Swedish epidemiology boss says questioned Covid-19 strategy seems to be working

Re:Swedish epidemiology boss says questioned Covid-19 strate... by black_puppydog on Wednesday July 22, 2020 @11:07AM (#23917816)

This would be okay if the strategy was explicitly "we will let people die and then hope that everything goes well once everyone's outdoors in summer." At least then people would honestly debate whether that's a morally/economically solid stance to take.

But in that case they'll also have to explain what their strategy will be at the end of summer.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Swedish epidemiology boss says questioned Covid-19 strate... by Ma8ee on Wednesday July 22, 2020 @01:50PM (#23919657)

They have been very transparent what the strategy is. Long term, since this won’t go away in just a few months the restrictions must be sustainable. Take into account the overall health and well-being of the people, don’t worry only about COVID-19. Only do what there are scientific evidence that it actually makes a difference. Make sure that the spread is slow enough so the health care system doesn’t get overwhelmed.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Swedish epidemiology boss says questioned Covid-19 strate... by mixmastamyk on Wednesday July 22, 2020 @08:34PM (#23923030)

> Take into account the overall health and well-being

This is a very concise way of putting what some believe is the best plan, thanks.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Swedish epidemiology boss says questioned Covid-19 strate... by whydoyoucare on Wednesday July 22, 2020 @03:08PM (#23920468)

I don't think there is any clear or morally unambiguous answer to the first part ("we will let people die"). It simply is either people die now of virus, or die later of economic fallout. Also see the Trolley Problem [1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem

[ Parent | on HN ]