Sweden no longer stands out in pandemic, says architect of ‘no lockdown’ policy

> The entire point I was making was that despite a very strict lockdown, Singapore is seeing really significant case numbers and deaths and they still aren't through it yet. All of those things are true.

That's not the point you were making at all and you know it, so now you're just further gaslighting -- and you haven't been remotely correct about any of it.

Let's recap.

> Maybe better to compare to Singapore which had ~6 deaths per million earlier this year, has one of the highest vaccination rates in the world but since barely relaxing their restrictions now has ~120 deaths per million, raging number of cases (mostly vaccinated) and had the highest level of suicides last year since 2012?

You wanted to compare Sweden to Singapore, but got called out for making a poor comparison given the drastic differences in population density. You also suggested that suicide rates increased because of lockdowns, without any evidence for that whatsoever, while also baselessly suggesting that more people died from lockdowns than would have from COVID, which is just completely false by every metric.

> Why calculate density of Sweden based on the total country when most people live in a couple cities?

Your response was to immediately move the goal post and limit the comparison to Sweden's most populated areas, while also making another false claim that "most" Swedes live in two cities, despite >65% of Swedes NOT living in those two cities. I played along with your trolling and explained why that's still a completely irrelevant comparison.

> Looking at city to city (Singapore is a city state) the density differences are minor. [...] And in in terms of suicides they were up 13% in one year.

Your response was to move the goal post AGAIN, to now strictly include the densest part of urban Stockholm itself. Unfortunately, even the densest part of Sweden's densest city isn't remotely similar to Singapore, especially given that the densest of Singapore's subzones have 45,000/km2, which is nearly 10x that of Stockholm's densest city center.

You also tried to use one person's musings as evidence that suicides were directly tied to lockdowns, even though the person didn't even claim that connection -- and at this point, you're still trying to insist that Singapore's "lockdown-induced" suicide rate increase is higher than Sweden's non-lockdown COVID death rate.

> Wow! You sure back down quickly. You originally said we should use Sweden's 25 people/sq km and now you're willing to concede that in reality it's half? And sorry, but Singapore and Stockholm have the same population density in terms of order of magnitude.

Here's where your trolling becomes egregious, because despite your decision to repeatedly put new, unfair and illogical restrictions on the comparison, you've now claimed that I was the one who changed the parameters. In reality, all I did was prove you wrong no matter how many times YOU decided to change the rules. In a last ditch effort to pretend your arguments have any footing, you also made a new claim that 4,000 is the same as 8,000 because they have the same number of digits, which is beyond absurd.

You also conveniently dropped your suicide rate argument at this point, because you ran out of manufactured and personally theorized "evidence."

> Half the density is "not even comparable"? You're not even arguing in good faith. You've just been proven wrong and now you're moving the goalposts and trying again.

You're now claiming that 50% is similar to 100%, which again, is beyond absurd. At this point, you've also completely misdirected away from the actual comparison between Singapore and Sweden being drastically lower than half, which is the case even for Stockholm alone when you more appropriately include the metropolitan area. You also repeated your claim that I moved the goal posts, which we've already established was your decision and not mine.

To summarize, you made two nonsensical claims in defense of 15,000 people dying, then moved the goal post, then moved it again, then moved it again while also inventing new word definitions. Then when you ran out of excuses for making such ridiculous claims and couldn't find any evidence to back them up, you started trollishly claiming that I was the one who decided to change the comparison.

By all means, explain how I'm the one gaslighting.

The tolerance against driving under influence in Sweden is extremely low. The punishments are severe and the allowed alcohol percentage to drive is lower than in most countries in the world. There is just no way that carries over from wherever that study was done, it's not Sweden for sure. If that is the main cause of reduced life expectancy (the measure you use now is something else really but sure lets roll with it) then it's not a good argument to apply to Sweden. I have tried to look for a study focused on the Swedish context but I haven't been able to find one.

750 DALY per 1 million is 0.00075 years per person by the way. That's basically negligible.

Obtaining that data you trust depends on different methods.

Perhaps it’s a bad thing in the moment and for survivors of the dead, but it’s really just going to be a footnote in history though.

Appreciated!