Still can't take yes for an answer, hey? Still want to reject good news, and important good news, because it would mean admitting your side was horrendously wrong, hey? FYI, Swedish officials have said that their approach is aimed at achieving herd immunity. The article, which you apparently did not read, talks about this as well.
I notice you simply ignored the main point, i.e., that when adjusted for population size, Sweden's number of COVID-19 deaths has been 12 times lower than ours for the last three months. That should not be if the lockdown approach were the better approach.
Yeah, you'd rather trust a left-wing rag like Nature than a reputable news outlet.
Apparently you are unaware that scientists from all over the world have begun to reject the lockdown approach, including scientists from Harvard, Oxford, and Stanford. Heard of the recent Great Barrington Declaration, signed by scientists from Harvard, Oxford, Stanford, the University of London, Tel Aviv University, the University of Montreal, the University of Arizona, Baylor University, etc., etc.? You might want to read it:
https://gbdeclaration.org/
It argues for the same kind of data-driven targeted approach that I've been talking about for months, instead of the senseless liberal one-size-fits-all approach that caused tens of millions of people to lose their jobs, that shut down tens of thousands of businesses, that forced millions of people to use up their life savings just to survive, etc., etc.
You might want to check the latest trends, looks like 3000 cases in last day and deaths were 9, 400% the figure in your article. Perhaps you could point to the herd reference too.
"Sweden, which has shunned lockdowns throughout the pandemic, has registered 2,820 new coronavirus cases in 24 hours, the highest daily figure since the pandemic began.
Key points:
Sweden's death rate per capita is several times higher than its Nordic neighbours
It has reported record numbers of new cases three times in a matter of days
Tighter recommendations are now being introduced in some regions
The October 28 figure eclipsed a record set only the previous day, when more than 2,400 cases were announced, Health Agency statistics show.
It was the third record number in a matter of days and came as the country's chief epidemiologist Anders Tegnell warned against the strategy of attaining herd immunity.
"Striving for herd immunity is neither ethical nor otherwise justifiable," Dr Tegnell told German paper Die Zeit."
As for Great Barrington.....well that deserves some analysis.
My country of 25M just had a day with zero cases of community transmission. Thanks for your advise though, I believe your just had 100,000 in the same period. As we are about 12x less populous than the USA we could multiply ours by 12 and still get zero. ain’t simple maths great.
As for Nature.....a small part from from the Wiki reference...
"Nature is a British weekly scientific journal founded and based in London, England. As a multidisciplinary publication, Nature features peer-reviewed research from a variety of academic disciplines, mainly in science, technology, and the natural sciences. It has core editorial offices across the United States, continental Europe, and Asia under the international scientific publishing company Springer Nature. Nature was one of the world's most cited scientific journals by the Science Edition of the 2019 Journal Citation Reports (with an ascribed impact factor of 42.778),[1] making it one of the world's most-read and most prestigious academic journals.[2][3][4] As of 2012, it claimed an online readership of about three million unique readers per month"
Even mentioning the Solomon rag "Justthenews" in the same post is an insult to the reader's intelligence. They should stick to Hunter's laptop stuff, more their style. Dismissal of Nature without supporting evidence is particularly insulting to me as some of my research has been published in Nature, amongst other scientific journals, over a career of about 40 years. I can say that along with "Science" it is the most prestigious journal to be accepted for publication. I am bemused as to how my research could ever be classified as left or right wing. Came across an an uniformed glib dismissal using a right wing "talking point".
Is this part of a growing anti-science movement by those threatened by the uncertainty that "science" can present at times. I wonder.
