Vilka nationella eller regionala åtgärder mot coronavirus är evidensbaserade?

Diskutera allmänt om vetenskap, pseudovetenskap och folkbildning, t.ex. vetenskapsteori eller forskningspolitik.
Nemesis
Inlägg: 1841
Blev medlem: tor 12 okt 2006, 22:04
Ort: Stockholm

Re: Vilka nationella eller regionala åtgärder mot coronavirus är evidensbaserade?

Inlägg av Nemesis » tor 02 jul 2020, 19:56

Här är vad Science-Based Medicine säger om munskydd och corona:
So here, then, is my bottom line. Sure, wear face masks whenever you are out in public or have to be exposed to other people – but wear the mask properly, don’t touch or adjust it, don’t take it off or lower it even briefly. Further, understand this is only modest protection. It may statistically help reduce the spread of the pandemic, but it is not total protection. So you still have to adhere to strict recommendations to avoid spread – physical distancing and hand washing being the most important. Also, if you are sick, you can apparently cough the virus through your mask, so still cough into your elbow and not at other people or onto the environment. But most importantly, if you think you may be sick, self-isolate. A mask is not adequate protection for others.

So wear the mask properly, but act as if the mask does not work.
Kan väl tillägga att personligen inte följer detta då jag inte äger något munskydd. Men om alla i samhället bar munskydd när man rör sig ute skulle det sannolikt minska smittspridningen. Tegnells svar att man ska stanna hemma om man är sjuk förbiser att man kanske inte märker om man är sjuk, och att långtifrån alla följer den uppmaningen.
"… all the data shows that most people are not influenced by rational arguments. They're influenced by social pressure. … That's just the human condition, and we just have to acknowledge it and accept it." - Steven Novella

Nemesis
Inlägg: 1841
Blev medlem: tor 12 okt 2006, 22:04
Ort: Stockholm

Re: Vilka nationella eller regionala åtgärder mot coronavirus är evidensbaserade?

Inlägg av Nemesis » tor 02 jul 2020, 19:59

Matte skrev:
tis 30 jun 2020, 14:44
Men bortsett från det tycker jag du kan skriva på ditt eget språk här. Kan inte tänka mig att någon har problem med det
Jag håller med. Talad danska är svårt för mig att förstå, men att läsa dansk eller norsk text tycker jag fungerar helt okej.

Forum som är avsedda att vara på svenska, norska, eller danska brukar väldigt sällan ha något emot om medlemmar skriven på något av de andra skandinaviska språken.

Bara kul om forumet blir lite aktivt igen. Kan inte förstå att så många svenska skeptiker tycks föredra Facebook.
"… all the data shows that most people are not influenced by rational arguments. They're influenced by social pressure. … That's just the human condition, and we just have to acknowledge it and accept it." - Steven Novella

dann
Inlägg: 157
Blev medlem: sön 24 maj 2020, 17:18

Re: Vilka nationella eller regionala åtgärder mot coronavirus är evidensbaserade?

Inlägg av dann » tor 09 jul 2020, 18:56

Johannes skrev:
tor 02 jul 2020, 16:31
dann skrev:
tor 02 jul 2020, 11:29
Proof positive that Anders Tegnell in the question of munskydd is either the most ignorant so-called expert in the world or a bloody psychopath, who just doesn’t give a damn:
Du framstår som väldigt oseriös. Tegnell är givetvis en kompetent epidemiolog. Han vet att med stor sannolikhet är man inte särskilt smittsam om man inte har symptom, och därför är munskydd sannolikt inte heller en särskilt viktig åtgärd så länge symptomatiska personer inte rör sig ute i samhället. Det viktiga vid smittbekämpning är att mota huvuddelen av smittspridningen, inte de enstaka fallen.

One more:
our results indicate that the majority of transmission is attributable to people who are not exhibiting symptoms, either because they are still in the presymptomatic stage or the infection is asymptomatic (Fig. 1). Specifically, if 17.9% of infections are asymptomatic (5), we found that the presymptomatic stage and asymptomatic infections account for 48% and 3.4% of transmission, respectively (Fig. 1A).
The implications of silent transmission for the control of COVID-19 outbreaks (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS), July 6, 2020)
In other words - you are most often infected by people who aren't sick. (Twitter, July 6, 2020)

So much for the idea that Tegnell givetvis är en kompetent epidemiolog som vet att med stor sannolikhet är man inte särskilt smittsam om man inte har symptom.

Användarvisningsbild
Johannes
Inlägg: 4205
Blev medlem: tis 30 nov 2004, 14:31

Re: Vilka nationella eller regionala åtgärder mot coronavirus är evidensbaserade?

Inlägg av Johannes » tor 09 jul 2020, 21:52

Ditt citat motsäger inte vad jag skrev. Det kanske är svenskan du har problem med?

dann
Inlägg: 157
Blev medlem: sön 24 maj 2020, 17:18

Re: Vilka nationella eller regionala åtgärder mot coronavirus är evidensbaserade?

Inlägg av dann » fre 10 jul 2020, 15:49

You seem to have a problem with reality.

Användarvisningsbild
Johannes
Inlägg: 4205
Blev medlem: tis 30 nov 2004, 14:31

Re: Vilka nationella eller regionala åtgärder mot coronavirus är evidensbaserade?

Inlägg av Johannes » fre 10 jul 2020, 20:20

dann skrev:
fre 10 jul 2020, 15:49
You seem to have a problem with reality.
Du har alltså inga verkliga argument, bara små förolämpningar.

dann
Inlägg: 157
Blev medlem: sön 24 maj 2020, 17:18

Re: Vilka nationella eller regionala åtgärder mot coronavirus är evidensbaserade?

Inlägg av dann » lör 11 jul 2020, 09:08

A new Twitter thread reminded me of Annika Linde's statement from May:

Sweden 'wrong' not to shut down, says former state epidemiologist (Guardian, May 24, 2020)
Sweden's former state epidemiologist reveals why she changed her view on controversial coronavirus strategy (TheLocal.se, May 28, 2020)
Tidigare statsepidemiolog: Det fanns ingen strategi för äldrevården (SVT, May 28, 2020)
When discussing Sweden, most people still focus on the stale debate of whether they should have locked down or not. Time will tell. Here's a much more interesting debate: Why are they not dancing now? [1/2]
Thomes Pueyo (Twitter, July 10, 2020)
This email from March 13 is particularly interesting!

dann
Inlägg: 157
Blev medlem: sön 24 maj 2020, 17:18

Re: Vilka nationella eller regionala åtgärder mot coronavirus är evidensbaserade?

Inlägg av dann » lör 11 jul 2020, 09:35

Johannes skrev:
fre 10 jul 2020, 20:20
dann skrev:
fre 10 jul 2020, 15:49
You seem to have a problem with reality.
Du har alltså inga verkliga argument, bara små förolämpningar.
I am astonished that you can suspect me of giving you nothing but "små förolämpningar."

I assumed that it would be obvious to you that I was just offering to help you with your problems with reality in return for your kind offer to help me with my alleged problems with Swedish:
Johannes skrev:
tor 09 jul 2020, 21:52
Ditt citat motsäger inte vad jag skrev. Det kanske är svenskan du har problem med?

Nemesis
Inlägg: 1841
Blev medlem: tor 12 okt 2006, 22:04
Ort: Stockholm

Re: Vilka nationella eller regionala åtgärder mot coronavirus är evidensbaserade?

Inlägg av Nemesis » lör 11 jul 2020, 10:20

Jag tror inte alls att Tegnell skulle vara psykopat eller liknande. Däremot tror jag att det ligger prestige i att hålla fast vid den utstakade linjen. Tegnell har säkert, som andra människor, ett psykologiskt motstånd mot att medge (större) misstag.

Svenska skeptiker bör släppa coronanationalismen och acceptera att Sverige inte alltid är bäst på allting alltid. Sverige har hanterat detta mycket sämre än våra grannländer.

Jag upprepar min tidigare fråga, som ingen i tråden hittills svarat på: Ni som stödjer den svenska strategin, om ni var norrmän, finnar, danskar, tyskar, nyzeeländare, taiwaneser, eller sydkoreaner, hade ni då förespråkat att er regering ska anamma den svenska strategin?

Jag undrar om danska, norska, finska, och tyska skeptiker kollat avundsjukt på Sverige. :roll:

Här är mer om munskydd från Science-Based Medicine:
David Gorski skrev:Do face masks decrease the risk of COVID-19 transmission?

As wearing masks to prevent the spread of COVID-19 becomes a culture war issue, the evidence for whether they prevent transmission of COVID-19 remains contested. A new systematic review and meta-analysis provides the best evidence yet that social distancing and masks are highly effective at decreasing the risk of contracting coronavirus, while eye protection might also help, but it’s not a slam dunk.

...

As you might have gathered, even this “best evidence” so far is only good enough to lead the authors to say that they are “moderately” certain that social distancing and the wearing of masks are likely to produce a large decrease in COVID-19 transmission. On the other hand, in a pandemic involving a virus that was only identified and sequenced less than five months ago, what that means is that a lot of the science is still uncertain and will change. Worse, because everyone is working so fast and papers are being rushed through, peer review sometimes suffers. Retraction Watch maintains a list of COVID-19 papers that have been retracted thus far that continues to grow, and two very high profile COVID-19 papers were retracted by The Lancet and The New England Journal of Medicine last week because no one bothered to look into whether a tiny company could produce the sort of database whose data were analyzed in the paper and that company refused to let an independent third party audit of its data. On the mask front, a study purporting to show that masks don’t stop COVID-19 spread was retracted because it was pointed out that the authors didn’t recognize the concept of limit of detection (LOD) of its in-house test for COVID-19 and didn’t express their findings below the LOD as “< LOD." Given how many of their measurements were below the LOD, their results were basically uninterpretable. It was a widely cited study, too, referenced by dozens of news stories, nearly 10,000 Twitter users, and the World Health Organization. These sorts of retractions add to the feeling of mistrust of science among too many members of the public.

The bottom line remains, though, that we have to learn to go with what we know, even in the face of uncertainty, even in the face of crappy retracted science papers, and even in this age of political division, and, right here, right now, there is more than enough evidence to suggest that mask wearing significantly decreases the risk of COVID-19 transmission. As Steve wrote last week, this is a marathon, not a sprint, and it is science that will eventually win the day. As I’ve said many times before, science as process can be messy, and in a pandemic every misstep, each of which would probably have made little stir if it were in a different area of science under different circumstances, will be magnified and politicized. We need to keep that in mind and view with caution each new discovery breathtakingly announced to the public.

And, yes, we need to wear our masks but, as Steve put it, continue to behave as though they don’t work very well. Eventually science will settle the issue, but until it does the balance of evidence supports routine wearing of masks. It’s also important to remember that masks are not the be-all and end-all. Social distancing, masks, and face protection all work together to reduce the risk of coronavirus transmission as low as feasible.
Om den samlade forskningen pekar åt ett håll, och en enskild forskare, låt vara att han är statsepidemiolog, säger något annat, vilken ståndpunkt har då störst sannolikhet att vara korrekt? Som icke-expert, vilken ståndpunkt bör man utgå från?
"… all the data shows that most people are not influenced by rational arguments. They're influenced by social pressure. … That's just the human condition, and we just have to acknowledge it and accept it." - Steven Novella

dann
Inlägg: 157
Blev medlem: sön 24 maj 2020, 17:18

Re: Vilka nationella eller regionala åtgärder mot coronavirus är evidensbaserade?

Inlägg av dann » lör 11 jul 2020, 15:06

Nemesis skrev:
lör 11 jul 2020, 10:20
Jag tror inte alls att Tegnell skulle vara psykopat eller liknande. Däremot tror jag att det ligger prestige i att hålla fast vid den utstakade linjen. Tegnell har säkert, som andra människor, ett psykologiskt motstånd mot att medge (större) misstag.
You don't think that watching thousands of people die unnecessarily would enable most empathic human beings to overcome "ett psykologiskt motstånd mot att medge (större) misstag"?
Jag undrar om danska, norska, finska, och tyska skeptiker kollat avundsjukt på Sverige. :roll:

At the beginning of the outbreak, a few Danish skeptics leaned towards the Swedish strategy. I haven't heard of any who still do.

Här är mer om munskydd från Science-Based Medicine:
Some Swedish experts don't seem to read anything that contradicts what they said in March. Agnes Wold, for instance, deliberately obfuscates the question by pretending that face masks worn by the general public for protection against the virus should do the same job as masks used in an operating room during surgery: Agnes Wold sågar forskarnas larm om luftburen smitta: ”Jättelarvigt” (Aftonbladet, July 9, 2020)
At this point, the article is behind a paywall, and for some reason they have changed the title. I quoted from it in the ISF thread when it appeared on Thursday with the title, Professorn avfärdar nya varningarna om luftburet virus.
The point of face masks is not to prevent every single particle of virus from getting out. It is to limit the distance that the cloud of virus travels when you sneeze, cough or just breathes out. Even a bandana worn over the bottom half of your face does that to some extent. That it gets wet when you wear it for too long doesn't really matter. Other people don't touch or lick your mask.

Om den samlade forskningen pekar åt ett håll, och en enskild forskare, låt vara att han är statsepidemiolog, säger något annat, vilken ståndpunkt har då störst sannolikhet att vara korrekt? Som icke-expert, vilken ståndpunkt bör man utgå från?
The point of view of many Swedish skeptics seems to be one of nationalism, as you already pointed out: Är den enskilda forskaren svensk?
In the Twitter thread I linked to, the user Tyler By Day praises Sweden:
Sweden has gotten a lot right as a society and there is a lot of good intention behind it but as the saying goes, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
before he goes on to say:
They've built a society around trust that authority has everything under control so don't u worry your pretty little head. The problem is that only works until it doesn't. There is no mechanism to question authority with the power to resign it.
The appeal-to-authority fallacy seems to have a version that is unique to Sweden: appeal to Swedish authority.

Användarvisningsbild
Johannes
Inlägg: 4205
Blev medlem: tis 30 nov 2004, 14:31

Re: Vilka nationella eller regionala åtgärder mot coronavirus är evidensbaserade?

Inlägg av Johannes » sön 12 jul 2020, 08:16

Nemesis skrev:
lör 11 jul 2020, 10:20
Om den samlade forskningen pekar åt ett håll, och en enskild forskare, låt vara att han är statsepidemiolog, säger något annat, vilken ståndpunkt har då störst sannolikhet att vara korrekt? Som icke-expert, vilken ståndpunkt bör man utgå från?
Var säger Tegnell något annat? Har han hävdat att munskydd inte har någon effekt?

Användarvisningsbild
Johannes
Inlägg: 4205
Blev medlem: tis 30 nov 2004, 14:31

Re: Vilka nationella eller regionala åtgärder mot coronavirus är evidensbaserade?

Inlägg av Johannes » sön 12 jul 2020, 08:18

Nemesis skrev:
lör 11 jul 2020, 10:20
Jag upprepar min tidigare fråga, som ingen i tråden hittills svarat på: Ni som stödjer den svenska strategin, om ni var norrmän, finnar, danskar, tyskar, nyzeeländare, taiwaneser, eller sydkoreaner, hade ni då förespråkat att er regering ska anamma den svenska strategin?
Finns det egentligen någon i tråden som helhjärtat stöder den svenska strategin?

Användarvisningsbild
Johannes
Inlägg: 4205
Blev medlem: tis 30 nov 2004, 14:31

Re: Vilka nationella eller regionala åtgärder mot coronavirus är evidensbaserade?

Inlägg av Johannes » sön 12 jul 2020, 08:29

dann skrev:
lör 11 jul 2020, 09:35
I assumed that it would be obvious to you that I was just offering to help you with your problems with reality in return for your kind offer to help me with my alleged problems with Swedish:
Personangrepp är knappast en särskilt vuxen eller konstruktiv debatteknik. Och nu gjorde du det igen.

Eftersom du fortfarande inte verkar förstå vad jag skrev:

Det finns inget i din citerade undersökning som motsäger att man med stor sannolikhet inte är särskilt smittsam om man inte har symptom.

Av nyfikenhet: är du lika kritisk till danska Sundhetsstyrelsen, som fram till för någon dag sedan inte heller rekommenderat munskydd, och fortfarande inte gör det generellt?

dann
Inlägg: 157
Blev medlem: sön 24 maj 2020, 17:18

Re: Vilka nationella eller regionala åtgärder mot coronavirus är evidensbaserade?

Inlägg av dann » sön 12 jul 2020, 11:52

Johannes skrev:
sön 12 jul 2020, 08:16
Var säger Tegnell något annat? Har han hävdat att munskydd inte har någon effekt?
I have already quoted Anders Tegnell. His argument was that munskydd is an unnecessary precaution in Sweden since, "– I Sverige har vi strategin att är du sjuk så ska du hålla dig hemma, i stället för att röra sig med munskydd."

In Sweden you have also had the strategy not to test people who weren't very seriously ill - and sometimes not even those. This means that asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic cases didn't stay at some since they didn't even know that they were infected. They mingled with the rest of the population because ... why wouldn't they? They were unaware that they were carriers of the virus. Wearing munskydd would have prevented those asymptomatic cases from transmitting the infection to the number of people that they would transmit it to without munskydd.

If Tegnell had actually been a competent and conscientious epidemiologist, he would have known about that. If instead, as I suspect, he was pissed off because his strategy of herd immunity had been overruled and therefore decided to contribute to further spreading of the disease, the logical thing to do would be to speak out against measures that could slow down the spread before the switch to TeTrIs got up and running. It would be the logic of an offended psychopath, but still logic.
Those are the only two explanations for what he did that I can come up with: extreme incompetence or the wounded vanity of a psychopath.

And several other either incompetent or cynical idiots, Agnes Wold, for instance, have supported (and are still supporting) this attempt to let the virus run its course.

As for your curiosity:
Johannes skrev:
sön 12 jul 2020, 08:29
Av nyfikenhet: är du lika kritisk till danska Sundhetsstyrelsen, som fram till för någon dag sedan inte heller rekommenderat munskydd, och fortfarande inte gör det generellt?
I have to admit that I am curious, too: When do you think that munskydd is required? Before or after the contagion has been hammered down?

In my case, I actually was critical of Sundhedsstyrelsen, and I think I have mentioned it in this thread once or twice.
At the very early stage of the Danish outbreak, they were honest about the reason why they asked ordinary Danes not to use munskydd: They wanted to make sure that there was enough for health-care workers, i.e. for those most at risk. That is very similar to Dr. Fauci said at the time. He now recommends making munskydd mandatory, and Trump is trying to make Fauci's first statements about munskydd back in March-April appear to be a contradiction to what he's saying now..
In Denmark, the virus was hammered down effectively very early on, and at this point munskydd in ordinary everyday life seems to be an unnecessary precaution. TeTrIs is working! And it is probably also sensible to let people relax a little before a second wave may hit us in October, at which point a call to wear masks in public may be in order.

By the way, I am not a nationalist. I'm an anti-nationalist. I have pointed out that the pandemic responses in Iceland, Norway and Finland (and the Faroe Islands and Greenland), in that order, have been superior to Denmark's. When I have compared Sweden to Denmark, it's because Denmark's strategy is the one that I am most familiar with and the one that Sweden would have been able to choose in the early stages of the outbreak. Instead, Sweden spent months insisting that all the countries that made sensible adjustments to their strategies were inferior to Sweden's glorious worship of science-based medicine, whereas everybody else was simply obeying capricious whims of uneducated politicians and would live to regret it when Sweden's strategy would prove superior and they would all be forced to adapt it.

Can we agree that the opposite of that vainglorious fantasy is what has actually happened in the real world?
Or are you still waiting for history to prove everybody else wrong?

Go back to page one of this thread and start again if you think I'm exaggerating.

dann
Inlägg: 157
Blev medlem: sön 24 maj 2020, 17:18

Re: Vilka nationella eller regionala åtgärder mot coronavirus är evidensbaserade?

Inlägg av dann » sön 12 jul 2020, 12:05

Johannes skrev:
sön 12 jul 2020, 08:18
Finns det egentligen någon i tråden som helhjärtat stöder den svenska strategin?
Wholeheartedly? And in the present tense? No, probably not.
Fanns det egentligen någon i tråden som helhjärtat stötte den svenska strategin?
Yes, quite a lot, actually. But they seem to have gone missing lately.

Maybe it's high time for some introspection among Swedish skeptics:
Why did so many of us choose to believe the Swedish experts?
Why did it take so long for us to admit to ourselves that we were wrong?
(And why would we rather not admit it to others?)
Why did we choose to believe in the alleged authorities as their idiocy became increasingly apparent?
How to we prevent ourselves from making the same mistake again?

In other words: Isn't it time to consider what skepticism implies?

Skriv svar