Update: All EWS Zermatt COVID Tests Returned Negative Results

Aug 28, 2020
by James Smurthwaite  

We’ve received good news from the EWS this afternoon as all 3 of the people quarantined in Zermatt have returned negative test results for COVID-19. As we reported yesterday, there was one suspected case but three people were quarantined and tested as they had been working in close proximity to each other.

bigquotesThe Enduro World Series and Traillove can confirm that all Covid tests carried out in Zermatt returned negative results.

Those affected can now leave quarantine and rejoin the peloton bubble that has been formed in the EWS pits.

We again commend the EWS and Traillove on their quick response to the potential infection and it's great to see the COVID safety measures acting as intended.



Original Story

Three people are currently quarantining in Zermatt due to a potential COVID-19 infection. The three people are connected to this weekend's Enduro World Series race but reportedly are not racers.

Traillove, the event organisers, and the EWS were made aware of the potential cases and initiated containment policies immediately. Riders and teams have been informed and now the bubble system and contact tracing have begun as outlined in their Covid-19 Measures and Safety Protocol.

The three individuals have been tested and will remain quarantined until the results are returned. As it stands no riders have been affected and there is no suggestion that the event will be cancelled. The Traillove and EWS statement is below:

Press Statement: EWS & Traillove

The Enduro World Series and Traillove Zermatt was made aware of a potential Coronavirus case at the event in Zermatt and as a result three individuals are now isolating pending test results. No riders are affected. The bubble system and contact tracing policies in effect at the event mean the situation has been contained.


We want to see racing back as badly as anyone, but we urge race organizers and teams to use an abundance of caution. We commend the EWS and Traillove on their quick response to the potential infection. If the cases are confirmed, we wish a quick recovery to the individuals affected.


A note on the comments

COVID-19 is a serious global health risk, and while we don't want to limit the conversation we're going to actively remove disinformation and suspend people who continue to post it.


Regions in Article
Zermatt


223 Comments

  • 429 2
 It was only Zermatt'er of time
  • 13 33
flag h20-50 (Aug 27, 2020 at 9:59) (Below Threshold)
 I see what you did there, touché.
  • 99 2
 C'mon, this is no laughing Matter-horn...
  • 7 3
 This comment is top quality. I'll be hearing this in my head for a long time.
  • 43 7
 I don't want Toblerone it out of proportion but, you're right.
  • 15 1
 I bet the riders swiss this wasn’t happening
  • 1 4
 It's the people'S WhISS Here will finally be the EWS race we've all been waiting for. We'll watch this space!
  • 6 1
 What zermatter you? Hey! Gotta no respect?
What-a you t'ink you do, why you look-a so sad?
It's-a not so bad, it's-a nice-a place
Ah shaddap-a you face!

Oh dear !
  • 2 0
 Yeah? Well, you know, that's just like uh, your alpinion, man.
  • 210 0
 I volunteer to quarantine in Zermatt if there is availability.
  • 24 0
 That's a fast track to bankruptcy
  • 3 0
 @Maxcommencemal: I'll take it! Has to be better than this...
  • 1 0
 @Maxcommencemal: 145chf for the day, baby!! and 120chf to ride a f*cking train up a hill.. A nice hill. But still. What a racket.
  • 1 0
 @rookie100: ker-chiiing
  • 74 15
 International sporting event in a time of pandemic.....?
NAAHHHHHH it'll be fiiiiiine
  • 9 3
 It’ll be fine.
  • 8 3
 Chill, it'll be fine.
  • 8 1
 Just don't invite anyone from the USA, it'll be fiiinneee
  • 5 1
 Several formula 1 races and moto GP races have gone off without a hich. Don't be scared, be careful.
  • 3 0
 @oldmanjoe: IMSA, GT World Challenge, WEC and more
  • 3 2
 Its a racers job to race just so why the hell shouldn't they be cable to go to work .
  • 75 20
 Prepping for the downvotes. But does anyone realistically think something will be different in 2021 or 2025 or whenever unless we just don't care anymore that people have this virus or the next one? If so, what will be different if we are still testing in the same way? I know covid is not the flu or the common cold or the rhinovirus or grimdonutvirus or whatever other virus. But unless there's a vaccine that irradicates it (which i doubt there will be) or we just stop testing everyone at the events 3 times a week I really don't see what is going to change. If you test for any of the aforementioned viruses constantly you are constantly going to find people infected now and forever.
  • 18 8
 Yep. You're getting downvoted but no one has any rebuttal or better idea other than a perfect vaccine.
  • 28 15
 Totally agree, we are still in hysterics in the UK despite the fact deaths from flu have now overtaken Covid and the NHS continues to ensure anyone with a non Covid but deadly health issue isn’t treated in as timely manner as previously available.
  • 36 45
flag IntoTheEverflow (Aug 27, 2020 at 12:25) (Below Threshold)
 @mildsauce91: I have a better idea.
Just let the virus roam, like we used to do with influenza.
Yes some people will die, but they would probably pass away very soon anyway.
Quality of life will go back to normal again.
And less people will die from fear or from becoming homeless.

Almost everyone wins!
  • 15 16
 There's a chance there could be an effective vaccine in the next year or two. I don't think it's irrational to expect that possibility and doubting it just kills people's hope.
  • 15 5
 @DoubleCrownAddict: there is also a good chance the vaccine will be ineffective, won’t come in the next few years or need to be re-taken and re-‘formed’ yearly to have any effect at all....
  • 105 29
 I am going to go with the epidemiologists and virologists that say:
- Covid is more contagious than the influenza
- Covid is significantly more deadly than the influenza
- There real and significant long term complications for many people who don't die from it and we are still learning about what those are
- That there is an unprecedented worldwide effort taking place to come up with vaccines, antivirals and other treatment strategies
- We should be doing all we can in the meanwhile to mitigate the spread of the disease to keep ourselves and those around us safe and that we already know what we need to do in order to accomplish that.

Over a pinkbike random who clearly doesn't know the first thing about viral transmission or severity or treatment or anything really. But that's just me.
  • 20 14
 @roma258: though I agree with accepting the opinion of actual scientists over the opinion of people on the internet, what if the virologists are wrong in their handling of this?

How does your opinion change with the knowledge that flu killed more than coronavirus over a given period in the uk (I think it was around a week ago, over a 7 day period)

If a vaccine never comes, or if it does but it isn’t nearly as effective as hoped (such as flu, again as above) would you suggest we adhere to these measures for the foreseeable future?

It’s almost become a dirty thing to debate any of this now, just accept and move on.
  • 18 8
 @justanotherusername: Deaths from Flu have not overtaken COVID in the UK, that is not true unless there has been some historic surge of flue this year because 41000 have died of covid and the average numbers for yearly flu deaths in the UK is 17000 a year.
  • 41 14
 @justanotherusername: it's dirty because it's done tremendous damage here in the US. It's why we've had 170,000 deaths and still losing over 1000 a day. People convinced themselves it's not a big deal, lots of states opened up too quickly and we had massive spikes, hospitals overwhelmed, the whole deal. My dad got sick working in a hospital, he now has an irregular heartbeat, gets light headed all the time and having a hard time breathing 4 months later. I take people's cavalier attitudes and desire to "have a debate" pretty personally. I have friends who are ER docs and I've heard their stories.

It's not a game. You don't debate with a virus, you're gonna lose.
  • 23 9
 @justanotherusername: what if the virologists and all their dorky PhDs are wrong and "justanotherusername" from the forums is right?
  • 3 0
 @justanotherusername: My bad, miss read you.
  • 14 9
 @roma258: no, you didn’t debate it in the US - you had a mad orangutang president mismanage, lie, spread falsehoods and talk general rubbish in opposition to scientific advice.

I am talking about following the rules respectfully, understanding that risks and adjusting accordingly but having the mental ability to still allow some discussion over the matter. I am sorry to hear about your father btw and hope he makes a full recovery
  • 10 2
 @dirtologist: when did I say not to follow their advice? When did make statement contrary to theirs with any authority over matters that require you to be a PHD medical professional?

All i suggested is that the hope of a vaccine may be unfounded, many share this view and questioned the management of this whole situation, which takes in a whole spectrum of view points such as economics, social science and management, politics etc

Stop being so binary. I’m not an anti vaccine trump loving degenerate, It’s not ‘dumb’ to discuss things.
  • 9 3
 @justanotherusername: orange dumbass notwithstanding, it was pretty much left to the states, and there was plenty of debate and range of responses.

I am not even sure what you're proposing. Do you not think scientists adjust and reflect their recommendations based on the best available data/information? Do you not think the disease control experts weight various factors and risks on a regular basis to adjust their advice? This is literally the thing that they train for. The governments that headed their advice and leaned on their expertise are looking much better these days than those who played it down or went for the unorthodox herd immunity approach.
  • 5 0
 @roma258: I’m not really questioning the initial response made worldwide, it being a novel virus those trained to handle such an event implemented controls to minimise its effect which clearly worked - though different countries all did seem to have different ideas of how the measures should look.

What I am questioning is how we move forward, is a vaccine a plausible way out? If not, what? Should measures be as contradictory e.g. uk quarantine measures for people coming back from countries with likely lower levels of risk. What is the economic and social health risks going forward?

As I say, lots more to it now than the simple stay at home method of months ago - we have to live with this for some time.
  • 9 23
flag gunslingger (Aug 27, 2020 at 14:25) (Below Threshold)
 @justanotherusername: when making such claims can you please quote some of the information that was wrong from the president you are referring to? It is very easy to make such generalizations but please don't forget the CDC and the WHO have made contradicting statements as time has gone on-masks no masks-how we get infected as close long term contact verse quick exposure-it is on surfaces, it is not-anyhow I could go on, President Trump is not the problem here and honestly we can't all sit in our houses forever and count covid deaths -when someone dies from a heart attack or car accident and has covid as it is proven has been done. it is ridiculous for you to point fingers verse everyone working in a bi-partisan fashion toward the same goal. You may be younger than me but AIDS-100% death rate and we had no idea how it was transmitted yet nothing changes-Swine Flu, deadly yet no one did a thing-you have to be wise enough to educate yourself without blaming a party or a person and try to see the whole picture. Economically the repercussions could end up causing more deaths than the virus.
  • 1 1
 Irradication probably won't occur in the near term, but there are a number of vaccines that will likely be ready within one year, and will confer a level of immunity that will allow safe participation in sports, provided they get distributed widely. Cases will continue to happen in the post vaccine covid world, but they won't result in the same level of spread that we see at the moment.
  • 7 3
 @gunslingger: how about injecting disinfectant for a start off?
  • 7 2
 @justanotherusername: yeah, I just checked and it's not true that there's more flu deaths than covid in UK. Me smells a Murdoch rat.
  • 1 3
 @justanotherusername: please detail the comment you are referring to, just use google and then let me know.
  • 1 0
 Depends how they're recorded a bit
  • 8 19
flag mtboaxaca (Aug 27, 2020 at 16:47) (Below Threshold)
 Turn off your tv you've been brain washed, and yes a vaccine is almost ready 4u! No face mask can or will stop a virus they are nanos in size. Its a game and your all in.
  • 2 0
 @ColquhounerHooner: care to show sources? I admitted I hated using the sun and happy to be disproven
  • 1 0
 The uk data is not very reliable imo, because of the criteria in which a death is recorded as covid19 caused (see link)
That said, it's clearly still a big deal or we wouldn't be in such chao

www.kingsfund.org.uk/publications/deaths-covid-19
  • 6 4
 @b3n: The more I read and the more I'm thinking about this.....I'm starting to think a vaccine is the answer actually. Not because of its effectiveness but because it will give everyone an excuse to be "OK" with going somewhat back to normal. Maybe they will slow down the testing which just freaks everyone out the same way I'm sure it would if you tested everyone for HPV or Gonorrhea and saw the real numbers. I don't think we're all as smart as we like to think we are and we need a little comfort like we did when our mommy told us she was taking the old, crippled dog to "the farm". We just need to be told that everything is OK and we'll be OK.
  • 2 0
 @IntoTheEverflow: What did you take an over-dose of?
  • 6 3
 @gunslingger: Amid a flurry of backlash and ridicule, President Trump walked back his suggestion that scientists test whether disinfectants, such as bleach, could be injected inside the human body to fight the coronavirus, claiming Friday that he had said it sarcastically.

The president offered his idea for a cure in the White House briefing room Thursday after a presentation that mentioned disinfectants can kill the novel coronavirus on surfaces and in the air.
Quoted in the Washington Post
“I see the disinfectant that knocks it out in a minute, one minute,” Trump said during Thursday’s coronavirus press briefing. “And is there a way we can do something like that by injection inside, or almost a cleaning? Because you see it gets inside the lungs and it does a tremendous number on the lungs, so it would be interesting to check that.”

The question, which Trump offered unprompted, immediately spurred doctors, lawmakers and the makers of Lysol to respond with incredulity and warnings against injecting or otherwise ingesting disinfectants, which are highly toxic.
  • 1 0
 @jonesy-1: Yeah that will contribute to a healthy discussion.
  • 1 2
 @roma258: thank you for highlighting all these points. im a healthcare worker and agree with your sentiments
  • 1 2
 @justanotherusername: You’re on point man. And you’re correct, debate is as important as it ever has been.
The quarantine worked when the hospitals were full. Since then we have been social distancing with empty hospitals. As a result there is no chance for herd immunity before winter now. And now virus is circulating again where I live and what progress can we say has been made?? No vaccine. No option for a full lock down again.
Re. the US, my suspicion is that the high death toll is related to high obesity levels more than any actions that were taken or not taken..
Basically, we are not gonna contain this thing -not without another full lockdown. So until we have a vaccine I’m beginning to think we just ask the extra vulnerable to be extra careful and carry on living
  • 13 3
 @gunslingger: " President Trump is not the problem here". President Trump is a problem everywhere.
  • 2 2
 @Unrealityshow: thanks for that, I should should have been more careful as the truth is it’s flu and pneumonia killing more, not just flu.

They do admit more people have flu and pneumonia on their death certificate then Covid over that period but due to flu’s reduced mortality level vs Covid (when taken in insulation to pneumonia) they say Covid would still have resulted in more deaths - I wonder if this will change as the realistic Covid mortality level drops? (E.g. As we better understand just how many people have had it and recovered as it’s likely orders of magnitude more then the people that have been tested as confirmed cases)

It does state that double the amount of people did die from flu and pneumonia in that period vs Covid - 284 v 141 - probably unfair to lump them together I agree and my mistake for not mentioning pneumonia but still a muddy subject with the ability to interpret data to suit your chosen ‘story’ as the Sun did - no surprise there.
  • 3 1
 @roma258: If you don't get downvoted into oblivion, something is wrong with Pinkbike. Logical comments that make sense always get downvoted!!! Smile
  • 6 0
 @roma258: I am going to go with the epidemiologists and virologists that the MSM ignore that say:
- Covid is more contagious than the influenza.

- Covid is "suspiciously" more deadly than the influenza. Covid doesn't kill otherwise healthy people, but it has been proven to reduce the average life expectancy of the people who died with it by an average of just 3 weeks. Those that died from it were, by and large, already in the advanced stages of their various (and often multiple) illnesses, and would likely have died in a relatively short period after their actual death had they not contracted Covid. Just look at how the number of those who died from other causes have dropped in the last 6 months; Covid simply killed them before their bad hearts, or terminal illnesses etc. got there first.

- There are *potentially* real and significant long term complications for many people who don't die from it and we are still learning about what those are. Unfortunately we don't have a crystal ball to see what the long-term effects are on the small minority of people who experience severe symptoms, but again healthy people (the vast majority of cases) can expect have mild to moderate symptoms, and to recover fully. We'll simply have to wait and see what the actual long-term effects are, because speculating now will only lead to more fear and confusion.

- That there is an unprecedented worldwide effort taking place to come up with vaccines, antivirals and other treatment strategies. We've been trying for decades to develop a vaccine for the common cold, without success. Those trials have also led to several deaths among test subjects. The Chief Medical Officers in several western countries have indicated that any Covid vaccination may have to follow the same protocol as the seasonal flu vaccine, and that people will require annual top-ups. But, no flu vaccine that was distributed in the last 5 years has been more than 50% effective, and several times it's effectiveness has been below 30%. Quite simply, it's an expensive shot in the dark, for minimal benefit, and one we're not actually improving at providing over time.
There are also significant alarms sounding over the suspension of long-term effect studies of these vaccines. That's not a good idea. If you don't understand why, then I suggest you educate yourself on the Thalidomide scandal. And if still think something like that couldn't possibly happen in this day and age, then read up on the Boeing 737 Max.

- We should be doing all we can in the meanwhile to mitigate the spread of the disease to keep ourselves and those around us safe and that we already know what we need to do in order to accomplish that.
This is the only sensible approach. No expectation of wearing a mask to protect others, no government interference to "strongly encourage" individuals to get the vaccine by denying them access to social services (or their basic human rights) just individuals choosing the right approach for them based on sound medical advice, not scaremongering.
  • 3 0
 @ColquhounerHooner: just read too and the headlines are always half true, cause of deaths can be intertwined and a lot of Covid deaths will have pneumonia as cause of death followed by Covid 19!
  • 4 1
 @Matt115lamb: And almost all had significant underlying conditions that won't be mentioned at all, so the truth will probably never be known.
@justanotherusername: There's every reason to believe that Covid simply accelerated the deaths in a lot of people that would otherwise have died of heart attacks, cancer, flu, pneumonia or any other illness in the same period.
  • 4 1
 @SmashySmashy: underlying or not people dying prematurely isn’t good !
  • 1 0
 @SmashySmashy: pneumonia is often caused by the corona virus, just like cold and flu can lead to pneumonia.
  • 5 2
 @Matt115lamb: Neither is shutting down the world and causing untold damage to billions of lives to add mere weeks on to the lives of a million people (maybe), many of whom probably knew their time was coming to an end and accepted that fact. I know it might sound callous, but when you look at it from that perspective the powers that be have really screwed this up royally.
  • 3 2
 @SmashySmashy: TBH the lockdowns occured early on after the pandemic started, when it was the only logical thing to do. Nobody knew anything about this virus and how it behaves, so it made sense to 'stop, drop, roll' to put out the fire. Then investigate and act accordingly.

Will we have another round or multiple rounds of lockdowns? Maybe. I say likely. But it's just as likely that those will be shorter because people are more used to the current state and the lockdowns would have a greater effect much quicker.

Will the world be back to normal next year? Unlikely. But boy do I hope it will be, I want to do some bike trips!
  • 1 0
 @Primoz: You say "only logical thing to do". I live in the US and can only comment on that. We have something called the CDC (center for disease control) that had a flu/respiratory pandemic guideline that stated what our approach should be. stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/11425 People will argue hey, it's from 2007 but realistically, that shouldn't' change our general approach. It states death counts and how to categorize the pandemic.

And I don't want to argue about how this is for the "flu" and shouldn't be adhered to. It's for a simliar respiratory pandemic.
  • 5 4
 @Primoz: Lockdowns were far from the logical thing to do, and the countries that didn't implement them have fared better than many countries that did. As I've said elsewhere, we knew the groups that were at risk back in January; The better (and obvious!) plan would be to ensure those groups were kept safe as possible while the rest of us got on with things. This isn't hindsight talking either, several prominent doctors were saying this in my country back in April, but they were largely ignored.

Lockdowns, even short ones are still an affront to liberty and a suppression of basic human rights. They should be the last resort, not the first option tabled. Covid isn't even bad enough to warrant such blatant techno-tarianism- it's mortality rates are way below those of actual pandemics like the Spanish Flu.

We could return to 'normal' tomorrow if people were just willing to stand up for it;Those that sacrifice freedom for security deserve neither.
  • 2 0
 @SmashySmashy: Interested in which countries fared better without lock down? I know a lot of countries that went into lock downs did so due to severe spread and the lock downs quelled that significant spread. Not sure how the lock down caused them to be worse off.
  • 2 2
 @SmashySmashy: Really? Better? For example Sweden?
i.imgur.com/sfvTQhn.png

Granted, Slovenia has a population of ~2 mio, Sweden has a population of ~10 mio. So let's take a cool, round factor of 5 and call it a day. The Slovenian absolute daily new cases peak was, drumroll, 60. At a time where Sweden's cases only started getting off in a serious manner. Even at a time when Sweden's cases apparently dropped off a cliff (I can't find any info if some measures or differences in case handling were taken or if this is 'natural - the latter seems unlikely given the cliff), in july and august, at a time where we can talk about a second wave in Slovenia with much reduced measures (the lockdown is more or less off), we are still talking about a difference with a factor of 10, which means Sweden has ~double the per capita daily case amount to Slovenia.

Granted, the lockdown in Slovenia was a complete shitshow regarding comments from people due to draconian measures (we were to work from home, if possible, schools and kindergartens were closed down and for a time only movement inside the county of residence was allowed, unless needed otherwise). But it does seem like it did something. And we were told to be careful and not engage in sports to not strain the healthcare system, because not only taking care of injured people took away the healthcare workers that could be needed to fight the epidemic, taking care of injured people is harder when there's the threat of a virus hanging in the air.

Case in point? I had an operation 6 weeks ago today for a smashed cheekbone. Before the operation, being examined by the doctors, they said 'the operation will happen in a few hours, when we get back your test results, if they are negative. Well, if they're positive, we're all going home anyway'. And I'm talking about 2 doctors and a nurse in the exam room at the least.

As for 'we knew this then', we didn't. We still know diddly squat about the virus. Erring on the cautionary side is the only logical and sensible thing when it comes to something you don't know about. There's someone in this thread saying he had mild symptoms, but months after he can barely ride because of the after-effects. Was he one of the groups vulnerable to the virus that should be protected?
  • 1 0
 Right!!! Thanks for speaking out...even here on pinkbike you have to worry about the shaming and attacks for pointing out the obvious....
  • 3 1
 @ptrcarson: Well it's not advised to make direct comparisons between countries (demographics, terrain, population concentration etc.) but when I'm talking about countries that without lockdowns I mean Sweden and The Netherlands (32nd and 66th of the rankings of total cases per million habitants). The fact that both nations have similar profiles of the spread of the virus as other countries, despite not implementing mandated lockdowns tells us that:
a) The people can be trusted to take care of themselves once properly informed.
b) The lockdowns were largely ineffective at preventing deaths; We gave so much for so little in return.

The initial hit of the virus was always going to be bad; It spread rapidly, put huge strain on services that struggled in the face of so many critical cases and it a great many people died before their time. But again, those people were already seriously ill for the most part. And deaths have dropped substantially since that first wave because those most at risk are locked down with the rest of us. But only those that are most at risk need to be safeguarded; The rest of us can get on with normal life.

It's way past time to open up and get the world moving again.
  • 4 1
 @SmashySmashy: I cannot see Sweden as a country that has done well because they really have not. I understand how their rate of infection per population is quite low because their testing level is quite low as well, same with the Neatherlands (S 54, N 63). To say Sweden is great at 32nd for number of cases while they are not testing nearly as much as many behind them is disingenuous. As The Donald would say "If you don't test you don't get cases". Because of this I would say Infection per population is a poor marker to use due to the significant differences in testing in many countries.

A better marker for success would be comparing their deaths per population to their neighbors because ultimately that has less variables in measurement. In which case Sweden has done quite poorly. They share a lot culturally, where and how people live and so on with Norway and Finland, all very compliant to government overall. They have way more deaths 576 per million compared to Finlands 60 and Norway's 49. Around 1/3 of Swedes self isolated despite no order from gov, imagine if they had told people to stay home, I bet their death rate would be more similar to Finland and Norway.
  • 3 1
 @Primoz: As I already said, you can't make those kinds of direct comparisons between countries. For one, Slovenia has one of the lowest population densities in Europe. Stockholm has roughly 4 times as many inhabitants as Ljublana, and almost half of the entire population of Slovenia concentrated in 1 city. Secondly, Sweden has one of the highest % of elderly citizens in Europe. Comparing their rates of infection/ death is pointless in the context of this discussion.

My point isn't that these countries fared well, it's that despite not implementing lockdowns they're far from the worst, when we're all being told how necessary the lockdowns are. To make that case countries without lockdown should really have death rates head and shoulders above all the countries that put them in place. Maybe, then an honest debate about lockdowns could happen.
  • 1 0
 @SmashySmashy: Slovenia and Sweden are almost identical for % of citizens over 65. Sweden has a lower percentage than Itialy, Greece, Portugal, Finland, Germany, Bulgaria, Croatia, Serbia, Latvia and France. Not the oldest at all.
  • 2 1
 @SmashySmashy:
USA , Brazil , and Mexico have the worst Covid deaths and all have been condemned for there lack of lockdown whereas New Zealand who acted quick and strict have come out of this ( atm ) with good numbers !
Act quick and strict will save life’s and your economy long term will be better off !
  • 1 1
 @ptrcarson: I think it's complete BS to say Sweden isn't testing. Rankings make my case, they don't make yours though:
Sweden has almost twice the population of Finland and Norway (52nd and 45th in terms of testing). Sweden has tested 10.83% of the population, Finland- 11.11%, Norway 12.64%. Maybe their stats are as disingenuous as you claim Swedens are?

Sweden standas apart from the other scandanavian countries though- it has a much higher population, a land bridge with mainland Europe and a significant nigrant population. Comparing neighbours isn't a smart move. Finland's only other neighbour is Russia- how's that going to work in your favour?
  • 1 0
 @Matt115lamb: The "your economy long term will be better off" (at least in the US) is not 100% true. Lots of pundits seem to compare the different cities in the us to the 1918 flu as an example. While the cities that did lockdown in 1918 fared much better economically than ones that didn't they're incomparable. I say this because in 1918 the US (and much of the western world) was a manufacturing economy. 70% of the US GDP is consumer economic driven.

Now, that's not to say that fear from the virus won't hinder the consumer driven economy but to bring up long term I think is incorrect as we really don't know where the chips will fall.
  • 2 0
 @Matt115lamb: NZ is an island with a population half that of London, not exactly comparable to USA, Brazil and Mexico, they have also had some ‘odd’ ideas about Covid, such as it not actually being real.

The UK ‘locked down’ however and we, managed 45k deaths and the worst economic outcome in Europe....
  • 1 0
 @justanotherusername: we took too long to lockdown and it wasn’t really a lockdown, it was an advisery lockdown that went to pieces the day Cummins drove his wife and kid on a 50 miles trip to test his eyesight and Boris backing him !
  • 1 0
 @Matt115lamb: initial lockdown compliance was very high, intact it was higher than the government predicted, though I thought the Cummings thing was an absolute scandal it hasn’t seemingly contributed to a rise in deaths which continued to drop to this day.

So, aside from it being too late, which is very likely possible, do you not think that our high death stats have something more to do with complete failure to protect care homes and vulnerable people in hospitals? (Germany did, look at their numbers) How do you explain lockdown easing, case load increasing but deaths continuing to decrease regardless?
  • 2 1
 @SmashySmashy: do you even look at the numbers before typing? You say Slovenia has one of the lowest densities of inhabitants in Europe. Sweden has almost exactly one quarter of the population density Slovenia has. True, Stockholm has roughly 4 times as many inhabitants as Ljubljana does, but Sweden has 5 times as many inhabitants overall. And a bit less than 10 % of the Swedes live in Stockholm. Almost 15 % of Slovenians live in Ljubljana. And the old population share? Over 65 years old represent 20,59% of population in Sweden, 21,23 % in Slovenia.

The point you're trying to make is not supported by the claims in your comment, as Slovenia is FAR more densely populated (as opposed to what you said) and has an older population than Sweden, judging by the share of 65+ year olds (as opposed to what you said). The percentage of people living in Ljubljana was also wrong as was the claim that a lot of people in Slovenia live in only one city. Kinda like in Sweden.

The kicker? Slovenia is more densely populated, has older population and has a higher percentage of people living in one city. All these facts are condusive to higher infection rates. Yet they are much lower than they are in Sweden. See the point? See how a lockdown helped?

If you're trying to make a point there are countries worse than Sweden that had a lockdown, support it with numbers.
  • 1 0
 @justanotherusername: I agree that the gov completely threw care homes under the bus after they said the “we’ve put a protective ring around care homes” lie !
I don’t know , it just seems EVERYTHING this gov does turn to sh*t , and I don’t believe a word that comes out of they’re mouths !
  • 1 0
 @Matt115lamb: You think it's bad now, just wait 'til Brexit fully kicks in. The fact they awarded a ferry contract to a company with no ships, kinda tells you everything you need to know.
  • 1 0
 @commental: what do you mean , I though we had an oven ready deal lol
  • 1 0
 @Matt115lamb: agree with that, this government is a total shower of shite, a cabinet made up of yes men and women put there purely due to loyalty rather than ability.

@commental1: please don’t I was trying to forget we have that to deal with too.... ah well.
  • 1 0
 @Matt115lamb: it’s burned, not oven ready.
  • 1 0
 @Primoz: My comment comparing population densities was between Slovenia and Stockholm; I'm sure the population density of Stockholm is much higher than that of all Slovenia, with almost three-quarters of the entire population of the country all living in one municipal area (Updated since I found out the figures I had were for the city only).
Slovenia has 2 cities with ~100K citizens or more (including Maribor because it's close) so 19% of the population live in large towns/ cities- Sweden has 11 (including Jönköping Norrköping, with ~97K each), for a total of 35% of the population.

We don't have to go down this rabbit hole- my point is very simple (and with good reason, as we've just demonstrated); You can't make direct comparisons between countries. If you're going to make comparisons you need to do it with their individual stats and those *of the rest of the world* and have educated discussions about the relative differences in their various populations distributions, customs etc.
My case is not that countries that didn't lock down fared better than all the countries that did, only that they didn't fare the worst of them, which raises the question of whether the lockdowns were really justified.

@ptrcarson: I just noticed the (unfortunate) typo in my reply to you. It was entirely unintended- I was responding on my phone and I missed it.
  • 2 1
 @SmashySmashy: so you're trying to say that we can't compare countries between each other, but we can compare cities to countries? What kind of logic is that???

Plus, the 100k limit, why not put the limit at 1 million? That way neither of the countries has a large city. Or if I take the largest 10 (not even 11!) cities in Slovenia, it covers the same 35 % as in Sweden.

We don't have to go down the rabbit hole, agreed, we only need to look at the facts as they are and not make arbitrary comparisons of countries vs. cities just to try to make simple points fit a certain mindset, regardless if they are right or wrong.

And like I said, "If you're trying to make a point there are countries worse than Sweden that had a lockdown, support it with numbers.". I never said why are you saying Sweden fared the best of them all. Just show a country that had a lockdown when it mattered that fared or fares worse than Sweden. You're trying to wiggle out that you never said non-lockdown countries fared better than lockdown countries. I'm just asking you to show an example of how non-lockdown countries didn't fare horribly bad. Which is a much simpler thing to do and should be easy given the point you're trying to make.
  • 2 1
 @Primoz: Calm down lad, you're rage is preventing you from considering what's being said to you.
I made the point that one municipality in Sweden contains roughly the same number of people as 75% of all of Slovenia to highlight why we can't go making the kinds of conclusions you seem hell bent on inferring from what I'm saying.

The facts as they are:
Sweden is 9th among the countries with the highest deaths per million inhabitants, 7th if you exclude San Marino and Andorra because their tiny population skew the results. The Netherlands is 19th. My point is that to justify lockdowns these countries should top of the list by a massive margin before lockdowns were ever even considered. I'm not comparing them with other individual countries, I'm looking at how the virus has affect all the other countries, and wondering why lockdowns were necessary.

I'm trying to explain to you why the lockdowns were a bad solution using the rankings. I'm not trying to wriggle out of anything If anything, it's you that's being disingenuous. Direct quote copied from my previous post: "Lockdowns were far from the logical thing to do, and the countries that didn't implement them have fared better than many countries that did". *Many countries*

My take on this has always been that the lockdowns were only effective because those that needed safeguarding were locked down like everyone else. But a more pragmatic, sensible and ultimately better approach for everyone would have been to isolate those most likely to have serious symptoms, and allow the rest of us to get on with life.
  • 1 0
 @SmashySmashy: Lock downs worked to stop outbreaks. The countries that locked down for the most part did so to quell outbreaks in progress. Those that did so slowed the outbreak to manageable levels. It was the right thing to do. In Sweden you were more likely to die of covid than be admitted to ICU, this is because they choose to only treat those in hospital that were definitely going to survive in order to keep beds open. They had to ask doctors to choose who lives and dies and still do. I don't believe that is success in any rational world. That was written in Forbes don't have the link but I am sure you can find it.
  • 2 0
 @Primoz: I'm not getting into whether lockdowns were right or wrong, I believe most governments did what they thought was right at the time. What I will point out is that Japan has a population of over 124 million which is, for the most part extremely densely packed. They had no lockdown and have reported 1238 deaths. I think the culture of wearing masks has had more impact on the spread of the virus there than lockdown achieved in Western countries.
  • 3 1
 @ptrcarson:

Lockdowns work to stop outbreaks... in the same way that dynamite works for fishing. There are better tools for the job, that don't have so many dire and uncontrollable consequences.

Doctors routinely have to decide who gets treated, and those that are unlikely to recover. When the decision is made to move from treatment to palliative care we call it mercy, on a battlefield it's triage. The initial hit of the virus was such that tough choices had to be made. And when you consider that those that died with Covid were already very close to the end of their lives it makes sense to redirect resources from them to those with greater chances of recovering.

"Those that did so slowed the outbreak to manageable levels." Only because those that are most at risk are locked down with us. Covid was like a flash fire in that it did the greatest amount of damage up-front. Even as cases rise he number of new deaths remain low- because anyone at risk with a bit of sense is ensuring they don't catch it. And that's the way to should be Once there were sufficient controls and processes in place to protect those that are at most risk, there was absolutely *zero* reason to quarantine healthy individuals.
  • 3 0
 @commental: Japan has a massive elderly population too, which is saying something. I think another part of it is that the Japanese respect and protect their personal space a lot more than people from western cultures. Social distancing does work. Masks offer additional protections too (when used correctly- I see far too many people wearing them in their personal cars, or even out on the street. I get the sense it's a more of a virtue signal than any kind of preventative measure.)
  • 1 0
 @SmashySmashy: Your all over the map, I don't feel the need to justify the belief that everyone deserves care until there are no options available. That is when doctors move people to palliative. Comparing everyday citizens to the battlefield is worse that than comparing Sweden to Finland. We are not enlisted, that is a different world.

I don't get why you think there was value in people dying of this unnecessarily. Yes there was an economic impact but seems to me like recovery is well underway here and we now have a better understanding of the virus that we did 6 months ago so that w don't have to go back to as draconian measures to keep the population safe. I'm sure glad we did what we did.
  • 2 0
 @ptrcarson: "I don't feel the need to justify the belief that everyone deserves care until there are no options available." There were no options available; There simply wasn't enough to go around and tough decisions had to be made. We live in the real world, with material limitations on resources and people's time.I wonder if you thought of offering you services to hospitals to assist with either? I know I did.

Those that died of Covid overwhelmingly died slightly prematurely, not unnecessarily. They were far from healthy individuals by-and-large. They were already very ill, and often terminally so. Where is the value in ensuring their lives were extended at all costs, during a crisis, alone and afraid and gasping for air. I'm sure many would have given up their remaining time to be allowed to see their family and friends one last time.

"I'm sure glad we did what we did." For now. But the piper has yet to be paid for all the furloughed staff, government handouts and business incentives that kept the world running for the last few months. It's nonsensical to me that those we tried in vain to save were never going to live long enough to see what he world would become. To me, it seems like the misery ahead of us, that was entirely preventable if we'd just followed common sense, is far worse than anything we've experienced due to Covid.
  • 3 2
 @SmashySmashy: We did not have to make those decisions here in BC and the hospitals did not need help. You will justify anything it seems to support your view point. I get it, you're scared of the economic consequences, totally fair. I personally don't think my want to have a party with more than 50 friends outweighs my want to have my newborn baby to meet their great grandparent once they can understand what that means. I am happy to pay the cost via my tax dollars in the future. I don't agree that the misery ahead is as bad for us in Canada in comparison to places that did not take similar actions. You cannot have the numbers of people dying that countries have in places that choose to do little and have a healthy economy. That is a significant shock to the system. Worse economically is if many have the long term disabilities that seem to be attached to the illness even if it does not affect them significantly. There are many people that are 5 or 6 months since their illness began that have some serious disabilities still. If those issues prove to continue that will be quite the burden on society.

We will see, I hope everyone gets out of this as well as possible. I just would rather hedge my bets on caution and deliberate action than the other option.
  • 2 2
 @ptrcarson: Wow, how lazy, uninformed and completely devoid of self-awareness does one have to be to openly state such short-sighted, selfish tripe.
Other people, those that don't live in "wonderful, perfect" BC have endured far harsher lockdowns and sacrificed so much for questionable benefit to them, those they love, and their society at large. I might be callous in terms of the language and basis of my criticism of the lockdowns, but your indifference to the suffering of so many is so entitled it's galling. I'd genuinely be ashamed to be so uncaring.
  • 1 0
 @SmashySmashy: I never said wonderful or perfect, I said I appreciated what we did. I hope the best for you.
  • 1 1
 @SmashySmashy: you say you're not trying to wriggle out of anything but that I am. Yet I asked you, when mentioning wriggling, which countries with a lockdown fared worse than non-lockdown countries. And when saying you're not wriggling out of anything you again wriggle out of the exact same thing by stating the same line again without, again, giving an example...

@commental: of course culture has a huge impact. But you can't change the culture over night. You can impose 'draconian' measures which is the next best thing when you're trying to stop an outbreak though. Therefore lockdowns, work from home, mandatory masks, etc.

BTW, South Korea also fared reasonably well and besides masks they also quickly deployed a contact tracing app (with a much more privacy worrisome method of functioning than what we have now from Google and Apple), so there are of course alternatives to lockdowns.

And, when you're mentioning tough choices, how, at the time, a stop, drop and roll approach to quenching the fire with a lockdown wasn't the least tough option? Regarding the financial effects of the lockdowns and everything, I'll leave this here. www.npr.org/transcripts/835571843

Though I am very sure it won't change a thing as @ptrcarson pretty much said everyhting:
  • 3 0
 @Primoz: Here's the list of countries you petulant child; A 2 minute search is all it would have taken you to find them for yourself.

In terms of deaths per million inhabitants, the following countries are between Sweden at 9th, and the Netherlands at 19th:
*P denotes Partial lockdown, L denotes a full lockdown.
Brazil(P), USA(P), Mexico(L), France(L), Panama(L), Bolivia(L), Colombia(L), Equador(L)
I'll include Ireland(L) in that list too because their deaths numbers are very similar to The Netherlands.
Countries that fared worse than both Sweden and The Netherlands:
Italy(L), Spain (L), UK(P), Chile(L), Belgium(L), Peru(L).

I don't see why you refuse to accept a simple premise: Despite not locking down, Sweden and The Netherlands have not fared worse than many other nations that did. So again, the virus is not overwhelming Sweden or The Netherlands significantly more than countries that did, so were the lockdowns justified? It seems Canada didn't really implement one if 50 people can gather, while in Australia people are being dragged from their cars and placed in detention centers if they test positive for the virus, so @ptrcarson exists is a warm, fuzzy bubble as far as lockdowns go.

Regarding dollar amounts etc. You do realize that social services require tax collections for funding, right? Hospitals, welfare, pensions; Things the most vulnerable in society depend on. And if they're under funded (which they always do in a massive global recession) then those individuals suffer disproportionately.

@ptrcarson and you both suffer from the same deluded ideal, and that is that today's problems should be tackled with no consideration given to the situation tomorrow, or in 6 months. By saving a million people (maybe) from a slightly untimely grave now, we may be condemning tens, if not hundreds of millions to suffer more than they would have otherwise, and a significant portion of them will die as a direct result.

I'm tired of trying to discuss this with someone who has absolutely no idea of how to form an argument, or what makes a good argument, and has to be dragged along the logical steps required to achieve an understanding of the most basic concepts that are being outlined to them, so this will be the last time I will reply to you.
  • 1 0
 It seems that we were being listened to lads (well, the people that were right anyway):
www.bbc.com/news/health-53951764

Left-leaning BBC promotes Swedish-style lockdown (I.e. No lockdown for healthy individuals, just clear guidance and advice) while protecting those most at risk, admits 2nd wave is driven by cases, not deaths and describes how a significant portion of the population have an innate immunity to Covid. This no doubt will be used to attack Boris and the Tories all over again (after soft, screeching lefties demanded a lockdown in the first place) but that's to be expected, because if it wasn't for double-standards the illiberal left would have none at all...

I'm so glad the rest of the world has finally begun to catch up, it was getting lonely out here in the land of common sense.

Hat tip to the anonymous PBer for sending this on too (you know who you are).
  • 2 0
 @SmashySmashy:

I was at my buddies birthday party asking people to bet me that these draconian lockdowns would be viewed as bad if not worse in the future than the Iraq War. Of course I got shit on. But here we are, I didn't think it would be this soon.

I'll also say that people are actually waking up to the mental health crisis this bs has caused too. It's been very bad, at least here in America.
  • 2 0
 @pistol2ne: Living where you do I'm surprised you survived Big Grin
I know where you're coming from. I'm not sure we've faced anything on this scale since the Cold War. And look what that did to those who lived through it.
Fear does strange and horrible things to people. Certainly the new McCarthyism seems be directed at anti-lockdown-types, anti-maskers and anti-vaxxers.
I hope you stay safe.
  • 1 0
 @SmashySmashy: This is what happens when we’re lead by the likes of Bannon and Cummings!
  • 2 0
 @SmashySmashy: I do understand the impact of severe lock down. My sister lives in coop housing in central London and it was awful for her. I worried both about her emotional health and physical health, she has a genetic heart issue that makes her at significant risk if she gets the virus. The emotional toll was in part created by lockdown but equally significant was the worry about her risk. She relies on the tube to get around so even as things have opened she has still been quite restricted in her movement as her doctors recommend she does not use the tube. It is really hard.

I don't think you and me really are that far off of what we think is appropriate. Many here in BC point to Sweden as an excuse to do nothing rather than the minimal change that our gov asked us to do. They are incorrect in what it is that was done in Sweden. After spending the time reading deeper into the policy that Sweden used it really was not that different than we had here. They didn't close business as much as we did but their proximity to central Europe likely had more to do with their significant issues than their policy. I would say that in the future I hope we here do similar to what we did before when the virus surges. I do think a little more restriction than Sweden, like more rules on how business stays open in ways that are safe would have been better for them but certainly not a full lock down unless we are in a full hospital overflowing death spiral. As with lockdowns we have more information now and should adapt to allow the most free movement possible while limiting people interactions to keep contact tracing viable.

I think many people coming from many different contexts spend a lot of time talking past each other on this one, myself included. Some people here say our "lockdowns" were wrong and we should be like Sweden and do nothing. Their characterization of our restrictions as a lockdown is incorrect and their characterization of Sweden as doing nothing is also incorrect.

I do think you are a little cavalier when talking about who is dyeing. It is not only the nearly dead, there are others who have have a fair bill of health who have passed away too early. They do not need to have a health issue that you can blame on them to be at risk. Families have lost loved one prematurely and that cannot be downplayed. When I read that I feel great pain for those who have lost people too young, if we were unlucky that could have been my family, my sister is 33. I think you should take your own words into consideration, "your indifference to the suffering of so many is so entitled it's galling. I'd genuinely be ashamed to be so uncaring". There are many with grief that should not be belittled, that is what really bothers me about those minimizing the impact of the virus.
  • 1 0
 @Matt115lamb: Right on cue.
  • 4 0
 @ptrcarson: Honestly, I appreciate the more considered response. I apologize for what I said about the lockdown you inhabit, it was inconsiderate of me to presume. I hope things improve for your sister soon.

Regarding the Swedish policy- I don't believe it was an indifferent 'do nothing' approach, so I'm not one of those people. The Swedish government chose not to interfere unduly in their countries affairs and instead they allowed businesses to stay open and they treated people as responsible, rational individuals by educating them about the risks of Covid and ways to reduce them. And in return they were rewarded (as a population, not just a government) with high compliance and less severe economic fallout. I don't know how well the hospitals fared, but their economy has reportedly weathered the storm better than most (I'd better be careful with that term), giving them a larger reserve with which up to tackle any unforeseeable future events.

Again, the virus doesn't kill healthy individuals. Just because someone doesn't yet have a diagnosis, doesn't mean they were healthy. The only case of I know of where someone who was "healthy" that died of the virus was 5'3" and must have weighed 250lbs. I take your point about being cavalier when talking about the deaths though, I could have been more delicate, but I'm not minimizing the impact of the virus, I'm stating it for what it is so people such as yourself can understand the consequences of the decisions we made now on society in the near future. You may not agree, or like the facts as I have presented them, which is your choice. But when the bill comes due for all those furloughed workers, the business grants coupled with the enormous drop in tax receipts from the reduced workforce and businesses that can only serve 40-50% of the capacity they previously could, then the real nightmare will begin. Do you think Apple, Google, Amazon etc. are suddenly going to start paying their fair share? I have a better chance of winning a DH World Cup.

I'd like you to consider what it's going to feel like when the world is plunged again into massive recession, tens of millions of people are unable to afford the most basic items they need to survive and there's no amount of tax you can pay to help them all (or even any of them, realistically). You probably won't even notice their suffering you'll be working so hard to stay afloat. And worst of all, it didn't have to be like that if rationality had prevailed; 1 million unfortunate but unavoidable marginally-early deaths now (whether we locked down or not) or 10 million indiscriminate deaths a year from now, 50 million unemployed, mass evictions. 1 million deaths is only the tip of this iceberg- the real disaster, what lurks beneath is still waiting to rear it's ugly, destructive head and there won't be any options like we had when this began. That's where sentimentality gets you.
  • 84 36
 Just. Cancel. The. F*cking. Seasons.
  • 9 2
 Please no I need fantasy prizes!
  • 24 18
 Until when though? 2030? If the bubble system and test and trace is working and they do actually quarantine upon return (not that anyone in the UK are doing so) - what’s the problem and how will march next year be any better?
  • 17 11
 @justanotherusername: please don't use your sample size of "2 people you know where back at work" to judge and then tell the world how the UK is ignoring quarantine. Maybe the people you know are simply d**kheads or lying d**kheads.
  • 22 4
 @Dropthedebt: I’m not using that as a sample size, I know these people in real life, not just on the internet as I live in the UK and a few miles from them.

They both returned immediately to work, both of their employers knew where they had been. They said how many on their plane hadn’t pre filled the required info sheet and some didn’t even know they had to.

Nobody checked forms to ensure correct details, people have not been contacted and checked to see if isolating, it’s a total farce.

Besides, one of them went to the canaries, they have barely had a case there let alone a death, yet I could spend a who week eating out and drinking in a city in the UK with a massively higher case load and nobody would bat an eyelid....
  • 26 14
 @justanotherusername: Stop making sense and just follow the rules! This is what a good subject does.
  • 5 0
 @Dropthedebt: uk is actually ignoring quarantines and many other things pal
  • 8 11
 100% agree. Sorry, but sport is not worth anyone's lives.
  • 24 26
 @PAmtbiker: stop all sport forever then, too much risk, you could fall of the bike, have a heart attack, fall over and bang your head... etc etc etc
  • 4 0
 @justanotherusername: The Canary Islands have had almost 5,000 cases and 167 deaths.
  • 9 4
 @justanotherusername: those risks are self inflicted, covid will usually harm those naturally at risk who aren’t choosing to make their immune systems weak
  • 9 10
 @justanotherusername: You might know a couple of folks but I know a few too that have come from Spain, France, Dubai, etc and they are sticking to it religiously. Equally the cops are doing random home visits here including on them.
I think we have all decided that non-masking wearing non-quarantiners are the socially unacceptable Covid equivalents of drink drivers.
  • 3 6
 @billreilly: that’s this year, the uk had daily figures like that not so long ago....
  • 3 4
 @ilovedust: yea but you are talking shite, the ‘cops’ are doing no such thing.
  • 1 3
 @loam4311: And athletes and associated staff fall into the bracket of those ‘naturally at risk’?

If the test, trace and quarantine rules are implemented and any infection spread therefore limited to the event Itself the risk to competitors and staff (who should know the obvious risks ) is almost non existent.
  • 9 20
flag gnarlysipes (Aug 27, 2020 at 17:31) (Below Threshold)
 @Dropthedebt: you need to get your head out of CNN or whatever state media you listen to. Strict lock downs don’t work. We have dozens of examples. A common sense approach to social distancing, mask wearing, and keeping at-risk people away works best. For people’s safety, mental well-being, and economic security.
  • 7 14
flag gnarlysipes (Aug 27, 2020 at 17:39) (Below Threshold)
 @yupstate: ignore the facts in favor of rules from 5 months ago based on flawed projections.
  • 1 0
 @justanotherusername:
If they are not doing it, I guess those that I know that got visited just made it up?
Idiot.
  • 3 3
 @ilovedust: nope, you made it up.
  • 2 1
 @ilovedust: that or your ‘friends’ were either reported for suspected breach of quarantine or were unable to be contacted / when contacted the tracers unhappy with the answers they gave leading them to believe they were not at home and required a visit - the ‘cops’ are absolutely not checking up on people who have been on holiday without it cause.

So, either your are lying, your friends lying, or your friends have broken quarantine warranting a police visit, so like I say, many are not adhering to it... pick one?
  • 3 2
 @justanotherusername: Just because you know a loads of scumbags doesn't make it right.....
  • 1 0
 @holdandhope: so you are saying he knows loads of scumbags? As if his friends were checked on by ‘the cops’ it was because of either actual or suspected breaking of quarantine?
  • 4 0
 @gnarlysipes: They don't work so well that a strict lockdown, against a ton of moans of course, here in Slovenia dropped the peak daily number of new cases from 60 to 5 in 2 months. Now we're back to 20-30 new cases per day because nobody will take away the freedom of vacationing from people and they just have to go to the seaside in Croatia. And supposedly the vast majority of new cases these days are returnees from vacationing in Croatia.

So yeah, lockdowns don't work at all. Freedom and corona for everybody!!!
  • 2 1
 @Primoz: Lockdown do not work in practice because the economical cost is prohibitive. In the same way you could save thousands of people by simply banning cars, but you woul bankcrup in a week, and then many people would die because of poverty.
  • 2 2
 @lkubica: did you run the numbers? Because some people did. And they do not agree with you, far from it.
www.npr.org/transcripts/835571843
  • 4 1
 I just adore reading all the posts from you guys who have never been through a pandemic before, on top of that it's this new virus that we have never seen, and don't really even know where it came from exactly plus it is mutating as it goes into even newer versions. It's like listening to 10 year old kids talk about their careers.
  • 1 0
 @justanotherusername: Your the one I'm saying has scumbag friends....
  • 1 0
 @Bomadics: isn't COVID-19 relatively stable mutations wise? Which is the reason we have a hope for a vaccine?
  • 1 1
 @holdandhope: at least you agree
  • 1 0
 @Primoz: last I heard there were 8 different strains, this was a couple of months ago though so not sure if they are more or less currently. Plus a new variant a few weeks ago but was apparently less virulent than the most dominant form of the virus.
  • 2 0
 @Bomadics: the first investigations of the genome I saw talked about a relatively low number (under 10 if I remember correctly), which at first seems daunting until you take into account that HIV is a tough cookie to vaccinate against because it mutates so quickly inside a patient. So 8 strains for a virus causing a global pandemic isn't half bad I suppose...
  • 83 36
 Hopefully no Americans were there since the CDC will still insist no testing is needed. FUCK.DONALD.TRUMP.
  • 36 5
 Hey he’s got a point, if you don’t test you can’t have cases ????‍♂️
  • 9 29
flag yupstate (Aug 27, 2020 at 17:18) (Below Threshold)
 @gareth4636: If you don't test as extensively and report and focus on it obsessively you can't be as terrified by the results. I bet if someone came to your house and tested how much fecal matter was on your sleepy-time pillow and your toothbrush every day you'd freak out too.
  • 8 1
 @yupstate: and in this situation the correct response would be "I'd better wash my pillow more often" rather than "I'd better not test my pillow any more" don't you agree?
  • 1 0
 @yupstate: he is also not brushing the teeth of people who come near him with the fecal covered toothbrush...
  • 3 1
 @yupstate: There's less shit on my toothbrush than there is that comes out of Trump's mouth.
  • 46 2
 No way, who would have expected this?!
  • 27 2
 I had Covid in March. Really mild symptoms. Felt fine after 4 days. Have hardly been able to ride since. The after effects and long term health impacts are pretty grim for some. For all those saying flu kills more than covid and we should just crack on with life...well, i don't think it's that simple. I hope all my riding mates to do everything they can to avoid getting it.
  • 1 0
 Solo rides.
  • 5 5
 can you expand on this? just trying to understand what happened to you. why can't you ride? my riding buddy got it, he works in the ER, he is 100% fine now and riding like a champ.
  • 3 0
 I had it in March too with some quite high temperatures and pretty bad headaches for a week or so. But after that I recovered quickly with zero impact on my riding or life.
  • 4 4
 @gunslingger: smh...do we need to explain you that not everyone is affected in the same way by a disease ? Really ?
Plenty of cases were people take months to recover, also many cases were people have permanent lungs damage afterwards.

Then again you would know this if you were reading news and not so focused swallowing everything that comes from that one ridiculously stupid twitter account
  • 4 1
 @gunslingger:
Yeah - no probs. I was fine for about a week but every time I exercised I'd get severe chest pains, racing heart rate and mucus build up in my respiratory tract.
It looks like it's given me a rubbish version of acid reflux...on meds now which are helping but can't do much in the way of exercise. Waiting to see a consultant to check out the heart issue. Seems lots of people are getting different post viral symptoms...ranging from none....to much worse than mine. I've no doubt I'll be back up to riding properly again at some point... Got a new bike to ride after all.
Stay safe all. ????????❤️
  • 22 0
 *Surprised Pikachu*
  • 19 0
 Nobody knew that healthcare would be so complicated.
  • 5 0
 Nobody knew either that drinking bleach in a UV cabin would not be a cure for Covid19
  • 18 3
 Not that I am a bitter American or anything, but per capita new cases in Spain have surpassed the US recently. Are spanish riders/staff quarantined too? What happens if the spike in France continues growing, will the French teams have to go home? Yes, I spend way too much time on covid dashboards, what of it?
  • 11 0
 Epidemiological Word Search
  • 10 0
 Bummer. Stay safe people.
  • 9 25
flag justanotherusername (Aug 27, 2020 at 11:32) (Below Threshold)
 Stay safe from what exactly? Going home to the USA where there is more chance of catching the virus?
  • 13 5
 For some reason I’m thinking of comments making fun of athletes for choosing to not attend this race
  • 5 1
 Don't see why people would make fun. I've only seen Sam Hill and Connon Fearon say they are not traveling this year, mainly due to the 2 week quarantine that would be required when returning to Australia, but also in Sam's case that he doesn't want to risk infecting his family which is totally reasonable. There will be no EWS champion this year, so not surprised a lot of people are not attending.
  • 7 2
 There has to be an end game. Someone needs to develop a vaccine or we have got to bite the bullet and go for herd immunity. Unless we do either one, all of our countries will be lost in monumental debt and economic disaster. It’s really bad we are having to discuss this instead of bikes but it’s affecting everything we do.
  • 16 5
 Herd immunity isn't a legitimate goal and work towards a vaccine is hard under way our job is to minimise the spread until it's available, or until another factor changes such as a successful drug candidate. The human race did not develop 'herd immunity' to influenza, polio, smallpox, rabies, rhinoviruses etc so I don't understand why anyone thinks it's a good idea in this case.
  • 1 12
flag johnd2 (Aug 27, 2020 at 16:55) (Below Threshold)
 @GrandMasterOrge: Tell me more , Doctor Phill.
  • 2 12
flag Golden-G (Aug 27, 2020 at 20:30) (Below Threshold)
 No vaccine has EVER been proven to achieve herd immunity. Not once. Not ever.
  • 4 0
 @Golden-G: Can you elaborate on what you mean here please?
  • 8 1
 @GrandMasterOrge: he means : "it's a GiaNt plOt from the lizArd pharmA spraying chem trail and putting ChIps in OuR BrAins CBD will save us where is my tinfoil hat arhhhgg the CIA is controlling meee"
  • 2 1
 @Golden-G: Herd immunity through normal activity, without a vaccine = death on an entirely different scale to what it is now. With that "strategy" I'm not sure the weak shall inherit the earth, but they might get their own plot, sure... Only eugenicists could subscribe to such an approach.
  • 5 0
 @Golden-G: Have you ever heard of Polio? You might want to check recent news to see, what a vaccine is able to do.
  • 1 11
flag Golden-G (Aug 28, 2020 at 5:07) (Below Threshold)
 @FuzzyL: I am fat far ore researched than any of you on the subject. Herd immunity is only achieved via natural means. Once you understand that pharmaceutical corporations DO NOT benefit from making people healthy you might begin to understand what is at play here. It is a matter of simple economics. A patient cured is a customer lost. Pharmaceutical corporations are incentivized to not only make people sick but keep them sick for as long as possible thus maximizing revenues per individual. Respond emotionally as you have been conditioned to do, logic escapes over 90% of you.
  • 2 7
flag Golden-G (Aug 28, 2020 at 5:19) (Below Threshold)
 @GrandMasterOrge: the obvious notion that the pharmaceutical industry has acquired more wealth than the military industrial complex by profiting from people’s poor health seems to escape all of you. They own the media, the medical system, the medical schools, and now the governments, they essentially control everything. They DO NOT make any money from healthy people!!!! They are not moral entities. A publicly listed corporation is only interested in generating profits for its shareholders by any and all means necessary including but not limited to suppressing actual cures, and purposefully compromising the health of entire populations in order to maximize revenues.
  • 1 2
 Apparently I am fat...LOL!
  • 1 1
 @BenPea: This is purely conjecture when we don't have concrete figures for how much of the population has actually had it, more or less symptom free, already. The virus is still basically everywhere and social distancing and improved hospital response is keeping it at bay.
  • 7 2
 @Golden-G: "Herd immunity is only achieved via natural means."
Horseshit. You need 70-90% of the population to be immune to achieve this. Doing so without a vaccine is essentially a death penalty in the case of covid 19. You've clearly researched f*ck all and are seeking to reverse engineer your fantasy fears so that they are grounded in some kind of logic (as explained in Conspiracy Theorising for Dummies), which would ultimately lead to the conclusion that big pharma caused everything from HIV to cancer to diabetes (which are caused by having sex with simians (in the first instance and possibly BS), genetic predisposition/environmental factors, and the western diet, respectively), not some claw-handed boogie man in a dimly-lit lab. The pharma industry has been involved in some dodgy shit, but only where the market has allowed it, not least in the US where you are told how free you are every day, just keep popping the Xanax and prescription heroin and do anything to keep the job that pays for the medical bills that inevitably stem from that beautiful American freedom (to get fat and shoot random people) uncle Donnie keeps telling you about while gradually destroying the whole concept of truth and honesty, giving every crack pot a licence to make the shit up that you read on the internet.
If you ever find yourself wondering which fears are legit and which have been carefully implanted in your head, count how many people in the US have been killed by, say, muslim immigrants in the last year and how many by the abject incompetence, corruption and venality of its govt.
  • 5 2
 @rookie100: it's not entirely conjecture, it is a pretty safe assumption when not far off a million are dead (and many are long-term sick) despite the pretty unprecedented steps taken by governments and populations. And I've seen figures of between 15 and 80% for the proportion of cases that are asymptomatic, the latter dating from March and the former from June. So we're probably somewhere in between right now.
The reliability of the antibody tests as an indicator of who's had it isn't great either.
Too many unknowns, none of which are reassuring.
  • 2 3
 @BenPea: So you agree that we have no idea how many people have had it already. So we can't really say how deadly it is. 70-90% herd immunity is an estimate skewed to favour your argument. What do you think is the appropriate way to deal with this virus besides social distancing, full lockdown? It is very easy to scaremonger ...as easy at it is to play Trump and say "all is under control".
I believe we are going to have to get used to living with this thing (as long as there is capacity in the hospitals) until there is a vaccine.
  • 2 1
 @rookie100: not saying there's a magic bullet, just that being certain about anything is impossible and that many are certain that it's a hoax - including, up until pretty recently, the most powerful man in the world (well, his American counterpart at least) - which is an idea that needs to be countered. Scaremongering and saying that we cannot underestimate this thing is not the same, just as claiming it's not as bad as flu is not the same as making a valid argument. I think we agree on the essentials.
  • 6 0
 Now we can implement actual trail sanitization so it can no longer be used as a reference for every new trail being too easy.
  • 8 2
 Raise your hand if you are surprised. The precautionary principle comes to mind...
  • 11 7
 I get that racers and mechanics really want to get back for competition and a salary, but why do these traveling jobs like this get to return right now?
  • 15 18
 Because the people who are doing it are selfish as covid will not kill them. They do kot give a crap about infecting a nurse who they socialize with then that nurse goes to the hospital to treat vulnerable people. I am using this example because someone doing the ews that lives in the s2s region does frequently socialize with that crowd.
  • 10 7
 what do you mean "get" to return? are you going to pay the world to sit at home?
  • 4 1
 @onemind123: they do have to isolate for 2 weeks when they come back here. The beauty about social media and the new addiction of the pros with it means it's easy to call them out and keep tabs on them if you can see what they're up to.
  • 5 1
 And now all UK entrants will have to isolate for 2 weeks on return is it worth it
  • 2 0
 They do anyway
  • 1 0
 Of course. Isn’t everyone basically self isolating anyways?
  • 1 4
 By ‘have to’ do you mean will just completely ignore it and carry on with their lives?

Is anyone paying a single bit of attention to travel quarantine in the UK, two people I know didn’t, they filled out a quick form, weren’t contacted at any point and were back to work the day after landing.
  • 4 1
 @justanotherusername: i don't think countries have the resources to enforce this in a meaningful way...
ideally they'd return from holiday and have a police tag round their ankle for 2 weeks while they stay at home, and somehow their shopping is delivered etc.

there'd be outrage at the government for deprivation of liberty, but i'd argue that its a risk you're willing to take by going on holiday.. and its only 2 weeks isolation after all (if you're unfortunate enough to catch it).

enforcement like this would make people think twice about going on holiday right now.. and would make them more cautious while they're out there
  • 3 1
 @nordland071285: it’s a complete farce and more a political statement than one of prevention - as I said above I would have to quarantine if I drove via the tunnel to the alps, stayed in my van and rode bikes for a week seeing almost nobody but could happily spend a week or two in Cornwall or any major city and eat out every night etc
  • 1 1
 @justanotherusername: calling you out on this because yet again in the same article you are casting aspersions on the entire nation based on a couple of folk you know where as I will tell you the complete opposite about quite a few more.
  • 1 0
 @ilovedust: i don't know many people who are taking this seriously to be honest ..parties every weekend, crowded pub in the week, hug? Better not? Ah sod it
  • 1 0
 @nordland071285: turns out his ‘friends’ were visited by police to check on their location during quarantine.

As they are only doing this following a report that people are not isolating from tracers or a report from someone else in the public it appears even the people he believes are living to the letter of the guidance are actually doing the exact opposite, like you say, ah sod it....
  • 6 2
 People making jokes will be quarantined.
  • 8 2
 only if the joke sucked.
  • 3 0
 BBC News - Coronavirus: Switzerland latest to join UK's quarantine list
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-53937997
  • 1 0
 So long as people aren’t up in each other’s faces or sneezing on people they should be fine. They probably shouldn’t be gathering indoors where there is poor air circulation though.
  • 4 0
 uPdAtE is PrOoF tHe LizArDs aRe in ChArGe. IvE saId ToO mUcH
  • 1 1
 There is the possibility that nearly every human being on this planet will catch Covid19 at some point in their life. Just like cold and flu viruses...Covid is here to stay vaccine or not. Life your life and be happy everyone stop hiding, get riding.
  • 3 0
 Homer Simpson, hand slap to the face. Doh!
  • 2 0
 Damn... I didn't had enough money to put both Maes and Covid-19 on my fantasy team...
  • 3 0
 Didn’t take long for that to go viral !!
  • 5 3
 Fake news! All scare tactics I find it offensive! It's all being drained, eat popcorn n enjoy.
  • 3 0
 People desperate for a win while the best sit out haha
  • 2 0
 Just ship everyone over here to Canada and we will have races.
  • 5 3
 Sam Hill...."I told you so"
  • 1 0
 I had just put my surprised hat away too
  • 1 0
 Stick then on top of the Matternorn!
  • 1 0
 Can I make covid jokes already, or still dead serious?
  • 1 0
 would look at that...hmmm
  • 1 0
 Well huh. Look at that.
  • 4 5
 Queue all the soap boxxers, shamers and guilt throwing.
Below threshold threads are hidden

Post a Comment



Copyright © 2000 - 2020. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv65 0.030499
Mobile Version of Website