Comments by "Xyz Same" (@xyzsame4081) on "John Anderson Media" channel.

  1. July 14 2020: your comment did not age well. - MOST wealthy nations have a grip on the pandemic, but not the U.S., U.K. and Sweden. Their death number curve has STILL not flattened, the numbers of deaths are STILL RISING in Sweden, U.S. U.K. - it has gotten much ! worse in the U.S. in the last days.
    3
  2. The only chance to contain the virus , is to have low case numbers to begin with and then to nip it in the bud. Almost all other countries needed a lockdown to return to the stage they had in Feburuary, when they would have had a chance to contain it - but only with testing and PPE ready to go. Most nations were not prepared (exception Taiwan, South Korea, ...) so they had to pay the price - and they learned from it. It cost them the lockdown to return to a stage where it is manageable. The deaths in Florida (or Arizona, Texas, ...) will manifest in 3 - 5 weeks, there is a lag. Even if most cases are harmless or the patients are ony very uncomfortable for 1 - 2 weeks but do not need the hospital - there will be a fallout in form of overwhelmed hospitals and preventable deaths.
    3
  3. It is a numbers game. Have huge numbers of infected people with not too bad outcomes in most cases - the hospital, ICU cases and deaths will be a byproduct of the LARGE NUMBERS. "Spreads like a wildfire" easily undoes "death rate is lower than we thought, because there are so many untedetced cases". Yes, and the many undeteected cases means it is more contagious, the damn thing does spread like a wildfire. See Florida, Texas, Italy, and China in Wuhan until the Chinese could be bothered to get their head out of the sand. And we do not have so harmless outcome in almost all cases, that we could let it spread and get herd immunity with little sacrifices (death toll). We are caught in the unhappy middle. Herd immunity starts with 50 % of the population have at least some immunity. The more contagious a disease is the higher the immunity must be - for CoVid-19 it would have to be in the 70 - 80 % range. As individual you would rather have CoVid-19 than Ebola (the 2013 strain) or get MERS (which is a quite deadly but not very contagious version of corona virus). The Ebola virus is likely as contagious as Sars-CoV-2 (at least somewhat in the same league). But there are no "light" or asymptomatic cases, so the health professionals and epidemiologists always know WHERE the infection cases are IF you have the resources of modern medicine and a modern administration. That means Ebola is still easier to contain, even though it is fairly contagious and a terrible disease. MERS has a 30 % death rate (the death rate may be even higher for Ebola) - but it is not vey contagious. A modern medical SYSTEM can contain these terrible infections - as bad as it is for the unfortunate individuals that contract it. The WHO had warned months before that the African nations did not have the medical systems, the doctors the money and resources to deal with Ebola on their own. Only when it become a likely scenario that Ebola would spill over to the wealthy nations (2013) they jumped into action, funded the counter measures. Ebola was contained fast after that - once it was handled with modern medicine. it did not even cost that much to help out the poor African nations, and there was no lockdown discussed. (I do not even know if there were mild and selective restrictions on airtraffic - which proves my point, it was a tempest in the teacup for the rich nations).
    3
  4. We also had the 2009 FLU PANDEMIC. Estimates: 700 million to 1,4 billion got infected. but it was not as deadly, did not cause nearly as many hospital stays. AND IF people died of it, they mostly died within a short time. There were not nearly as many hospital stays or ICU beds necessary. Either people were getting better after 7 - 10 days. Or the died. Or had died already. Most lived and revovered at home, Those who died, did so fast. The hospitals were full then, too, but nothing like now in the areas where there is a surge of corona virus. It was not even discussed to restrict airtraffic for a few weeks, or wearing masks in 2009 (measures that are not too costly for the national economy) . As government / epidemiologist you would rather NOT have a contagious infection with a lot of light and undetected cases (when these cases stll can spread the infection). you would rather deal with a terrible disease that is easier to contain.
    3
  5. 7 of 9 Sweden has bad results (deaths in care homes, among the elderly), but their hospitals do better than those in the U.K. and the U.S. Several reasons (and some quite sinister - see next comment): Their healthcare system is much better funded that that of the U.K. Or in the U.S. for low income people. They have paid sick leave. Single payer so medical care free at the point of service. Sweden allegedly does not test much ..... Employees in Europe with a "cold" do not have to gamble, they get their test free, the result fast, if it is corona (or something else that they recover from at home) they continue to have full income (and usually it is hard to fire them during the time of sick leave, and what is the point of firing them after they have recovered and return to work). In the U.S.: Many cannot missout on the wage for a few days. Plus they would get fired. Or they cannot afford the doctor / hospital visit (if it turns out is is not corona the usual bad conditions apply). A younger worker with no preexisting condtions that needs the income, has no sick leave, and is under insured, may be tempted to "wing it" and hope for the best, while they continue to go to work (after taking anti-fever medication). Chances are THEY are not going to die. If they end up in the hospital - they would have landed there anyway. With that gamble (that is forced on them) they endanger of course others who are older, overweight, have high risk relatives at home and bring the virus into their families - from work. Potential spreaders (especially if low-income) mainly think of themselves: they often lived from pay cheque to pay cheque in the "good" economy (2015 - 2019) - Society also does not care about them either. Or they would have paid sick leave and single payer already. Sweden has also the advantage of having more hospital beds than the U.S. per 1000 residents (that U.S. number is no hard to beat, even Italy does better and they have been applying austerity on their healthcare system before the corona virus crisis).
    2
  6. In Florida aprox 19 % of those that are tested, test positve (around July 10, 2020). That is a STATE AVERAGE (it was over 30 % in one county). The 19 % number (in that range, could be 18 or 20 %) is extremely high. Of course they are behind with testing, it takes 7 - 10 days for affluent people ! (aquaintances of Ana Navarro who lives in FL) to get a test result. The labs are overwhelmed, and of course the admin did not push to establish capacities for fast testing when there was time. All other wealthy nations did use the time of lockdown in March and Aril to prepare. Almost all nations initially dragged their feet, but then they - finally ! - jumped into action, all hands on deck, and they learned the lesson from unfortunate Italy who was the first to be hit badly outside of China. Italy paid dearly for the hard won insights (and nations that were lucky that they were NOT the first ones learned from their warning example. With an denial stage in February, but then they did). Italy NOW also has a grip on the case numbers. Currently Europeans are allowed to travel between those countries. they try to find a balance between summer tourism and being cautious. They have contact tracing resp. testing people around confirmed infections - other countries watch like hawks every - potential - cluster, and not even with "cluster relatated testing" they find 19 % that test positive for SARS-CoV-2 The damn virus is so contagious and "sneaky" in the way it spreads: Asymptomatic spreaders. Medical staff that wears protective gear gets it anyway. Children are likely good spreaders because they have more often no or light symptoms only. Likely there is some spread via A/C ventilation systems.
    2
  7. Now, I expect the high U.S. numbers still be too low (people dying alone at home or in underfunded care homes). If you now in July 2020 got a test (contact with a confirmed case) you currently have to wait 7 - 10 days for your test result in Florida (wealthy people). People self-quarantine just in case. That means when a person dies FAST, no one is going to test them and to add them correctly to the death numbers. Case numbers of nations are not comparable. A lot of testing is good policy and helps to MANAGE the pandemic and spread - but it makes the case numbers look higher, they FIND more. Comparing the death numbers is the best (if still imperfect) parameter we have so far (I think most wealthy nations except for the U.S. have realistic numbers). At the end of the year we can count "excessive deaths".
    2
  8. Sweden has bad results (deaths in care homes, among the elderly), but their hospitals do better than those in the U.K. and the U.S. Several reasons (and some quite sinister - see next comment): Their healthcare system is much better funded that that of the U.K. Or in the U.S. for low income people. They have paid sick leave. Single payer so medical care free at the point of service. Sweden allegedly does not test much ..... Employees in Europe with a "cold" do not have to gamble, they get their test free, the result fast, if it is corona (or something else that they recover from at home) they continue to have full income (and usually it is hard to fire them during the time of sick leave, and what is the point to fire them after recovery). In the U.S.: they cannot missout on the wage for a few days, they would get fired. Or they cannot afford the doctor / hospital visit (if it is not corona the usual bad conditions apply). A younger worker with no preexisting condtions that needs the income, has no sick leave, and is under insured, may be tempted to "wing it" and hope for the best, while they continue to go to work (after taking anti-fever medication). Chances are THEY are not going to die. If they end up in the hospital - they would have landed there anyway. With that gamble (that is forced on them) they endanger of course others who are older, overweight, have high risk relatives at home and bring the virus into their families - from work. Potential spreaders (especially if low-income) mainly think of themselves, they often lived from pay cheque to pay cheque in the "good" economy (2015 - 2019) - after all society also does not care about them. Or they would have paid sick leave and single payer. Sweden has also the advantage of having more hospital beds than the U.S. per 1000 residents (that U.S. number is no hard to beat, even Italy does better and they have been applying austerity on their healthcare system before the corona virus crisis).
    2
  9. Now for the "Eugenics" part of the Swedish model: They keep the infected / sick old in the care homes, and do not send them to hospitals. Prescriptions of palliative cocktails for patients in care homes haven gone up. The numbers of OLD people in the ICU have gone DOWN compared with 2019. In other words, they let them die, give them an end of life cocktail that makes it less obvious - and also more bearable for STAFF. Those cocktails have a negative effect on breathing. Doctors accept that as trade off - in cases where a person is going to die anyway. Dr. Campell says they do not even give oxygen (in some cases). That is a low key intervention they should be able to do that, even in a care home. And tthat would change outcomes for some. He also would not deploy all measures to save a frail 80 year old - not like he would do for a younger person who could have potentially many more good years - but oxygen would always be on "the menu". Another idiocy when Sweden started with their different approach: they did not have enough protectice equipment in the beginning. The claim then was the younger Swedes would go about their normal life, little mandates and restrictions- and the elderly and the higher risk people would be isolated and protected. Nope: staff brings the infection into the homes, relatives also infect at-risk-persons that do not live in a home. Think a kid or young adult with diabetes 1, or the 40 year old that battles cancer. And since there were hardly any restoctopms the normal population spread it more. Children / teenagers up to 16 years still meet in school (I think for some time they had only half the time, likely so they could have more space for half the class). Children and teenagers are very good spreaders (many asymptomatic cases), children are less aware and consistent with hygiene, .... They have staff that switches between homes. And to make things worse: in the beginning they did not have the protective gear for staff working in care homes. The staff that had contact with the normal population so they had higher risks to get infected, and spread it more (and to spread it even better working for more than one care home) - the Swedish "lockdown" was almost non-existent (no mass events and home schooling / working for those who could), so more chances for normal citizens to become spreaders. The over 16 year olds stayed home, they likely had online learning. Most women hold a job, so if the smaller children would not have gone to school, they would have needed to find solutions to supervize kids till age 16 - like in Germany and Austria (in Austria no real life school for all over 14 - they can stay home alone. Now they have summer holidy till beginning of September. Real school was voluntary for under 14 - so families who could keep the kids at home, did so. Those who had to work and had no family got help and services to still watch over the children (also regarding childcare).  Germany and Austria had it easier to handle that, because the traditional family model is more common (stay at home parent or mum works part time). But France also has a comparable high rate of women in the workforce than Sweden, so they had to find a solution for children that cannot stay home alone during their lockdown. France did a strict lockdown, they had a lot of cases and deaths - btw Sweden has now surpassed them considerably regarding the dealths per million residents. France had a bad situation in April, but now they have a grip on it. Like Italy or Spain
    2
  10. Dr. John Campell talks about the Swedish measures bordering on Eugenics in his video Sweden the jury returns https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4SQ-NOV-iU (that was in June). He has also prescribed these palliative cocktails in certain cases throughout his medical career, so they do have their place in medicine, he is not on principle against them. But he has plausible suspicions (backed up by data) that the Swedes have now practices for elderly people in care homes that border on eugenics. I suspect that family cannot visit or not much (to not get the infection into the homes even more), so if an old person happens to get worse and was not in a good shape to begin- there are no upset relatives to deal with. At least the relatives cannot prove the neglect. And because of the use of the "end of life cocktails" (morphine etc.) staff is spared to watch the struggle of the elderly that are denied the chance to get into a hospital (or even simple measures like oxygen), the palliative cocktails smoothe over the suffocation in the end (and shorten that phase - those cocktails are known to somewhat interfere with breathing - which is a tradeoff that is accepted for their normal use).
    2
  11. 9 of 9 Dr. John Campell talks about the Swedish measures bordering on Eugenics in his video Sweden The Jury Returns https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4SQ-NOV-iU (that was in June). He has also prescribed these palliative cocktails in certain cases throughout his medical career, so they do have their place in medicine, he is not on principle against them. But he has plausible suspicions (backed up by data) that the Swedes have now practices for elderly people in care homes that border on eugenics. I suspect that family cannot visit or not much (to not get the infection into the homes even more), so if an old person happens to get worse and die fast - and was not in a good shape to begin with - there are no upset relatives to deal with. At least the relatives cannot prove the neglect. And because of the use of the "end of life cocktails" (morphine etc. in in the mix) staff is spared to watch the struggle of the elderly that are denied the chance to get into a hospital (or even simple measures like oxygen). The palliative cocktails smoothe over the suffocation in the end (and shorten that phase - those cocktails are known to somewhat interfere with breathing - which is a tradeoff that is accepted for their normal use, to make it easier for people who are sure to die).
    1
  12. 8 of 9 Now for the "Eugenics" part of the Swedish model: They keep the infected / sick old in the care homes, and do not send them to hospitals. Prescriptions of palliative cocktails for patients in care homes haven gone up. The numbers of OLD people in the ICU have gone DOWN compared with 2019. In other words, they let them die, give them an end of life cocktail that makes it less obvious - and also more bearable for STAFF. Those cocktails have a negative effect on breathing. Doctors accept that as trade off - in cases where a person is going to die anyway. Dr. Campell says they do not even give oxygen (in some cases he heard of, it is not clear if that was incompetence of a few homes or systematic). That is a low key intervention: they should be able to do that, even in a care home. And that would change outcomes for some. He also would not deploy all measures to save a frail 80 year old - not like he would do for a younger person who could have potentially many more good years - but oxygen would always be on "the menu". Another idiocy when Sweden started with their different approach: they did not have enough protectice equipment in the beginning. The claim then was: the younger Swedes would go about their normal life, few mandates and restrictions - and the elderly and the higher risk people would be isolated and protected. Nope: staff brings the infection into the homes, relatives also infect at-risk-persons that do not live in a home but among the regular population. Think a kid or young adult with diabetes 1, or the 40 year old that battles cancer. And since there were hardly any restrictions the normal population spread it more. Children / teenagers up to 16 years still meet in school (I think for some time they had only half the time, likely so they could have more space for half the class). Children and teenagers are very good spreaders (many asymptomatic cases), children are less aware and consistent with hygiene, .... They have staff that switches between care homes. And to make things worse: in the beginning they did not have the protective gear for staff working in care homes. The staff had contact with the normal population so they had higher risks to get infected, and spread it more (and to spread it even better, working for more than one care home)  - the Swedish "lockdown" was almost non-existent (no mass events and home schooling / working from home for those who could), so more chances for normal citizens to become spreaders. The over 16 year olds stayed home, they likely had online learning. Most women hold a job, so if the smaller children would not have gone to school, they would have needed to find solutions to supervise kids till age 16 - like in Germany and Austria. In Austria no real life school for all over 14 - they can stay home alone. Now, they have summer holidy till beginning of September. Real school was voluntary for under 14 - so families who could keep the kids at home, did so. Those who had to work and had no family, got help and services to still watch over the children (also regarding childcare). Germany and Austria had it easier to handle that, because the traditional family model is more common (stay at home parent or mum works part time). But France also has a comparable high rate of women in the workforce than Sweden, so they had to find a solution for children that cannot stay home alone during their lockdown. France did a strict lockdown, they had a lot of cases and deaths - btw Sweden has now surpassed them considerably regarding the deaths per million residents. France had a bad situation in March / April, but now they have a grip on it. Like Italy or Spain, ....
    1
  13. 6 of 9 Now, I expect the high official U.S.death numbers still be too low (people dying alone at home or in underfunded care homes). If you now - in July 2020 got a test (contact with a confirmed case) you currently have to wait 7 - 10 days for your test result in Florida (wealthy people). People self-quarantine just in case. That means when a person dies FAST and at home, no one is going to test them and to add them correctly to the death toll. Case numbers of nations are not comparable. A lot of testing is good policy and helps to MANAGE the pandemic and spread - but it makes the case numbers look higher, they FIND more. Comparing the death numbers is the best (if still imperfect) parameter we have so far (I think most wealthy nations except for the U.S. have realistic numbers). At the end of the year we can count "excessive deaths".
    1
  14. 2 of 9 In Florida aprox 19 % of those that are tested, test positve (around July 10, 2020). That is a STATE AVERAGE (it was over 30 % in one county). The 19 % number (in that range, could be 18 or 20 %) is extremely high. Of course they are behind with testing, it takes 7 - 10 days for affluent people ! (aquaintances of Ana Navarro who lives in FL) to get a test result. The labs are overwhelmed, and of course the admin did not push to establish capacities for fast testing when there was time. All other wealthy nations did use the time of lockdown in March and April to prepare. Almost all nations initially dragged their feet, but then they - finally ! - jumped into action, all hands on deck, and they learned the lesson from unfortunate Italy who was the first to be hit badly outside of China. Italy paid dearly for the hard won insights - lockdwon too late and half hearted in the beginning (and nations that were lucky that they were NOT the first ones learned from their warning example. With an denial stage in February, but then they got very active ). Italy NOW also has a grip on the case numbers. Currently Europeans are allowed to travel between those countries. they try to find a balance between summer tourism and being cautious. They have contact tracing resp. testing people around confirmed infections - other countries watch like hawks every - potential - cluster, and not even with "cluster relatated testing" they find 19 % that test positive for SARS-CoV-2 The damn virus is so _contagious and "sneaky" in the way it spreads: _ Asymptomatic spreaders. Medical staff that wears protective gear gets it anyway. Children are likely good spreaders because they have more often no or light symptoms only. Likely there is some spread via A/C ventilation systems.
    1
  15. 1 of 9 July 14 2020: That did not age well (as was to be expected). - MOST wealthy nations have a grip on the pandemic, but not the U.S., U.K. and Sweden. Their death number curve has STILL not flattened, the numbers of deaths are STILL RISING in Sweden, U.S. U.K. - it has gotten much ! worse in the U.S. in the last days.
    1
  16. 4 of 9 It is a numbers game. Have huge numbers of infected people with not too bad outcomes in most cases - the hospital, ICU cases and deaths will be a byproduct of the LARGE NUMBERS.  "Spreads like a wildfire" easily undoes "death rate is lower than we thought, because there are so many untedetced cases". Yes, and the many undetected cases means it is more contagious, the damn thing does spread like a wildfire. See Florida, Texas, Italy, and China in Wuhan until the Chinese could be bothered to get their head out of the sand. We do not have so harmless outcomes in almost all cases, that we could let it spread and get herd immunity with little sacrifices (death toll). We are caught in the unhappy middle. Herd immunity starts with 50 % of the population have at least some immunity. The more contagious a disease is, the higher the immunity must be - for CoVid-19 it would have to be in the 70 - 80 % range. As individual you would rather have CoVid-19 than Ebola (the 2013 strain) or get MERS (which is a quite deadly but not very contagious version of corona virus). The Ebola virus is likely as contagious as Sars-CoV-2 (at least somewhat in the same league). But there are no "light" or asymptomatic cases, so the health professionals and epidemiologists always know WHERE the infection cases are IF you have the resources of modern medicine and a modern administration. That means Ebola is still easier to contain, even though it is fairly contagious and a terrible disease. MERS has a 30 % death rate (the death rate may be even higher for Ebola) - but it is not vey contagious. A modern medical SYSTEM can contain these terrible infections - as bad as it is for the unfortunate individuals that contract it. The WHO had warned months before that the African nations did not have the medical systems, the doctors the money and resources to deal with Ebola on their own. Only when it became a likely scenario that Ebola would spill over to the wealthy nations (2013) they jumped into action, funded the counter measures. Ebola was contained fast after that - once it was handled with modern medicine. it did not even cost that much to help out the poor African nations, and there was no lockdown discussed. (I do not even remember if there were mild and selective restrictions on airtraffic - which proves my point, it was a tempest in the teacup for the rich nations).
    1
  17. 3 of 9 The only chance to contain the virus , is to have low case numbers to begin with and then to nip any flare-up in the bud. Almost all other countries needed a lockdown to return to the stage they had in February, when they would have had a chance to contain it - but only with testing and PPE ready to go and decisive action (see Taiwan, South Korea, ... also Iceland). Most nations were not prepared (exception Taiwan, South Korea, ...) so they had to pay the price - and they learned from it. It cost them the lockdown to return to a stage where it is manageable. The deaths in Florida (or Arizona, Texas, ...) will manifest in 3 - 5 weeks, there is a lag. I wonder if it is Sweden or the U.S. who will take the lead - deaths per million people in the country. Even if most cases are harmless or the patients are only very uncomfortable for 1 - 2 weeks but do not need the hospital - there will be a fallout in form of overwhelmed hospitals and preventable deaths. Doctors also notice scaring of lung tissue even in seemingly less severe cases (recovered at home). THAT can lead to complications and earlier deaths. If a person has another health crisis and their lungs are the weakest part of the system, because of the CoVid-19 infection.
    1
  18. 5 of 9 We also had the 2009 FLU PANDEMIC. Estimates: 700 million to 1,4 billion got infected. But it was not as deadly, did not cause nearly as many hospital stays. AND IF people died of it, they mostly died within a short time. There were not nearly as many hospital stays or ICU beds necessary. Either people were getting better after 7 - 10 days. Or the died. Or had died already. Most lived and revovered at home, Those who died, did so fast. The hospitals were full then, too, but nothing like now in the areas where there is a surge of corona virus. It was not even discussed to restrict airtraffic for a few weeks, or wearing masks in 2009 (measures that are not too costly for the economy) . As government / epidemiologist you would rather NOT have a contagious infection with a lot of light and undetected cases (when these cases still can spread the infection). You would rather deal with a terrible disease with a higher death rate (for the fewr or traceable infected) that is easier to contain.
    1