Agree...need Eddies nous to create a few goals given we are down a few and have some sore soldiers. Think SPS suits a defensive setup vs Richmond who run more small forwards than most teams, dont need to be too tall down back.
Eddie, Fisher, Martin and Murph could create some headaches provided our inside 50 delivery enables our talls to bring the ball to ground AND we don't try to rely on our small forwards to outmark their defenders. A bit of defensive pressure inside our forward 50 won't go astray either.
A recent epidemiological study comparing Norway and Sweden:
Quote
Norway and Sweden are kindred countries in regards to ethnicity, administrative systems, socioeconomics, and public health care systems. Furthermore, both have reliable, stringent, timely, and comprehensive registration of deaths.
Interestingly, the study postulates that Sweden's COVID-19 death toll may not be as bad as it appears because the excess mortality rate has not increased. However, Sweden's mortality rate has been declining for several years and I think it's a case of more research required.
It's all out there, most just don't do their homework but still feel happy to espouse vacuous claims.
One thing about Dr Tegnell is that he doesn't let others put words in his mouth. His admissions of underestimating herd immunity and taking Sweden down the wrong path are just that, admissions that he was wrong.
It's easy to find one or two folk with dissenting views but I prefer to rely on research published in highly regarded journals. For example:
Quote
Given an R0 value before lockdowns in most countries of between 2·5 to 3·5, we estimate the herd immunity required is about 60–72%. If the proportional vaccine efficacy, ε, is considered, the simple expression for pc becomes [1 – 1 / R0] / ε. If we assume ε is 0·8 (80%), then the herd immunity required becomes 75–90% for the defined range of R0 values. For lower efficacies, the entire population would have to be immunised. These overall estimates ignore heterogeneities that can make these figures lower or higher in specific locations.
Why compare Sweden with Norway and Denmark? I would have thought that was obvious
Norway, Denmark and Sweden are culturally and geographically Scandinavian, have common borders, the same socioeconomics, shared history, similar social welfare and health systems, and Norway and Sweden have the same climatic constraints. Fortuitously, Norway and Denmark's combined population is almost equal to Sweden's. All three countries have strong social contracts and civil obedience is the norm. Norwegians and Swedes are used to long periods of isolation during long, harsh winters. Sweden is a little different in that its constitution only permits the declaration of a state of emergency in war time. In other words, it is comparing apples with apples and far more meaningful than comparing Sweden with Lithuania (204K cases and 3,363 deaths), or the other "herd mentality" countries like England (3.7M cases and 110K deaths) and the USA under Aurangzeb (29M cases and 545K deaths). Of course, Belgium (798K cases and 22.3K deaths) has a similar population to Sweden but its appalling COVID record reflects Belgian holiday destinations, an inadequate first response, an overwhelmed and compromised health system, freedom of movement across borders, and assumed causes of death, as well as a stratified society and infections spreading rapidly through ethic enclaves.
Similarly, there's no point in comparing Sweden with Australia and New Zealand with their natural advantages of ocean barriers to aid border control and, in Australia's case, State borders that can be closed as required.
Just going back to Fly's reference to the Great Barrington Declaration. This declaration was released by a libertarian think tank and a small group of scientists, many of whom have no relevant experience and all of whom have their own particular barrows to push.
The Great Barrington Declaration and the myth of naturally acquired herd immunity is discussed in some detail in Nature:
Interestingly, the Nature article quotes a former POTUS's malapropism “herd mentality” and it seems that Auraqngzeb has unwittingly described the libertarian, conspiracy theorist, anti-science approach to the COVID-19 pandemic.
The Great Barrington Declaration has also been exposed as "a dangerous fallacy unsupported by scientific evidence" in Lancet:
He has admitted they made errors in the care homes, that's it. But who didn't?
Attached is a terrific example of the gamesmanship that exemplifies this whole con. They're just not even remotely subtle.....
It's a bit hard to follow Dr Tegnell's arguments/statements because he changes the goalposts quite often.
To start with, it's worth noting that he was in hot water back in 2009 when he was behind the mass vaccination of Swedes with a vaccine that wasn't approved by the US FDA and was known to cause neurological disorders. It caused narcolepsy in many Swedish children.
In April 2020, Tegnell stated, “In major parts of Sweden, around Stockholm, we have reached a plateau (in new cases) and we’re already seeing the effect of herd immunity and in a few weeks’ time we’ll see even more of the effects of that. And in the rest of the country, the situation is stable.”
As anyone with a basic knowledge of herd immunity knows, the percentage of the population that has to have contracted a disease or have been vaccinated against it varies according to how infectious it is. For example it is >90% for measles and probably around 70% for COVID-19. It's also worth noting that herd immunity for novel viruses has never been achieved by natural infection.
In late October 2020, Tegnell conceded that it would be "futile and immoral for a state to deliberately pursue herd immunity". Tegnell also stated, "Throughout history there has up to now been no infectious disease whose transmission was fully halted by herd immunity without a vaccine.”
In February 2021, Dr Tegnell told Swedish public radio: "If we were to encounter the same disease again, knowing exactly what we know about it today, I think we would settle on doing something in between what Sweden did and what the rest of the world has done."
If that's not a concession that he was wrong, I don't know what is.
By the way, Sweden, with a population of 10.23M, has had 707K COVID cases and 13,111 deaths. Neighbours Norway and Denmark, with a combined population of 11.1M, have had 297K COVID cases and 3,032 deaths. Norway (population 5,3M) has only had 78K cases and 639 deaths. Whichever way you crunch those numbers, Sweden's approach has been an appalling failure. Now they are closing the border with Denmark, instituting lockdowns and just over 1M doses of vaccine have been administered.
At any rate, we have drifted somewhat off topic, so we should probably rein it back in.
Are you angling for a job as a moderator Paul?
One thing that I have been thinking about when looking at suggested teams for Round 1, is who comes out for Williams? Is he an automatic inclusion if we win?
Even with injury clouds over several players, there is genuine competition for places in the 22, particularly when you read the review of the performances of AFL listed players in the Reserves match:
A few of the original signatories. A few lightweights right?
Dr. Martin Kulldorff, professor of medicine at Harvard University, a biostatistician, and epidemiologist with expertise in detecting and monitoring infectious disease outbreaks and vaccine safety evaluations.
Dr. Sunetra Gupta, professor at Oxford University, an epidemiologist with expertise in immunology, vaccine development, and mathematical modeling of infectious diseases.
Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, professor at Stanford University Medical School, a physician, epidemiologist, health economist, and public health policy expert focusing on infectious diseases and vulnerable populations.
Dr. Alexander Walker, principal at World Health Information Science Consultants, former Chair of Epidemiology, Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, USA
Dr. Andrius Kavaliunas, epidemiologist and assistant professor at Karolinska Institute, Sweden
Dr. Angus Dalgleish, oncologist, infectious disease expert and professor, St. George’s Hospital Medical School, University of London, England
Dr. Anthony J Brookes, professor of genetics, University of Leicester, England
Dr. Annie Janvier, professor of pediatrics and clinical ethics, Université de Montréal and Sainte-Justine University Medical Centre, Canada Dr. Ariel Munitz, professor of clinical microbiology and immunology, Tel Aviv University, Israel
Dr. Boris Kotchoubey, Institute for Medical Psychology, University of Tübingen, Germany
Dr. Cody Meissner, professor of pediatrics, expert on vaccine development, efficacy, and safety. Tufts University School of Medicine, USA Dr. David Katz, physician and president, True Health Initiative, and founder of the Yale University Prevention Research Center, USA
Dr. David Livermore, microbiologist, infectious disease epidemiologist and professor, University of East Anglia, England
Dr. Eitan Friedman, professor of medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Israel
Dr. Ellen Townsend, professor of psychology, head of the Self-Harm Research Group, University of Nottingham, England
Dr. Eyal Shahar, physician, epidemiologist and professor (emeritus) of public health, University of Arizona, USA Dr. Florian Limbourg, physician and hypertension researcher, professor at Hannover Medical School, Germany
Dr. Gabriela Gomes, mathematician studying infectious disease epidemiology, professor, University of Strathclyde, Scotland Dr. Gerhard Krönke, physician and professor of translational immunology, University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Germany
Dr. Gesine Weckmann, professor of health education and prevention, Europäische Fachhochschule, Rostock, Germany
Dr. Günter Kampf, associate professor, Institute for Hygiene and Environmental Medicine, Greifswald University, Germany
Dr. Helen Colhoun, professor of medical informatics and epidemiology, and public health physician, University of Edinburgh, Scotland
Dr. Jonas Ludvigsson, pediatrician, epidemiologist and professor at Karolinska Institute and senior physician at Örebro University Hospital, Sweden Dr. Karol Sikora, physician, oncologist, and professor of medicine at the University of Buckingham, England
Dr. Laura Lazzeroni, professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences and of biomedical data science, Stanford University Medical School, USA Dr. Lisa White, professor of modelling and epidemiology, Oxford University, England
Dr. Mario Recker, malaria researcher and associate professor, University of Exeter, England Dr. Matthew Ratcliffe, professor of philosophy, specializing in philosophy of mental health, University of York, England
Dr. Matthew Strauss, critical care physician and assistant professor of medicine, Queen’s University, Canada Dr. Michael Jackson, research fellow, School of Biological Sciences, University of Canterbury, New Zealand Dr. Michael Levitt, biophysicist and professor of structural biology, Stanford University, USA. Recipient of the 2013 Nobel Prize in Chemistry.
Dr. Mike Hulme, professor of human geography, University of Cambridge, England
Dr. Motti Gerlic, professor of clinical microbiology and immunology, Tel Aviv University, Israel
Dr. Partha P. Majumder, professor and founder of the National Institute of Biomedical Genomics, Kalyani, India
Dr. Paul McKeigue, physician, disease modeler and professor of epidemiology and public health, University of Edinburgh, Scotland Dr. Rajiv Bhatia, physician, epidemiologist and public policy expert at the Veterans Administration, USA
Dr. Rodney Sturdivant, infectious disease scientist and associate professor of biostatistics, Baylor University, USA Dr. Salmaan Keshavjee, professor of Global Health and Social Medicine at Harvard Medical School, USA Dr. Simon Thornley, epidemiologist and biostatistician, University of Auckland, New Zealand Dr. Simon Wood, biostatistician and professor, University of Edinburgh, Scotland
Dr. Stephen Bremner,professor of medical statistics, University of Sussex, England
Dr. Sylvia Fogel, autism provider and psychiatrist at Massachusetts General Hospital and instructor at Harvard Medical School, USA
Tom Nicholson, Associate in Research, Duke Center for International Development, Sanford School of Public Policy, Duke University, USA Dr. Udi Qimron, professor of clinical microbiology and immunology, Tel Aviv University, Israel
Dr. Ulrike Kämmerer, professor and expert in virology, immunology and cell biology, University of Würzburg, Germany
Dr. Uri Gavish, biomedical consultant, Israel
Dr. Yaz Gulnur Muradoglu, professor of finance, director of the Behavioural Finance Working Group, Queen Mary University of London, England
The thing is Fly that some scientists, researchers, medicos, etc are more invested in economic and political outcomes than in health outcomes. Sweden's Anders Tegnall is a prime example but he now admits that his approach was wrong, as do the Swedish King and PM. Others have religious and/or philosophical beliefs that put them at odds with the results of rigorous scientific research. What you end up with are opinions and/or declarations that are based on beliefs, not science.
Of course, I can trump your list with one name, Nobel Laureate Peter Doherty. You should read the Doherty Institute newsletters for informed explanations of the efficacy of the COVID-19 measures.
Pick a hole in the argument if you can. That's fine by me.
Running with the my expert is better than your expert line is facile. In the extreme.
And there are a lot more than one or two scientists, and very eminent ones at that, with major questions.....they just don't get the air time that shills like Fauci get....
It’s more a matter of running with my thousands of experts rather than your one or two. Your bloke could be right, but the odds of that are worse than the odds of winning Tattslotto.
The vaccines, and for that matter, the widespread use of lock downs, should have been the subject of extensive cost-benefit analysis.
Perhaps you don't do that in science world, but in my finance/economics/business world they are front and centre.
Lockdowns - even though we knew better and had the fallout data, we never factored in the cost of the aftermath (other deaths. mental health issues, suicides, familial destruction, SME closures etc.).
Likewise with the vaccine - in Australia - where there never has been a pandemic - why are we taking an experimental treatment (as it is still in Phase 3 testing) when we have ZERO idea of the short to medium to long term safety issues yet?
The bug will now become endemic, just like influenza, and fluctuate seasonally.
And you obviously never read the Great Barrington Declaration - which is simply the tried and tested pathway of dealing with a pandemic.
Somehow all the rules got changed with this far from novel virus. Why?
The $$$$.
Why did the CDC change the long standing method of reporting deaths in the US in March 2020? Without which, the number of CV19 deaths in the US would have been far, far less?
COVID-19 Data Collection, Comorbidity & Federal Law: A Historical Retrospective
Science, Public Health Policy, and The Law Volume 2:4-22 October 12, 2020
This is what's funny with you shills - you say 'follow the science, listen to the experts'.
Then science from equally qualified, often more qualified, types gets put up and you go - yeah, nah, ignore that and start attacking the man....again a lot of parallels with the AGW scam.....
Cherry-picking one or two scientists with a contrary view does not overturn the overwhelming scientific consensus.
Well, I think Kouta in full flight was more Michael Jordan than Dusty.
And Jezza at his best was a combination of Larry Bird and Magic Johnson
There’s no doubting Dusty’s ability, particularly in finals. He has to be up there with the best of contemporary players but he does have the advantage of playing in a very good and well-coached team.
BTW, the next episode of “Australia in Colour” on SBS features footage of the mighty John Nichols doing battle against Rottingwood. Not to be missed!
