks in the Euro countries will dump the masks as soon as it's not a requirement indoors in a couple of weeks. Remember, most of Europe knows this is a sham.

You covid pushers have truly lost it. That looked a lot like the us before the shutdown? Does your lying know no bounds? This is why no one can take you seriously. You're quite the genius that you've figured out the video is a couple of weeks old. I guess you didn't figure out I was talking about right now. I don't listen to only the news. Neither do many who realize the pcr testing scam is running the show. People have phones, texting capabilities, skyping capabilities, etc. People know how to communicate outside of the msm noise. I'm in a large network of people between the east coast us and central and eastern europe. I was there during the summer, and people there certainly know about people like you. You've basically become the butt of jokes.

Barely readable, but thanks, always nice to have a new fan! Your Serbian implications are nothing unique/special. We've had similar situations/approaches in locations in the US and those locations - like Serbia right now - are all under strong restrictions/lockdown. Your video and Serbian suggestion does nothing to prove the Serbia is handling the pandemic any differently than the many states/localities that have struggled to contain it!

The following bold part is what I actually said in that post, directly after cautioning on deducing trends from the swedish numbers:

I am even more comfortable than before in projecting that they will peak below Belgium and Czechia. By some margin now even (more like 1/3 in daily per capita death toll numbers, quite possibly even better..), and yes, I totally agree that condemning Sweden's strategy is premature and probably will not hold up to scrutiny when this is all done.

So yes, I did in fact say 1/3, but any literate person with average reading comprehension not going to extreme lengths trying to win an argument on the internet would deduce from that what I actually did was: doubling down on the less than and that the latter half of the sentence exists to support the projection that the first half makes.

By the way: I very much stand by, this statement. I am as confident as I can be in that it will hold up. If anything I would be willing to bet more money on it than when given, because the data coming from Sweden supports it even more now than when given, even the 1/3rd part.

I wouldn't make a projection on 1/3 yet though. Less than half, yes, definately.

Oh..

Yes. I have no issues admitting to having picked Belgium and Czechia because they have roughly the same population as Sweden and obviously that they have been hit hard in the 2nd wave.

The first makes comparing numbers easy, the other because it is relevant as Sweden as they are the gold standard for bad..

I could just as easily have mentioned others

I can expand countries I compare and predict vs too..

What about:

(Drumroll)

My prediction is that Sweden will peak with lower daily deaths per capita in 2nd wave than all of the following:

Czechia

Belgium

Hungary

Poland

France

Sweden

Austria

England

Spain

Romania

Bulgaria

Croatia

Switzerland

In fact, I don't even think they'll reach past Portugal and dutch levels.

Not sure enough to predict it even if l judge it more likely than not though.

Is that better Kåre?

I don't know how it helps your argument if Sweden turns out to have lower deaths than all of them though?

And just 1 last little note on death estimations on Sweden..

Do you realize that when you label me an optimist you are also labelling yourself an optimist?

(And this doesnt look good, because you labelled me when you labelled Lead Foil, so now you have not only labelled me, but put yourself in the same boat as you have Lead Foil).

Surely wasn't your intention was it?

But 70-80 of let's say 200 (or do you have another peak death estimate for Belgium and Czechia. I'd wager it is above for Czechia but around that number for Belgium).

Anyways, for simplicity, let's say 200.

70-80% is 35-40% of 200 no?

Please don't take offense, just asking for a friend like, but why on earth go to the trouble of labelling me an optimist when I read swedish numbers, yet you end up guesstimating the same based on the same numbers? (quote)

Last things first. I labelled even myself as an optimist when I wrote 70-80. You read that, did you? Actually, I don't hope it get worse than that. And as you have read, I wrote:

"And the highest 7 day moving average might be under 80. I hope. Probably not. And 80 is far over 1/3 when it comes to Czechia and Belgium.

1/2 of the worst hit countries this authumn, about 92 when it comes to Belgium, and 97 when it comes to Czechia. You want to bet. Let's do it. If 7 day moving day average at 92 or higher I win. What about 1000 NOK? I don't know where you live, but it seems as you know Norway very well, so one place in Oslo after New Year. You can send a friend if you want. I will be there, you can choose where and when,. You can do it on this thread. And by God I hope I loose.

I am not going in to a lengthy argument on how to interpret what you wrote, but I am familiar with hermenutics.

And some of the other countries on your list. A lot of them have a much poorer health care system than the Nordic countries, and they are much poorer. But I will comment on some:

Spain will do better than Sweden this time, and so will probably UK. France, may be. Germany far better, Netherlands better. And the other Nordic countries, you know.

Next time GDP. Again.

Thanks for you input jokester. However, the folks in Estonia, Belarus, Lithuania, Poland, Germany, Serbia, Ukraine, Hungary, Austria, Slovakia, Czech, Slovenia, Croatia, Montenegro, and Albania would like to tell you a lot of jokes about you.

Amazing lying. As if I wouldn't know. You remember clearly about your leftist army shouting Florida's dangerous approach? Well just so happens I was in Florida at the height of that BS nonsense in mid July. And then was in many of those euro countries for most of August. Guess what the difference was? You couldn't go into any store in Florida without a mask, you couldn't ride a bus without a mask, and all public places like museums were closed. Going into restaurants was ridiculous with mask necessities and half the seating off limits. NONE of that was going on in the countries in Europe that I visited. You exceeding liar.

Ok so we’ve pivoted from lockdown policies to masking as I’ve demonstrated that Serbia had similar levels of business closures and group gathering restrictions as the States.

I’ll leave masking compliments/adoption rates across the US and Europe as an exercise for the reader... but I believe the same conclusions can be reached.

I look forward to your next pivot! This is fun for me!

Pretty sure I just explained to you that business in Serbia were all open throughout the summer. But you can go on deflecting and ignoring reality as you seem quite adept at that.

Even showed you clear video footage of what was going on just a couple of weeks ago in Estonia and Serbia. At this new height of "world panic"

Still waiting for your footage of why this is so incredibly world ending.

Now this should be fun!

x people wrote:

Pretty sure I just explained to you that business in Serbia were all open throughout the summer. But you can go on deflecting and ignoring reality as you seem quite adept at that.

You are using anecdotal evidence most of the time. Serbia, like Estonia, and other Eastern or Central European countries were not hard hit in the spring. They reacted swiftly, State of Emergency in Serbia March 15, Estonia March 17. Closed down Kindergardens, Gyms, Saunas etc. A lot of though restrictions were put in place. So also in Norway where I live. And they like us opened up again. It was a nice summer in many ways. "Everything" was open.

But most of these European countries are on the rise again. They were too sloppy in the summer. Serbia now 7 day moving average 54 deaths equals 2040 in USA where the highest number so far is 1713. Where I live and in Estonia we are managing; pretty low numbers. But restrictions, oh yes. We don't it want the Central European way. But even here where I am we shouldn't be so cocksure. Mistakes are made. Business was open here too, so what???

Forgive me if I am not being clear... Business (indoor dining, bars, etc.) in the US were ALSO open over the summer and fall. NOW Serbia and most US states are imposing strict rules banning indoor dining, forcing salons and gyms to close or scale to extremely low occupancy etc. Serbia is not any different than many US States that also failed to prevent this winter wave - that is the point.

x people wrote:

Pretty sure I just explained to you that business in Serbia were all open throughout the summer. But you can go on deflecting and ignoring reality as you seem quite adept at that.

x people wrote:

Pretty sure I just explained to you that business in Serbia were all open throughout the summer. But you can go on deflecting and ignoring reality as you seem quite adept at that.

Yeah, awesome, really cool story. Just like most of the US that thought they were in the clear for the summer and early fall because cases were low. Now the cases have spiked and death rates are following in-step.

Do you really think those lax attitudes and lack of sustainable protocols DIDN'T lead to the situation Serbia and half of Europe are in? Do you have such a short-term view of this that one sign of success (or lack of failure) at one point in time must mean "it's all good?"

Most of the western world is paying the price for their hubris, short-term satisfaction and vulnerability to groupthink about the situation not being as bad as it is/could be, at a point in time. The problem is, despite the played-out arguments about survivability, "it's just the flu" and it "only kills the vulnerable:" the bodies keep piling up and society, at large, has to answer for that failure.

Really?

You are priceless Kåre..

But ok, from one optimist to a self proclaimed one:

Are you really that statistically illiterate?

(Just giving you the opportunity to throw the label ad hominem fallacy in there even if the question is quite legitimate at this point)

My own, very manual counting of covid deaths in Czechia from woldometer on what looks visually to be close to peak:

Nov 1: 195

Nov 2: 201

Nov 3: 239

Nov 4: 208

Nov 5: 173

Nov 6: 181

Nov 7: 179

Average of 196,6

For simplicity's sake I said 200, but that Czechia was probably a little over.

Let's check with reality shall we?

Ourworldindata.org gives Czechia's 7 day moving average peak on nov 5 at 209.71.

So that's the facts.

Another fact: 80/209.71 = 38.14

So far we agree no?

Since I've previously said that your estimate is in fact roughly 35-40% of Czechia and Belgium's peak numbers and since I don't disagree with math I obviously agree that 35-40% is more than a 3rd.

However: In the context given though, you bet, I'd say your estimate is roughly the same as my 1/3..

I mean, if you want to claim 38.14% is far above 1/3, be my guest. I will never disagree that it's over.

But does it REALLY matter if a country peak at 33% or 38% of another country?

No it doesn't. It's pretty much the same.

So it isn't far over is it? not really, not in this context.

Also the lower end of your estimate = 70/209.71 = 33.37 of Czechia's peak.

Close enough to 1/3 for you taste?

As previously stated I am 100% willing to bet that Sweden will peak lower than half of Czechia's and Belgium's peak.

Why? Because even if Sweden's 7 day average goes up well over 130% from current numbers, that statement will hold true.

What I see when looking at data from Sweden is that number of infections looks to have started to trend ever so slightly downwards and hospitalizations looks to be plateauing albeit possibly rising still. (If rising it's not much anymore)

That's very promising

That means that death will hopefully follow soon

This is not neccecarily what goes on in Sweden, it's just what I see when looking at Sweden's number.

As to countries on my list, well Germany isn't even on my list and Germany's number are spiking hard, much like Sweden's by the way, so it's a bit difficult to compare, but yes, I'd wager you are correct on that one.

They are strangely following Sweden in this wave, so it is far from certain they'll beat them, but sure, I reckon they probably will.

Have to say though: Gonna be interesting to see if frowned upon Sweden will beat Germany (The closest we have to a "model" country in Europe of all countries with a large population)

As to Spain, a country that I have actually mentioned, well, their peak of about 96 (that's adjusted to Sweden's population, their real peak in the 7 day moving average is 441) is likely to be higher than Sweden. So no, sorry to disagree with you, but Sweden will by my estimate do better.

France's peak is basically the same as Spain on a per capita basis (626 real numbers), so again, Sweden will come in lower.

UK, their peak is about 74 (adjusted to Sweden), real number is 487. Yeah, as mentioned in my post I hadn't actually studied the numbers (Very conveniantly you cut out the disclaimer part that said I hadn't actually studied the numbers, but for some strange reason you kept what I wrote both above and below). You're systematically naughty Kåre, aren't you?

But yeah, now that I have actually studied the numbers (just a tad) because of your foolish attempts at twisting the numbers to fit your version of reality, I'll give you the following:

It COULD actually be that Sweden goes higher than the UK, I don't think so mind, but if UK has peaked (their 7 day moving average peak was just 5 days ago) and Sweden continue to rise longer than I anticipate, yes, possibly. I don't think Sweden will pass them by much if they do, but sure.

Possibly. I'll give you that.

What about I change my statement to:

They'll come under at least 11 of the 12 countries I claimed they'd come in under earlier, also the countries in that list with comparable health care to Sweden, but they might struggle to come in lower than the UK (the 12 county I mentioned. Well, I did actually list Sweden too, but you can see how that was a mistake no?)

Given the disclaimer I wrote when predicting earlier, where I specifically mentioned that I hadn't actually looked at the numbers, that's fair right?

And what about Italy Kåre? Do they have good enough hopsitals for you? They're in my list. They claim to be among the best in the world? Adjusted to Swedish population their daily death numbers are over 120.

Austria? Good enough health care? Their numbers are still rising by the way, and adjusted to Sweden's population their numbers are approaching 115.

Switzerland? Some of the best hospitals in the world apparently. I think they have peaked. Adjusted numbers above 110 too...

I am sure there must be other reasons not to compare Sweden with these countries, because you're not claiming them have bad hospitals do you?

Anyways: The betting.

You wrote the bolded part below:

1/2 of the worst hit countries this authumn, about 92 when it comes to Belgium, and 97 when it comes to Czechia. You want to bet. Let's do it. If 7 day moving day average at 92 or higher I win. What about 1000 NOK?

Sorry. Please help me. English isn't my native tongue, so even if I think I know what you mean, I need to be 100% sure that I read you correctly if I am gonna bet against it.

So just to be sure, what you are trying to say is (my interpretation):

half of Belgium's 7 day moving average is 92 and Czechia's number is 97? and if Sweden comes in above Belgium's number you win?

Am I right?

If so: I mean, sure, I'd obviously take that bet being an optimist betting another optimist.

I am sorry to inform you that the data in your bet is wrong though.

You see (as shown at the top of my answer) Belgium's number is in fact 206, so half would be 103.

And Czechia's number is actually 210 (209.71 to be precise), so half would be 105.

But if you are willing to accept that the numbers are what I say; I will take that bet.

I'll even bet against Belgium's lower number of 103 as opposed to the more fairer number of 104 (since I have always mentioned both Belgium and Czechia).

Sounds fair?

As for my data: ourworldindata.org have nice graphs with moving 7 day average of covid deaths.

Can we agree to use them as source?

Unlike you I don't want to make money of people dying though, so how about we change it to:

If I win, you'll donate to a charity of my choosing and if you win I'll donate to a charity of your choosing?

Have no doubt, I would even bet against Sweden going over 92, but that number just isn't a fair representation of half of Belgium's actual number and even less so when it comes to half of Czechia's, so I won't, just on general principle, as I won't bet against your bent version of reality.

If however you admit to my numbers being correct, I'll sweeten the deal for you:

I'll bet against 92.

That number is significantly below 104 though (and also Spain and France), so just to be clear I'd be lowering my prediction to less than 44% of Belgium and Czechia's peak.

That means for instance that if I lose the bet but Sweden peak at 95 my original predictions holds true.

Both on Sweden peaking on less than half of the infamous two, but also lower than all countries bar maybe UK of the extended list.

If Sweden peak at 104, my original prediction of less than half is bust and my 2nd extended list of Sweden peaking under a bunch of countries bar maybe UK is bust too

just for you...

Do we have a deal?

Just a few other questions:

Do you realize that the numbers we are betting on means that Sweden will manage fine in the 2nd wave?

Nothing close to Czechia, Belgium, Hungary or Poland.

Not even Austria, Switzerland or Italy and a bunch of other european countries.

More than likely below Spain and France too.

Do you realize it also underlines my point that our positions are not that different?

Do you realize that insisting on Sweden doing badly when they are in fact not indicates you have a anti-Sweden bias?

Probably no to all 3 questions above, I know.. ;)

Anyways, I digress...

Please Kåre.

Write your next GDP piece.

I beg you!

Remember, I haven't actually bothered to counterargue your latest post on it yet, so you have no clue what I am gonna write.

Well. You have my little equation.

But please, write more on GDP..

I can't wait!

I promise to answer, probably more thoroughly than I have ever done before!

Am I the only one that think it is funny that you are gonna write a new post on GDP to counter a post I haven't written yet?

Haha!

I'll admit to having an unusual sense of humour so don't think about it Kåre, it's all good!

KaareV:

And some of the other countries on your list. A lot of them have a much poorer health care system than the Nordic countries, and they are much poorer. But I will comment on some:

Spain will do better than Sweden this time, and so will probably UK. France, may be. Germany far better, Netherlands better. And the other Nordic countries, you know.

Next time GDP. Again.[/quote]

Budda:

Really?

You are priceless Kåre..

But ok, from one optimist to a self proclaimed one:

Are you really that statistically illiterate?

(Just giving you the opportunity to throw the label ad hominem fallacy in there even if the question is quite legitimate at this point)

My own, very manual counting of covid deaths in Czechia from woldometer on what looks visually to be close to peak:

Nov 1: 195

Nov 2: 201

Nov 3: 239

Nov 4: 208

Nov 5: 173

Nov 6: 181

Nov 7: 179

Average of 196,6

For simplicity's sake I said 200, but that Czechia was probably a little over.

Let's check with reality shall we?

Ourworldindata.org gives Czechia's 7 day moving average peak on nov 5 at 209.71.

So that's the facts.

Another fact: 80/209.71 = 38.14

So far we agree no?

Since I've previously said that your estimate is in fact roughly 35-40% of Czechia and Belgium's peak numbers and since I don't disagree with math I obviously agree that 35-40% is more than a 3rd.

However: In the context given though, you bet, I'd say your estimate is roughly the same as my 1/3..

I mean, if you want to claim 38.14% is far above 1/3, be my guest. I will never disagree that it's over.

But does it REALLY matter if a country peak at 33% or 38% of another country?

No it doesn't. It's pretty much the same.

So it isn't far over is it? not really, not in this context.

Also the lower end of your estimate = 70/209.71 = 33.37 of Czechia's peak.

Close enough to 1/3 for you taste?

As previously stated I am 100% willing to bet that Sweden will peak lower than half of Czechia's and Belgium's peak.

Why? Because even if Sweden's 7 day average goes up well over 130% from current numbers, that statement will hold true.

What I see when looking at data from Sweden is that number of infections looks to have started to trend ever so slightly downwards and hospitalizations looks to be plateauing albeit possibly rising still. (If rising it's not much anymore)

That's very promising

That means that death will hopefully follow soon

This is not neccecarily what goes on in Sweden, it's just what I see when looking at Sweden's number.

As to countries on my list, well Germany isn't even on my list and Germany's number are spiking hard, much like Sweden's by the way, so it's a bit difficult to compare, but yes, I'd wager you are correct on that one.

They are strangely following Sweden in this wave, so it is far from certain they'll beat them, but sure, I reckon they probably will.

Have to say though: Gonna be interesting to see if frowned upon Sweden will beat Germany (The closest we have to a "model" country in Europe of all countries with a large population)

As to Spain, a country that I have actually mentioned, well, their peak of about 96 (that's adjusted to Sweden's population, their real peak in the 7 day moving average is 441) is likely to be higher than Sweden. So no, sorry to disagree with you, but Sweden will by my estimate do better.

France's peak is basically the same as Spain on a per capita basis (626 real numbers), so again, Sweden will come in lower.

UK, their peak is about 74 (adjusted to Sweden), real number is 487. Yeah, as mentioned in my post I hadn't actually studied the numbers (Very conveniantly you cut out the disclaimer part that said I hadn't actually studied the numbers, but for some strange reason you kept what I wrote both above and below). You're systematically naughty Kåre, aren't you?

But yeah, now that I have actually studied the numbers (just a tad) because of your foolish attempts at twisting the numbers to fit your version of reality, I'll give you the following:

It COULD actually be that Sweden goes higher than the UK, I don't think so mind, but if UK has peaked (their 7 day moving average peak was just 5 days ago) and Sweden continue to rise longer than I anticipate, yes, possibly. I don't think Sweden will pass them by much if they do, but sure.

Possibly. I'll give you that.

What about I change my statement to:

They'll come under at least 11 of the 12 countries I claimed they'd come in under earlier, also the countries in that list with comparable health care to Sweden, but they might struggle to come in lower than the UK (the 12 county I mentioned. Well, I did actually list Sweden too, but you can see how that was a mistake no?)

Given the disclaimer I wrote when predicting earlier, where I specifically mentioned that I hadn't actually looked at the numbers, that's fair right?

And what about Italy Kåre? Do they have good enough hopsitals for you? They're in my list. They claim to be among the best in the world? Adjusted to Swedish population their daily death numbers are over 120.

Austria? Good enough health care? Their numbers are still rising by the way, and adjusted to Sweden's population their numbers are approaching 115.

Switzerland? Some of the best hospitals in the world apparently. I think they have peaked. Adjusted numbers above 110 too...

I am sure there must be other reasons not to compare Sweden with these countries, because you're not claiming them have bad hospitals do you?

Anyways: The betting.

You wrote the bolded part below:

1/2 of the worst hit countries this authumn, about 92 when it comes to Belgium, and 97 when it comes to Czechia. You want to bet. Let's do it. If 7 day moving day average at 92 or higher I win. What about 1000 NOK?

Sorry. Please help me. English isn't my native tongue, so even if I think I know what you mean, I need to be 100% sure that I read you correctly if I am gonna bet against it.

So just to be sure, what you are trying to say is (my interpretation):

half of Belgium's 7 day moving average is 92 and Czechia's number is 97? and if Sweden comes in above Belgium's number you win?

Am I right?

If so: I mean, sure, I'd obviously take that bet being an optimist betting another optimist.

I am sorry to inform you that the data in your bet is wrong though.

You see (as shown at the top of my answer) Belgium's number is in fact 206, so half would be 103.

And Czechia's number is actually 210 (209.71 to be precise), so half would be 105.

But if you are willing to accept that the numbers are what I say; I will take that bet.

I'll even bet against Belgium's lower number of 103 as opposed to the more fairer number of 104 (since I have always mentioned both Belgium and Czechia).

Sounds fair?

As for my data: ourworldindata.org have nice graphs with moving 7 day average of covid deaths.

Can we agree to use them as source?

Unlike you I don't want to make money of people dying though, so how about we change it to:

If I win, you'll donate to a charity of my choosing and if you win I'll donate to a charity of your choosing?

Have no doubt, I would even bet against Sweden going over 92, but that number just isn't a fair representation of half of Belgium's actual number and even less so when it comes to half of Czechia's, so I won't, just on general principle, as I won't bet against your bent version of reality.

If however you admit to my numbers being correct, I'll sweeten the deal for you:

I'll bet against 92.

That number is significantly below 104 though (and also Spain and France), so just to be clear I'd be lowering my prediction to less than 44% of Belgium and Czechia's peak.

That means for instance that if I lose the bet but Sweden peak at 95 my original predictions holds true.

Both on Sweden peaking on less than half of the infamous two, but also lower than all countries bar maybe UK of the extended list.

If Sweden peak at 104, my original prediction of less than half is bust and my 2nd extended list of Sweden peaking under a bunch of countries bar maybe UK is bust too

just for you...

Do we have a deal?

Just a few other questions:

Do you realize that the numbers we are betting on means that Sweden will manage fine in the 2nd wave?

Nothing close to Czechia, Belgium, Hungary or Poland.

Not even Austria, Switzerland or Italy and a bunch of other european countries.

More than likely below Spain and France too.

Do you realize it also underlines my point that our positions are not that different?

Do you realize that insisting on Sweden doing badly when they are in fact not indicates you have a anti-Sweden bias?

Remember, I haven't actually bothered to counterargue your latest post on it yet, so you have no clue what I am gonna write.

Well. You have my little equation.

Haha!

I'll admit to having an unusual sense of humour so don't think about it Kåre, it's all good![/quote]

You admit? You were/are trying to belittle me, Budda. Your sense of humor? No humor detected so far. It wasn't about that. And still you are not answering questions. If I wrote that you are full of selfrighteousness and even a monomaniac. Y es, I could have written that, using your ways of deduction. But I don't know your motives and intentions. But you think you know mine.

Lets make this bet very simple. Yes, by now we know that you are quite good at statistics and math. Nice demonstration. Or did you forget per capita?

You know as well as I do that there are big differences in how countries were hit. Yes, the Italian Health Care System is good. And they managed to protect Rome, far far better than the Swedes protected Stockholm. Region Lazio ( a bit over 5 M inhabitans) and Region Stockholm ( a bit over 2) approx the same numbers of Covid deaths in this Pandemic.

My approach to the bet. Very simple. It is about Belgium. I used Worldometer highest 7 day moving average: 205. and I wrote that 1/2 is 92. Just to be on the right side.

In Belgium 11.611M inhabitans according to Worldometer and Sweden 10. 126, but since I know Sweden and are trying to be fair I adjusted it to 10.350.

And this is how it goes, per capita, 10350 divided with 11611 is 0, 8914.

205 x 0,8914 = 182,737:2= 91,3685. And then we upgrade it to, yes, 92. So 92 should be more than 50 %. This is what you call my "bent version of reality". so you won't bet on it. Now, this time. Answer my question: Is this my twist or spin, my be version of reality? Actually you wrote: "

Since you know that I am in my 70ties, just as Trump and Biden, so my cognitive abilities are slowing down. And since my English is rusty, so might be I don't catch a nuance or two, or actually three.

And this time again, you are unstoppable, and you defy the rules of logic, demonstrating all these Ad Hominems, and "deductions". And now you try again.

"Do you realize that on insisting on Sweden doing badly when they are in fact not, indicates that you have a anti-Sweden bias". So when you write: "Are you statistically illiterate?". I can movbe down to your level and ask:

Are you illiterate when it comes to logic, both formal and informal, actually mostly informal?

No, it doesn't "indicate" anything, even if I buy that Sweden "in fact" are not doing badly.

But you are insiting on that I accept your context, even if we use two different contexts, we have done since the beginning of this whole "conversation". Mine has been from the start on this thread.

1.SWEDEN is not the bright shining example that all this extreme rightwing bigots claim.

2. I have again and again compared Sweden with the other Nordic Countries. But your context is comparing with all those countries that has few similarties with Sweden. The Nordic welfare states, you know. And our societies gave us a headstart. But the underlying Herd Immunity approach sent Sweden into this mess.

3. A lot of Swedish scientists has criticised the Tengell way. Now also Britton, selfciticism. But thay are not Anti_Swedish, are they?

You know all facts have to interpreted, right? You are using your own, a bit twisted way. I accept that from your standard Sweden will to well, compared with, may be, even Italy in wave 2. Italy at 124 compared with Sweden.

And GDP. You say you are an economist, i.e. a macroeconomist. You have not shown that so far. But may be, finally you will.

SWEDEN TODAY

35 new deaths, promising. 6485 infected, not so promising. But they are testing more. Positivity rate 13.3. Highest 7 day moving; Nov 24: 47, promising. Under 80 deaths tomorrow would also be promising.

What a remarkably unsatisfying waste of time.

You guys know what your doing basically amounts to screaming at a mirror

The Unkle wrote:

KaareV wrote:

Das Unkle, Sweden. 4. Nov you wrote: "Oh my God. Single figure daily deaths in a nation of 10 million. Three and a half months with single digit deaths except a day of 10".

Even that was not entirely correct. Because the numbers of deaths had just started to climb. Three days before 22 deaths. At 31 October 13. How do you reflect on your comment now? That is was nearly correct. You were just descriptive? No, that would be a misinterpretation of yourself.

It was precisely correct based on the official numbers at the time I posted it.

Do you really not understand that?

Absolutely. It is about what you write and what you don't write. Even though it seems correct it is normative. And if you look closer to what I wrote, Unkle: "That it was nearly correct". So now I know, you are both Das Unkle and The Unkle. It always depends of what you mean by "official numbers".

snerd McIntyre wrote:

What a remarkably unsatisfying waste of time.

You guys know what your doing basically amounts to screaming at a mirror

And you are wasting your time too. Both reading and commentating. But to a certain degree I agree with your first sentence,. Since I am a foreigner I find some delight in all this. Though, tell you later. About a month from now.

The Unkle wrote:

[quote]KaareV wrote:

SWEDEN TODAY

117 new deaths since Friday.

Not per the CDC.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/sweden/

Let's do the match. Nov 27 (Friday) through Nov 30 (when you made this claim).

14+8+8+3 = 33.

Not quite 117.

I wrote that it would be over 100 today. That was wrong.

Today:

26+19+29+13= 90.

Will keep you posted.

KaareV wrote:

SWEDEN TODAY

35 new deaths, promising. 6485 infected, not so promising. But they are testing more. Positivity rate 13.3. Highest 7 day moving; Nov 24: 47, promising. Under 80 deaths tomorrow would also be promising.

Per the above source, we see that 243,306 current active cases of Covid.

Scary, right?

But, we than also see that 243,057 are mild cases (which includes no symptom cases)' leaving 249 cases called critical or serious.

99.9% mild. 0.1% serious or critical.

Dunno where you are getting your daily death numbers.

But this source shows no day with deaths as high as 35 since Nov 26 (one week ago).

It is very difficult, at least for some, to keep track of the Swedish numbers of deaths. But don't worry if you don't understand the Swedish reporting system. It is very difficult even , for the Mastermind behind the Swedish Strategy the head epidemiologist Anders Tegnell, too. He has always been optimistic. So in November when the mumbers went up to 40 or more, he thought it was only 20 a day:

https://www.thelocal.se/20201203/fact-check-what-was-swedens-covid-19-death-rate-in-mid-november