I am skeptical about the methodology and the results of the paper.
It does not make sense to me, and it looks like the authors knowingly chose to increase the YLL with the choice of their data sets and how they analyzed the correlation between covid deaths and comorbidities.
I’m happy to admit that I might just not fully understand it.
There is no convincing evidence that Sweden’s approach has led to a materially worse outcome, and in fact if you look at the overall health of the country considerable evidence that outcomes will be much better in the long term.
Every country will have to adopt the Swedish approach eventually or find themselves caught in an endless cycle of lockdowns.
It seems to me that the experiment is countries trying to eradicate the virus through lockdown as opposed to just slowing it down, with no evidence that this is working or could ever work.
NoW that the virus is better understood and we know that the people at risk are mostly people at the end of their life the continued tyrannical lock down Of the general population in many countries is a failure of leadership, not a success.
The large number of hysterical articles condemning the Swedish approach reflects the fact that people don’t want to admit that they made a mistake and want to desperately justify doing something really stupid.
The fact is that the nature of work changes at the c level. You are no longer doing any actual work yourself. You don’t prepare specifications, do analysis or any other for of work that you might recognize from before. You won’t touch any Microsoft products yourself. Your team does this. You are responsible for hiring people to build that team for you, so even people management is delegated to a large extent.
Most of your work is being present, either in meetings or work functions. These will include breakfast lunch and dinner, and something all three on the same day.
Your main focus is communication. This work extends to working within your own departments, the company, the rest of senior management, government, share holders, banks etc.
Most of your hours are not effective. You write them off. It’s understanding that you only have 10 hours a week of effective hours out of 80 hours and making sure those hours are actually effective.Effective time will be 5 minutes in an hour most likely.
That said some people are really good at juggling all of this bs, and some people are really terrible.
We can talk about different approaches and what works and what doesn’t, but it doesn’t change the fact that the 80 to 100 hour work week is real for a lot of people in that position.
Most of the fraud that is commitment with parties on both side of the transaction is for practical purposes undetectable and unprovable, no matter the resources available to parties investigating the fraud.
The only break you get is when one of the parties makes a mistake like using company networks to conspire or sours on the deal and rats everyone out. Then you get to roll them all up.
Also, using cut outs like family members or trusts create reasonable cause for doubt unless their is overwhelming evidence that the arrangement was fraudulent, no matter how obvious it seems on the face of it.
We Just bought a RAV4 with a camera as a central console rear view mirror witch you can flip on or off.
It sounds like a great idea but the amount of time it takes your eyes to refocus when moving from the road to the camera makes it a safety hazard. And painful on the eyes.
I am skeptical about the methodology and the results of the paper.
It does not make sense to me, and it looks like the authors knowingly chose to increase the YLL with the choice of their data sets and how they analyzed the correlation between covid deaths and comorbidities.
I’m happy to admit that I might just not fully understand it.