Sweden why can they get it woohoo wrong

[Returnofrros]

Correct regarding Norway. Not so sure about the agenda, I think he doesn't believe his previous stuff about Sweden any more but is just being thrawn about it.

Last thing I read on norway/ Sweden excess deaths was by Dr Tomislav Mestrovic published in medical and life sciences news....beginning of November......specifically comparing the two countries overall deaths.

Wee bit high brow and didn't understand all of it but Sweden wasn't slagged off and it compared reasonably favourably with Norway.

So I don't want to disappoint you but I still believe Sweden has taken a course of action that's far less damaging in the long run....and have got it right....apart from the care homes.

That's me done.

[Returnofrros]

Oh got anything to say on the football😀

[BCram]

Just wondering if you have changed your mind re Sweden, it seems the good folk of Sweden have. Many comparisons have been made with the UK. Taking into account the fact that we have 7 times their population in a country half the size of Sweden (population density being a bigger factor than simple population size) their death toll is markedly worse than the UKs. In many minds the argument goes along the line of their performance without lockdowns, until more recent times than ours, versus the UK with the various lockdowns. I suppose there is room for some argument in this regard but the most damning statistic comes when you compare Sweden with Norway an infinitely closer comparison size wise and population wise. Norway locked down, Sweden didn't until recently. Swedish Covid deaths 7,800 Norway 402. I think that ends all arguments in this regard.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-55347021

Not sure about the density discussion. If UK has 7 times the population density I think it might be too simple to expect that there is a simple mathematical relationship between the number of deaths in Sweden or UK or Scotland. The links to the outside world will be vastly different too. I can't get my head round people being brought home and then just allowed to go to wherever they wanted and trusted to act responsibly. That's the sort of society that trusts the individual and the individual is expected to support civil society by behaving in a responsible manner. We don't seem to have that kind of ethos. It will be interesting to see if the Swedish way of dealing with covid has a measurable difference for the outcome of this second wave. Let's see what happens. Suppose there is such a thing as herd immunity, might it be that the second wave does not have the effect that is being predicted. After all the whole point of the vaccine programme is designed to reduce the number of people who can catch the virus.

[Taintedice]

The point of the vaccine is to stop people developing the disease, not to stop them being exposed to it or 'catching it'. Everyone gets cancer every day, but the body reacts and kills those cells in the vast majority of us. People will still be exposed to the virus, the virus will still attempt to infect, but the immunity via the vaccine stops that from happening. I think we'd be amazed with the amount of **** our bodies deal with on a daily basis, which we are clueless about.

[Deeranged]

The point of the vaccine is to stop people developing the disease, not to stop them being exposed to it or 'catching it'. Everyone gets cancer every day, but the body reacts and kills those cells in the vast majority of us. People will still be exposed to the virus, the virus will still attempt to infect, but the immunity via the vaccine stops that from happening. I think we'd be amazed with the amount of **** our bodies deal with on a daily basis, which we are clueless about.

Everyone gets cancer every day? Holy ****, seriously? Is cancer an airborne virus? Do we get cancer by contact with surfaces that have been contaminated with it?

There was me thinking cancer was caused by old cells not dying but continuing to divide and grow out of control spreading into surrounding tissues and forming tumours. Seems I'm wrong, again. Or is it maybe you that's wrong - yet again?

You'd be well advised to give up on this one before you make yourself look really, really stupid.

[Taintedice]

You are extremely mentally ill, please get help. Is Liff still open?

Given child cancer is a huge issue, can you explain what you mean by 'old cells'?

And present evidence that vaccines alter DNA rather than embarrassing yourself lashing out.

[Taintedice]

https://www.cancercenter.com/communi...ts-complicated

"Indeed, it is possible, even likely, that your immune system may regularly fight off cancer or pre-cancer on a regular basis without you even knowing it. "We all have a mechanism to filter out a small amount of cancer cells to prevent us from having visible cancer in the body," Dr. Tan says. "Over time, that balance becomes lost."

Imagine starting a rammy on something that was fairly innocuous only to be proven wrong yet again.

[Deeranged]

Let's not forget you said 'Everyone gets cancer every day'. What you've quoted above is the equivalent of saying we breathe in air every day but we don't blow up like balloons. The body takes it in, deals with it and blows it out, if it didn't there would be no life.

A healthy person cannot “catch” cancer from someone who has it. There is no evidence that close contact or things like ***, kissing, touching, sharing meals, or breathing the same air can spread cancer from one person to another.

Cancer cells transferred from one person are unable to live in the body of another healthy person. A healthy person’s immune system recognizes foreign cells of any kind and destroys them, including cancer cells from another person. Cells can be transferred from one individual to another via a body fluid for example however as foreign cells the recipient body will immediately reject those cells therefore cancer itself cannot develop in the host.

Cancer is not a contagious disease that easily spreads from person to person. The only situation in which cancer can spread from one person to another is in the case of organ or tissue transplantation.

The human body continually generates new cells and the life span of a typical cell is very short, for example red blood cells live for about four months while white blood cells live on average more than a year. Skin cells live about two or three weeks. Colon cells die off after about four days. An 'old cell' therefore can be as little as a week old. So cancer in children is, unfortunately, very possible. The well known exception to this of course is brain cells which typically last an entire lifetime and are not replaced when they die although they do die.

Obviously we're all at risk of developing cancer and we can roughly divide cancer risk factors into four general groups - 1 biological or internal factors, such as age, gender, inherited genetic defects and skin type 2 Environmental exposure, for instance to radon and UV radiation, and fine particulate matter 3. Occupational risk factors, including carcinogens such as many chemicals, radioactive materials and asbestos and 4. Lifestyle-related factors. Not however catching it on a bus.

So in summary - cancer is not contagious and you don't catch it every day. You may well have cancer cells transferred to you from another individual but it is impossible for these cells to develop into cancer.

[Returnofrros]

Let's not forget you said 'Everyone gets cancer every day'. What you've quoted above is the equivalent of saying we breathe in air every day but we don't blow up like balloons. The body takes it in, deals with it and blows it out, if it didn't there would be no life.

A healthy person cannot “catch” cancer from someone who has it. There is no evidence that close contact or things like ***, kissing, touching, sharing meals, or breathing the same air can spread cancer from one person to another.

Cancer cells transferred from one person are unable to live in the body of another healthy person. A healthy person’s immune system recognizes foreign cells of any kind and destroys them, including cancer cells from another person. Cells can be transferred from one individual to another via a body fluid for example however as foreign cells the recipient body will immediately reject those cells therefore cancer itself cannot develop in the host.

Cancer is not a contagious disease that easily spreads from person to person. The only situation in which cancer can spread from one person to another is in the case of organ or tissue transplantation.

The human body continually generates new cells and the life span of a typical cell is very short, for example red blood cells live for about four months while white blood cells live on average more than a year. Skin cells live about two or three weeks. Colon cells die off after about four days. An 'old cell' therefore can be as little as a week old. So cancer in children is, unfortunately, very possible. The well known exception to this of course is brain cells which typically last an entire lifetime and are not replaced when they die although they do die.

Obviously we're all at risk of developing cancer and we can roughly divide cancer risk factors into four general groups - 1 biological or internal factors, such as age, gender, inherited genetic defects and skin type 2 Environmental exposure, for instance to radon and UV radiation, and fine particulate matter 3. Occupational risk factors, including carcinogens such as many chemicals, radioactive materials and asbestos and 4. Lifestyle-related factors. Not however catching it on a bus.

So in summary - cancer is not contagious and you don't catch it every day. You may well have cancer cells transferred to you from another individual but it is impossible for these cells to develop into cancer.

That was a funny post.

Who wuda thought a post about cancer cud make ye laugh.🙂

Less of the informative and factual **** though.😂

[Deeranged]

That was a funny post.

Who wuda thought a post about cancer cud make ye laugh.��

Less of the informative and factual **** though.��

No problem, I try to keep people happy and make them laugh.

Sometimes the woods are too thick to allow a clear view of the trees.