Incomudro
Well-Known Member
I believe the Swedish people on the whole are quite happy with the outcome.But was touted here by many a year ago,April-may 2020 as the gold standard that the US should be following. Can you imagine.
I believe the Swedish people on the whole are quite happy with the outcome.But was touted here by many a year ago,April-may 2020 as the gold standard that the US should be following. Can you imagine.
In a way yes, but not by locking them in their homes for 18 months, but by having a higher level of restrictions for the whole population is places where there is a higher concentration of vulnerable people. It would never actually happen that way in the real world, but it would be an efficient way to maximize protection where it was needed most.You’re not suggesting we protect the most vulnerable, are you?![]()
In the beginning the Swedes for the most part liked the idea and was very supportive. Until around the June timeframe support waned and doing a quick google search from November until now will show that their initial reaction has turned all the way around. In fact they are saying if elections were held today the opposition has a higher approval rating because of the handling of the pandemic. That’s not even counting the neighboring countries who are disapproving of how it was handled and has affecting them.I believe the Swedish people on the whole are quite happy with the outcome.
I doubt anyone in the world is quite happy with the outcome of this pandemic. They suffered great losses both in human life and economically just like the rest of the world.I believe the Swedish people on the whole are quite happy with the outcome.
Yes, agreed. Mandates and requirements mean much less when they can’t be enforced. A government would have to either fine or arrest violators which didn’t happen a whole lot and wasn’t very successful. Private businesses on the other hand can just ban people from entering if they don’t follow masks and distancing. The most effective part of government mandates was setting a tone from the top. In states that had Governors who publicly supported sensible restrictions businesses met less resistance from customers.Sorry, I added something to my last post that it seems you did not have a chance to read, so I'll add it here as well:
My view is that many state mandates were irrelevant. Instead, how strictly private businesses and retail stores (places where non-family members are most likely to gather indoors) enforced masks and social distancing is a significant factor that often gets ignored.
IMO, there was not a huge amount of variance from state-to-state because even in those states that eased up more quickly than others, most large private businesses and chain stores continued to require masks and social distancing.
So although governor 'X' had such-and-such rules and eased up on those rules at such-and-such rates, large businesses and major realtors mostly ignored what those governors were doing and kept in place the rules they were being advised to follow by their health experts.
I believe the Swedish people on the whole are quite happy with the outcome.
Yes, agreed. Mandates and requirements mean much less when they can’t be enforced. A government would have to either fine or arrest violators which didn’t happen a whole lot and wasn’t very successful. Private businesses on the other hand can just ban people from entering if they don’t follow masks and distancing. The most effective part of government mandates was setting a tone from the top. In states that had Governors who publicly supported sensible restrictions businesses met less resistance from customers.
Imagine if everyone actually just followed the covid restrictions 100% of the time, even if they thought they were unnecessary, because it was the right thing to do. We would have then known one way or the other if the restrictions actually worked. Instead we got constant resistance and then some of the same people who didn‘t follow the restrictions and recommendations then claimed they didn’t work because cases kept growing in numbers. It’s all an academic debate at this point since that ship has long ago sailed, but we may have actually had an easier time figuring out what worked and what didn’t if most or all of the people were actually following rules.
I would like to hear Fauci's stance on the ethics of gain of function research.Nope. The early estimates were not based on less contagious variants. Fauci himself said something to the effect that he used the lower number because the public wasn't ready to hear the real number and then when polls indicated higher acceptance he felt he could give he higher estimate.
The lower number was either a lie or something he just made up.
Woods said service members may have declined the offer for any one of a variety of reasons, including wanting to allow others to get the vaccine before them; having already received the vaccine through other channels; or waiting until the military makes receiving the vaccine mandatory, which it has yet to do.
Someone needs to tell those who want others to go first that they need to be on the front lines and ready to serve?Woods said service members may have declined the offer for any one of a variety of reasons, including wanting to allow others to get the vaccine before them; having already received the vaccine through other channels; or waiting until the military makes receiving the vaccine mandatory, which it has yet to do.
It would be more informative if they could quantify how many of the Marines who said “no thanks” fall into the 2 bolded categories. It’s much less of a story if half the no’s either already went or plan to go later. The general population acceptance rate in polling is still around 70% so if even 10% of the people got the vaccine through other channels that would make it about where the average poll is.
Agreed. In their defense it depends on when the response was given. If it was back in Jan/Feb when doses were very scarce I could see a 20 year old marine wanting to wait if his grandparents and other elderly relatives hadn’t gone yet. At this point nobody should be waiting for others to go. Once the vaccine gets full FDA approval I assume the DoD will mandate it for all soldiers so the ones left will get done.Someone needs to tell those who want others to go first that they need to be on the front lines and ready to serve?
Unfortunately the trial technically ends in 2023, so that might be awhile.Agreed. In their defense it depends on when the response was given. If it was back in Jan/Feb when doses were very scarce I could see a 20 year old marine wanting to wait if his grandparents and other elderly relatives hadn’t gone yet. At this point nobody should be waiting for others to go. Once the vaccine gets full FDA approval I assume the DoD will mandate it for all soldiers so the ones left will get done.
For about a year during my army career, I ran sick call for the Marines stationed at Fort Sill for artillery AIT. There seems to be something about the type of individual who joins the Marines. Generally really tough, but they turn white as a ghost if they need to receive a needle. I never noticed the same with the army.
Does not mean they have to waitUnfortunately the trial technically ends in 2023, so that might be awhile.
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.