So is this part of the White House cluster? Probably so, right?https://twitter.com/KFaulders/status/1313522445731745792 …
-
Show this thread
-
zeynep tufekci Retweeted Jennifer Jacobs
zeynep tufekci added,
6 replies 9 retweets 77 likesShow this thread -
Anyone proposing Sweden as a contrarian example has *no idea* what they're talking about. Sweden had a more strict & early indoor gathering limit than most of Europe, never lifted it when others did & everyone 16+ is in virtual school. Japan! Try Japan! https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/09/k-overlooked-variable-driving-pandemic/616548/ …pic.twitter.com/rguHxKsJXo
25 replies 138 retweets 444 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @zeynep
It is categorically not true that Sweden had a stricter or earlier indoor gathering limits. 50 is not a 'strict' limit by any standards, and it went live on 29-March, many days after schools had closed, and countries were in *full lockdowns* across Europe.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @ritwik_priya @zeynep
It is also not relevant to say that it never 'lifted' these - UK has flitted between gatherings of 6 and 30 indoors/outdoors with 2m distancing and schools barely opened in September, so while it 'lifted' restrictions, it has never been less restrictive than Sweden.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ritwik_priya
Most of Europe, including the UK, lifted restrictions indoors with distance/capacity, not number of people. From a superspreading point of view, cap on number of people is more strict. A Spain nightclub at 50% capacity can be thousands of people. Capacity is performative strict.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @zeynep
Ok agreed. So, 1. The earlier and stricter point is still incorrect. 2. The argument really is about the current distinction between Sweden and others. Which is fine, but needs to be augmented by a comparison of why Sweden Mk II is better than Sweden Mk I with the same rules.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ritwik_priya @zeynep
We can't simply state/imply that Sweden has had 'tighter' policy than people think and leave it at that. That take has too many caveats.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ritwik_priya
I disagree. The claim is embedded in an article of ~5,000 words that explains *why* it is stricter and more consistent than almost all of Europe which had a very strict lock-down followed by an opening that only took capacity into account. It's not a throwaway claim.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @zeynep
I've read the article, and the one from Kai S in Science 4 months ago, and the overdispersion papers. It is good article. But it does not at all establish the comparative magnitude of the interventions in various European countries. Spain opened nightclubs, UK didn't.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
I'm going to refer you to the article and leave it at that because the point stands. UK and almost all of rest of Europe *did not* put an absolute limit on number of people in indoor gatherings when they opened up. Sweden *kept* its limit the whole time. https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/coronavirus-regulations-lockdown-social-distancing-pubs-162647770.html …pic.twitter.com/w7Z4kkhMSi
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.