There are lots of mouse studies that point to bad metabolic effects from soybean oil consumption. Many of these mechanisms are the same in humans. If one wants to start pulling the metaphorical thread on seed oils, this is not hard to do, as long as one realizes that the companies who sell these things will always tell the consumer they are healthy.
Seed oils did not exist in the food supply before the late 1800s, so the idea that they are this amazing health food, while also being incredibly cheap/profitable to produce and really useful in creating junk food really stretches credulity.
The calory in calory out (CICO) model is pretty much debunked I think. Some foods affect metabolism, others affect satiety. People in the US had enough food a hundred years ago, yet they weren't morbidly obese.
Yet the average calorie intake in the USA, Australia and UK is at its highest amount in history.
My country (Croatia) went from an average of ~20kg of meat per year per person (~1990s) to ~70kg of meat per year per person in 30 years. The amount of calories is obviously massively different.
The mediterranean diet in Croatia is dead.
People are getting obese and getting diseases that come with obesity (heart disease, diabetes etc.).
Meat is not to blame, it's people eating massive amounts of calories, living an unhealthy sedentary lifestyle.
CICO model works for healthy people. For those with metabolic disease (diabetes and similar) it might not work completely.
The environmental impact is also suspect. There were about as many head of cattle (buffalo) in the US before white people arrived as there are now, but somehow the cows are causing global warming, not you know, fossil fuels.
To be completely honest, I like to think I would go down to where the problem is and have the people dealing with the problem look for a solution first.
If you approach a third party as "a big company" looking for a "solution", you'll just get "a big solution at a bigger price"
The Scandinavian countries are actually quite different economically with regards to e.g. which industries represent most of their GDP. Since they are so small they are not very diversified. They're smaller than many US states and most people wouldn't make claims like this comparing those.
> They're smaller than many US states and most people wouldn't make claims like this comparing those.
People absolutely would, should, and do. Right now, the contrast between New York and Florida on reopening policy is pretty clear, despite differences in their economies.
Do you think it's possible that since more people have had the virus in Sweden, they are "through" to the other side while Norway isn't? How would that affect the excess death number?
I wouldn't know. But that's part of Tegnell's argument, yes. That when the second wave hits or this just goes on for years, Sweden will be better off. Hard to say right now, I think. 20/20.
As a Norwegian I don't trust a Norwegian newspaper to be anywhere near impartial with regards to the economic question. I also think it's hard to compare Norway and Sweden economically given the amount of money spent on stimulus by Norway this year because of "the oil".
Are the Covid deaths counted the same way? It seems for example that Sweden are very aggressive with labeling a death as Covid and e.g. Finland are undercounting.
The number of cases seems more clear cut, and I agree that it's not clear that the strategy either failed or succeeded. Just pointing out some potential pitfalls comparing even these two relatively similar countries.
As a Finn, I would be very interested to hear what are the sources for your claim that Finland are undercounting Covid-19 deaths. Further, could you elaborate in which way you claim Finland to be undercounting, such as Covid-19 deaths outside hospital setting, and is the undercounting supposed to be a country-wide policy, or limited to some specific regions?
Also what is the source for your claim about Sweden being very eager to label deaths as Covid-19? The excess death counts published by NY Times and Economist show only Belgium overcounting, and Sweden with more excess deaths than official Covid-19 deaths. If anything, Sweden's official total is unfortunately still missing hundreds of deaths, more than have died of Covid-19 in Finland or in Norway altogether.
Look at my sibling comment to yours ref counting deaths. From the source [1] Finland didn't have nearly as high spike in overall deaths as Sweden (see Z-scores)
Unless you have reliable information about Sweden exaggerating the number of Covid deaths, I can't see the argument. Even if Sweden wrongly labelled 25% as Covid deaths, that's still a significantly larger number population size taken into account.
The bankruptcy numbers aren't a matter of opinion, these are public numbers that are regularly published by each respective country.
I didn't claim you made up the bankruptcy numbers. I just pointed out the economies are different. We are discussing a strategy for dealing with the virus, not who has the most money. If you've been to Scandinavia you will know who has the most money.
Exaggerating is a strong word. I don't think any two countries count deaths in the same way however.
Of course. When we evaluate the efficacy of a strategy, maybe we shouldn't just repeat what the author of that strategy says. This is a place where we can look at data and draw conclusions rather than just become a mouthpiece for someone.
Yes, I agree, the debate needs to be open. I also think that being allowed to champion your own opinions and defend your past choices is a given, not least since these people whom I may disagree with may have good arguments that should be considered.
