Denmark becomes first EU country to lift all Covid-19 restrictions

[chare]

Quote

Denmark has lifted all Covid-19 restrictions within the country, with coronavirus no longer considered a "socially critical sickness," according to the government.

This means that an indoor mask mandate, the use of a "Covid pass" for bars, restaurants and other indoor venues, and the legal obligation to self-isolate if you test positive are all ending.

"No one can know what will happen next December. But we promised the citizens of Denmark that we will only have restrictions if they are truly necessary and we'll lift them as soon as we can," Danish Health Minister Magnus Heunicke told CNN on Monday. "That's what's happening right now."

[...]

Denmark becomes first EU country to lift all Covid-19 restrictions

[Daisy4RN]

Looks like Norway and Sweden are right behind also. 
Maybe they have figured out that some of these interventions are causing more harm than good. 

https://wusfnews.wusf.usf.edu/health-news-florida/2022-02-02/a-johns-hopkins-study-says-ill-founded-lockdowns-did-little-to-limit-covid-deaths

[SmilingBluEyes]

It will be interesting to see how things go in those countries. It may be time!

[turtlesRcool]

I think high vaccination rates are going to be the key. I recently had COVID, like a lot of people I know with Omicron surging over the past month or so. But it was basically a cold. That was the experience for pretty much everyone I knew. The only one who had stronger symptoms was my 13-year-old who fell into the gap of being vaccinated last Spring, but being too young for the booster when he got sick. He had fever, chills, body aches, and didn't really get out of bed for two days. But then he bounced back.  The people who are still getting seriously sick, by and large, are the unvaccinated. At this point, at least in most developed countries, that's mostly their choice. 

My sympathies remain with those who genuinely can't be vaccinated for medical reasons or whose underlying health is such that vaccines don't confer much, if any, protection. They will always be in danger of serious illness unless the virus mutates to something much less pernicious. In certain settings, such as health care, I don't know when we'll go back to treating patients without masks on.

I wish Denmark well in its endeavors. I would love to see them prove it's safe, and then see the rest of us follow.

[MunoRN, RN]

3 hours ago, Daisy4RN said:

Looks like Norway and Sweden are right behind also. 
Maybe they have figured out that some of these interventions are causing more harm than good. 

Kind of the opposite.  They figured out that how aggressively you have to mitigate the spread of Covid is dependent on how well you've been mitigating the spread.  

Their vaccination rate is over 80% and ignoring mitigation measures hasn't become a political statement in Denmark, as a result the total number of Covid patients in ICUs throughout all of Denmark is down to about 30, we have more than that just in my hospital.  

3 hours ago, Daisy4RN said:

 

https://wusfnews.wusf.usf.edu/health-news-florida/2022-02-02/a-johns-hopkins-study-says-ill-founded-lockdowns-did-little-to-limit-covid-deaths

I get how this sort of sham "research" finds it way into far-right sources, how it gets presented by a nurse is less understandable.

[Daisy4RN]

11 hours ago, MunoRN said:

Kind of the opposite.  They figured out that how aggressively you have to mitigate the spread of Covid is dependent on how well you've been mitigating the spread.  

Their vaccination rate is over 80% and ignoring mitigation measures hasn't become a political statement in Denmark, as a result the total number of Covid patients in ICUs throughout all of Denmark is down to about 30, we have more than that just in my hospital.  

I get how this sort of sham "research" finds it way into far-right sources, how it gets presented by a nurse is less understandable.

If I am not mistaken the research was done by Johns Hopkins, and if I am not mistaken Johns Hopkins is a respectable organization. However, there are plenty of sham “research” articles advocating for the continued lockdowns including  schools that are harming children, and stores etc that have bankrupted people. We need a balance to keep society proceeding forward.

[Daisy4RN]

“”According to the study, “lockdowns have had little to no effect on COVID-19 mortality,” and in the U.S. and Europe, “only reduced COVID-19 mortality by .2% on average.” 

One intervention that had “some effect” in terms of reducing Covid-19 mortality by 10.6 percent was the closing of non-essential businesses, “which is likely to be related to the closure of bars," the three researchers from Denmark, Sweden, and the United States write.

What the lockdowns did do is have “enormous economic and social costs.” “”

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/leahbarkoukis/2022/02/02/johns-hopkins-study-on-lockdowns-n2602716
 

2 hours ago, Daisy4RN said:

“”According to the study, “lockdowns have had little to no effect on COVID-19 mortality,” and in the U.S. and Europe, “only reduced COVID-19 mortality by .2% on average.” 

One intervention that had “some effect” in terms of reducing Covid-19 mortality by 10.6 percent was the closing of non-essential businesses, “which is likely to be related to the closure of bars," the three researchers from Denmark, Sweden, and the United States write.

What the lockdowns did do is have “enormous economic and social costs.” “”

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/leahbarkoukis/2022/02/02/johns-hopkins-study-on-lockdowns-n2602716
 

We read the study and understand why it titillates those who weren't terribly interested in mitigation in the first place.  Do you understand why the meta-analysis is flawed and shouldn't be used to determine public health policy?

[Daisy4RN]

2 hours ago, toomuchbaloney said:

We read the study and understand why it titillates those who weren't terribly interested in mitigation in the first place.  Do you understand why the meta-analysis is flawed and shouldn't be used to determine public health policy?

As usual I see you (and your friend) feel the need to comment on my posts and think you know me and what I understand or don’t understand!

Whatever you may think about the study, whether flawed or not, it should be obvious to any thinking person that at this point it is getting ridiculous and lockdowns need to stop for the well being of our society, just like that of the society OP posted about.  One could say that economists shouldn’t have to do such a study and that the Industrial Health complex should have done, just sayin

 

 

44 minutes ago, Daisy4RN said:

As usual I see you (and your friend) feel the need to comment on my posts and think you know me and what I understand or don’t understand!

Whatever you may think about the study, whether flawed or not, it should be obvious to any thinking person that at this point it is getting ridiculous and lockdowns need to stop for the well being of our society, just like that of the society OP posted about.  One could say that economists shouldn’t have to do such a study and that the Industrial Health complex should have done, just sayin

 

 

I asked you a question, I didn't tell you what I thought you understood or thought.  

Where are there lock downs in the USA? Are you locked down in your community? 

[macawake, MSN]

1 hour ago, Daisy4RN said:

As usual I see you (and your friend) feel the need to comment on my posts and think you know me and what I understand or don’t understand!

None of us know each other in real life and it’s impossible to know everything about each other, but it is possible to draw at least some conclusions from what posters choose to write and in this specific case about understand some things regarding your thinking process based on the working paper you chose to reference. But what TMB did was to ask you a question, and you can answer that if you wish to clarify your position on the paper or lockdowns. This is a public forum so of course it’s reasonable to expect that posters react and respond when we post something.

1 hour ago, Daisy4RN said:

Whatever you may think about the study, whether flawed or not, it should be obvious to any thinking person that at this point it is getting ridiculous and lockdowns need to stop for the well being of our society, just like that of the society OP posted about.  

So it’s not really about the paper itself which you admit might be flawed, but rather your personal opinion that lockdowns need to stop? I can understand that, at least to a certain degree. I do for example think that some European countries have gone way overboard with some of the measures, for example outdoor mask mandates including for young children. 
 

22 hours ago, Daisy4RN said:

Looks like Norway and Sweden are right behind also. 

That’s correct. Norway has and Sweden will end pandemic restrictions on Wednesday.

7 hours ago, Daisy4RN said:

If I am not mistaken the research was done by Johns Hopkins, and if I am not mistaken Johns Hopkins is a respectable organization.

I don’t think it’s accurate to call it a ”Johns Hopkins study”? As far as I understand it, it’s a working paper (not a peer-reviewed study) by three economists, one of whom happens to be a professor at Johns Hopkins? It does say that the views expressed in the papers are those of the authors, not necessarily those of the institution.

Here’s a link to the actual working paper:

---

https://sites.krieger.jhu.edu/iae/files/2022/01/A-Literature-Review-and-Meta-Analysis-of-the-Effects-of-Lockdowns-on-COVID-19-Mortality.pdf

I’ve skimmed through all of it, not just read the conclusions. What do you think about the eligibility criteria and the studies that they chose to exclude? What do you think about the fact that more than a third of the papers or studies that made the cut, were in fact other working papers as opposed to peer-reviewed studies? Also, from what I can tell there appears to be predominantly economic studies and very light on epidemiological studies? What, if any impact, do you think that might have?  What about their definition of the term ”lockdown”? Maybe it’s just me, but I think it’s a bit odd to do a meta-analysis of the effects of ”lockdowns” and come up with a definition that isn’t the one most people understand lockdowns as being. Is a mask mandate really what people associate with the word lockdown? 
 

7 hours ago, Daisy4RN said:

We need a balance to keep society proceeding forward.

I agree. 
 

[Daisy4RN]

17 minutes ago, macawake said:

None of us know each other in real life and it’s impossible to know everything about each other, but it is possible to draw at least some conclusions from what posters choose to write and in this specific case about understand some things regarding your thinking process based on the working paper you chose to reference. But what TMB did was to ask you a question, and you can answer that if you wish to clarify your position on the paper or lockdowns. This is a public forum so of course it’s reasonable to expect that posters react and respond when we post something.

So it’s not really about the paper itself which you admit might be flawed, but rather your personal opinion that lockdowns need to stop? I can understand that, at least to a certain degree. I do for example think that some European countries have gone overboard with some of the measures, for example outdoor mask mandates including for young children. 
 

That’s correct. Norway has and Sweden will end pandemic restrictions on Wednesday.

I  don’t thinks it’s accurate to call it a ”Johns Hopkins study”? As far as I understand it, it’s a working paper (not a peer-reviewed study) by the economists, one of whom happens to be a professor at Johns Hopkins?

Here’s a link to the actual working paper:

---

https://sites.krieger.jhu.edu/iae/files/2022/01/A-Literature-Review-and-Meta-Analysis-of-the-Effects-of-Lockdowns-on-COVID-19-Mortality.pdf

 

I agree. 
 

I have read the study also, call it what you will but we need to start somewhere and a working study does not mean disqualification). 

If you really think that TMB was merely asking a question I would urge you to read the post in context, and also put the Hx in context. Both Muno and TMB have quite a Hx of argumentative snarky comments (which I am sure you are aware). Not just a “react and respond” let’s have a conversation response (which I would have zero problem with). 

Anyway, I am glad your Country is moving forward and I hope that the US will do the same soon as too many people, including children, are being significantly hurt/damaged in the process.