Sweden Tries Out a New Status: Pariah State (sfgate.com) 382
Sweden's population is not quite twice the size of Norway's — yet Sweden has reported 21 times as many deaths from Covid-19, prompting many countries to close their borders to Sweden, reports the New York Times:
Norway isn't the only Scandinavian neighbor barring Swedes from visiting this summer. Denmark and Finland have also closed their borders to Swedes, fearing that they would bring new coronavirus infections with them. While those countries went into strict lockdowns this spring, Sweden famously refused, and now has suffered roughly twice as many infections and five times as many deaths as the other three nations combined, according to figures compiled by The New York Times. While reporting differences can make comparisons inexact, the overall trend is clear, as is Sweden's new status as Scandinavia's pariah state...
"When you see 5,000 deaths in Sweden and 230 in Norway, it is quite incredible," said Gro Harlem Brundtland, a former prime minister of Norway and the former director of the World Health Organization, during a digital lecture at the Norwegian Academy of Science and Letters in May...
Swedes now find themselves with few options for moving about the European Union. Most countries in the bloc have reopened their borders to member nations, but only France, Italy, Spain and Croatia are welcoming Swedes without restrictions.
On a popular Scandinavian radio program, a journalist with a leading Swedish paper complained about how Sweden was being treated by its neighboring countries, according to the Times. "We are supposed to sit here in our corner of shame, and the worst part is that you're savoring it."
The BBC notes that just days later, on Wednesday, Sweden reported 1,610 new infections — roughly one infection for every 6,354 people in Sweden and its highest number of daily infections since the outbreak began.
"When you see 5,000 deaths in Sweden and 230 in Norway, it is quite incredible," said Gro Harlem Brundtland, a former prime minister of Norway and the former director of the World Health Organization, during a digital lecture at the Norwegian Academy of Science and Letters in May...
Swedes now find themselves with few options for moving about the European Union. Most countries in the bloc have reopened their borders to member nations, but only France, Italy, Spain and Croatia are welcoming Swedes without restrictions.
On a popular Scandinavian radio program, a journalist with a leading Swedish paper complained about how Sweden was being treated by its neighboring countries, according to the Times. "We are supposed to sit here in our corner of shame, and the worst part is that you're savoring it."
The BBC notes that just days later, on Wednesday, Sweden reported 1,610 new infections — roughly one infection for every 6,354 people in Sweden and its highest number of daily infections since the outbreak began.
No. (Score:2, Insightful)
No. On Wednesday, Sweden reported 1610 new cases. For crying out loud, are reporters congenitally incapable of understanding the difference between infections and cases?
Also, for that matter, are they physically incapable of using running averages rather than cherry picking the worst days? One could also write, "Yesterday
Re:No. (Score:5, Informative)
In case anyone cares: Sweden's testing has gone way up, so its case rate has gone up. But its death rates continue to go down.
That said, Sweden certainly isn't doing great. It and the UK keep fighting over the record of "Who in Europe are currently handling the virus the worst?" Belgium and several small states have worse total deaths per capita records, but in terms of ongoing difficulty of control, those two are the heavyweights.
Sweden's general concept was epidemiologically sound, but its implementation an utter failure. If you can get the low-risk infected while protecting the high risk, and get it over with, you're in better shape than if everyone has an equal risk of infection and such a situation drags on indefinitely. Except that the low risk group (0-19 year olds) had a well lower infection rate than the 20-64 group, and only a little higher than the high-risk 65+ group. So they've accumulated plenty of deaths in the country and still only have limited immunity. And meanwhile we may only be months away from the start of distribution of an approved vaccine regardless.
Nice try, but fail. That said, thankfully you've got the UK possibly doing even worse than you somehow ;) Mainly England in specific.
Re: (Score:3)
Sweden's general concept was epidemiologically sound, but its implementation an utter failure.
In what sense was it sound?
Re: No. (Score:5, Informative)
For certain infections, it would have been sound.
If R has been low enough, the mortality rate low enough, no long-term consequences such as blood clotting and organ failure, few asymptomatic cases, and a strong enough immune response, as is the case for some diseases, the Swedish strategy would work.
Absolutely every single parameter went against the Swedes.
It's three times more infectious than the flu, a fifth as deadly as the Black Death, and because of low oxygen even with functioning lungs and blood clotting, you can die from Covid without dying of Covid.
The lack of symptoms means the disease spreads invisibly, a direct consequence of a poor immune response. Symptoms are often generated by your immune system, so no symptoms, no response.
No response, no herd immunity.
No effective vaccine possible! (Score:2)
You got it. But the worst has still to come:
You mentioned a "strong enough immune response" - and as it seems, anticorps do not last very long, as new data shows. So after a few months you may get infected again. And worst: any vaccine would be inefficient and of very limited use.
Re: No. (Score:4, Informative)
Most of the rest of what you said is reasonable, but that part just is not true. If you mount a weak or no immune response to a pathogen it typically kills you. Viruses, like COVID, kill your cells as part of their reproductive cycle.
Asymptomatic people are that way because their immune system mounts a successful response and kills off the infection before it spreads enough to cause symptoms and/or triggers their immune system to escalate to responses that involve more collateral damage.
Re:No. (Score:4, Informative)
It's sound in the same way that someone vaccinating their children helps protect your unvaccinated child.
If you do nothing (and a vaccine takes too long to come), the disease persists until it establishes herd immunity on its own terms (e.g. infecting a random cross section of society). If you can get many people immune with few deaths (e.g. getting the low-risk immune), you can protect millions via herd immunity. But if and only if you can protect them in the mean time.
In that critical regard, Sweden failed.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: No. (Score:5, Insightful)
What's risky about it? We knew from pretty early on who the high-risk groups were; the "risky" strategy was putting relatively healthy but infected individuals into nursing homes like New York did. I don't see what would have been risky about isolating the nursing homes and having family doctors reach out to other high risk groups to advise them to either self-isolate or check into special accommodations set up for that purpose, then let the disease run it's course amongst the low-rosk population. That seems like an eminently sensible approach.
Re: No. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Sweden's general concept was epidemiologically sound, but its implementation an utter failure.
Communism is a great idea. Just a shame it has never worked so far. Let's try it again on your nation? <\snark>
The idea was epidemiologically wrong because you have to include things like lack of equipment, pre-symptomatic spread and greater infectiousness of older people and changes in behaviour based on risk in your epidemiological model. If you can't do that then you are failing at your epidemiology. If you had managed to do that correctly you would have predicted that a) leakage into the olde
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Communism works... it just doesn't work on scales where the number of people involved is so high that personal accountability to each other person within the system cannot be maintained.
In other words, it works extremely well in small scales, such as individual households, in isolated communities numbering no more than perhaps a few hundred, or in places such as a monastery or the like.
Re: (Score:3)
That's as dumb as claiming that every system is a democracy because every system includes people - demos.
Re: (Score:3)
Your example completely fails elementary root word analysis.
The word demo (presumably an abbreviated form of demonstration) comes has a latin root, while the word democracy has greek origins. Demo and democracy may have the same initial syllables in english, but one does not derive any meaning whatsoever from the other.
The word 'commune' and the word 'communist', however, both derive from the same single latin root word.
Anyways, communism has absolutely *nothing* to do with the concept of a governi
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
A family unit, one of the most obvious examples of working communism that is prevalent even in North America, does not require any form of slavery, violent purging, or any kind of iron dictatorship in order to function. While there are certainly some family units that exist that do not practice communism at all, you would in fact find a great many that do... perhaps without even realizing it.
Again, communism is the following of a single principle, that each person in the commune provides according to
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Actually, that part of their plan seems to be working.
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks for the very interesting numbers, they seem to be very out of date (Mid May), at which time Germany was only just cleaning up after having been in serious problems due to a much earlier much stronger start of the infection and Sweden was only just starting to be infected. Do you have equivalent numbers for say mid June now that the situation of both countries has changed completely?
I can't agree with a bunch of your conclusions. Even at this rate (5% infection in about three months) Sweden will ta
Re:No. (Score:4, Informative)
Sweden will hit herd immunity sooner than Germany.
We don't even know if herd immunity is possible. Most of the research I've seen so far suggests immunity may only last from 2-6 months, and almost certainly less than a year, as is the case with other Coronaviruses that cause the common cold.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/1... [cnbc.com]
https://www.euronews.com/2020/... [euronews.com]
Re:No. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
If herd immunity is impossible, then so is a vaccine.
A vaccine is still possible. It seems highly unlikely it will be a one time thing though, and may well require regular booster shots thereafter. Ideally it could become part of the regular flu shot, which is required yearly but for a different reason.
Re: (Score:2)
In case anyone cares: Sweden's testing has gone way up, so its case rate has gone up. But its death rates continue to go down.
The infection rate is about 12% since May. While more people are being tested, the same percentage is coming back positive. However unlike other parts of the world, increasing the testing rate is considered a good thing.
Re:No. (Score:5, Interesting)
That is also true of what we're seeing in the US. Expanded testing is finding hundreds of thousands of new cases - and the death rate keeps falling. The result is moving the fatality rate down to around 0.05%.
There's a simple way to verify this idea. You check if the test positive rate is falling. If it is, this means many people are being tested but fewer are infected and so you find a lower proportion. In the US this is not happening. More tests find more infected people but the proportion of positive tests remains stubbornly high which suggests there is more spread ahead of the tests.
Re: (Score:3)
It may not return to previous levels but it's hard to say without more demographic information. I'm not particularly worried about it spiraling out of control either though. If we do get a big
Re: No. (Score:2, Informative)
The death rate isn't falling in America. Changes to reporting and lack of access to healthcare mean that most Covid deaths are simply never listed.
In addition, asymptomatic deaths aren't included, along with deaths due to long term damage from Covid.
The death rate in America is rising. Sharply.
Denial lowers the headline score cheaply and easily.
Re: No. (Score:2)
Deaths lag case spiked by weeks. Thousands of people who will die are just testing positive now. Deaths is a really bad metric to track to understand how well you are doing. Plus, just being not dead is a really low bar considering how this virus can mess with you.
And yeah, suddenly dying of stroke without any of the standard COVID symptoms happens. You can be pedantic all you want but the virus doesnt care.
Re: No. (Score:4, Informative)
The death rate is falling [worldometers.info].
No it isn't.
The death rate is falling in New York and New Jersey etc (blue states). But it's rising in Texas, Florida etc (red states)
That's what the science and data says.
You're just cherry picking numbers and calling it science and data. What are hospitals and ICU filling up again if it's only asymptomatic people?
You ain't even a tiny bit credible Lynnwood.
Re: (Score:2)
The death rate isn't falling in America. Changes to reporting and lack of access to healthcare mean that most Covid deaths are simply never listed.
The death rate is falling [worldometers.info]. That's what the science and data says. If you choose to ignore that, that's on you - not the rest of the sane folks.
Well, from your link, the death rate is falling and currently is 10.67% which is far from the 0.05% that you quoted before...
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: No. (Score:2, Insightful)
No one clicks on links that say, "Virus death rate falling, testing rates improving, is return to normal just around the corner?"
You'll get way more ad impressions with, "Tests show highest infection rate EVER! Experts say survivors future in doubt".
Re: (Score:3)
Re: No. (Score:3)
At risk of sounding stupid, I (until I read your comment) would have used the words infections and cases in this context interchangibly.
Wouldn't a new case be a new infection?
Asking honestly, fully willing to learn if somebody is willing to explain.
Re: No. (Score:5, Insightful)
Cases are infections. Infections are not cases. A case is a diagnosed infection. Undiagnosed infections are roughly an order of magnitude more common than diagnosed ones in the developed world (give or take large margins), and two or more orders of magnitude in most of the develping world.
Case growth does not imply infection growth. Case counts are testing rates times positive rates. While infections vastly outnumber cases, an increase in the amount of testing nearly linearly increases the number of cases, without altering the actual underlying infection rate. Positive rates are more meaningful, although they can still be deceptive (depending on where and who you test, and under what conditions; shifts in this can shift your positive rates).
Case rates are almost meaningless in terms of monitoring infection rates. Positive rates are meaningful, but with the above caveats. Hospitalizations are mostly testing-rate insensitive, but test rates do have some impact, as people who feel bad who have a diagnosis are more likely to go to the hospital than those who feel bad who don't. ICU rates have little to no test-rate influences, as do death rates (at least in the developed world, where pretty much everyone with confirmed COVID or COVID-like symptoms will be registered, and testing on hospital admission is pretty much universal in order to protect staff and other patients).
In terms of sensitivity to testing rates and methodologies, from worst to best:
1) Cases (almost worthless)
2) Positive rates
3) Hospitalizations
4) ICU cases
5) Deaths
In terms of lag time, from worst to least:
1) Deaths
2) ICU cases
3) Hospitalizations
4,5) Positive rates
4,5) Cases
In terms of sensitivity to advances in treatment methodology, in order from most to least:
1) Deaths
2) ICU cases
3) Hospitalizations
4,5) Positive rates
4,5) Cases
Re: No. (Score:3)
Thank you, I better understand what your saying. I guess I always had this in the back of my mind. In my province we haven't had any new "confirmed" cases in the last couple of weeks, and no current cases either. But they are now only testing 500-1000 people a day, so who really knows. I guess we can only say its better than it has been, because they are now testing people with less obvious symptoms, and some time ago we would see 60-100 new cases in a day.
Must admit, I've learned quite a bit through di
Re: No. (Score:2)
Though I didnt bother to make the distinction of confirmed case vs known infections.. lol
Re: (Score:2)
I think a "case" is a known infection, and there are many unknown infections. If you report 1,610 new infections, those are just the known ones. I think Rei's objection is that there are likely many more unknown infections than that and so reporting 1,610 new infections understates the true number of new infections.
Re: (Score:2)
This.
I have been downloading US state and county figures every day since early March, and virtually every jurisdiction shows some kind of highly regular sawtooth pattern in the new confirmed cases reported. My experience with inter-government data sharing suggest this is an artifact of work flow: batches of data get validated and entered, then people take a little time to do their regular jobs.
This means is that everything a gove
cherry picking the worst days (Score:5, Insightful)
Reporting 303 new cases will sell fewer newspapers (or web site visits) than reporting 1610 new cases.
The press have not behaved well when reporting the Covid-19 story - they have stoked the rumour mills; attacked earlier decisions that proved wrong with the benefit of hindsight; presented emotionally charged personal stories as if they were happening to everyone; ... We need to return to a far more objective press as we had (not universally) 20+ years ago - quite how to achieve this I do not know. Unfortunately most are click-whores these days.
Re:No. (Score:5, Insightful)
you know good and well that "reporters" are paid to push a narrative, and that science has never ever been in their wheelhouse
That's a great anti-media narrative you are pushing. Only the number of infections is actually far higher than cases (it's only a case if someone knows it's covid-19 - that rules out pre-symptomatic people, asymptomatic people and people who haven't been given access to testing). This would probably mean that the number of infections in Sweden is more like 5k and would actually support the story by showing that Sweden really is crazy dangerous. Perhaps the journalist doesn't know enough to manipulate the story in their favour? Perhaps they are just going for the lower number in order to ensure they aren't accused of being anti-Sweden in a country which doesn't brook much dissent?
What's freaky strange is that Swedish people still seem to believe in their special status as a really sensible nation and that belief is only just beginning to break down [theguardian.com] in the face of Sweden's overwhelming practical and moral failure.
Re: (Score:2)
What's freaky strange is that Swedish people still seem to believe in their special status as a really sensible nation and that belief is only just beginning to break down [theguardian.com] in the face of Sweden's overwhelming practical and moral failure.
It is because Swedish media is pushing the narrative that we have the best government on earth.
Re:No. (Score:4, Insightful)
Then you have never been to Sweden. Their groupthink is very different from that seen in US. It's far closer to what China has, as its far more collectivist in its mindset.
"U-S-A!" definitionally is individualist. You're supposed to be a contrarian asshole in US, and that's why "U-S-A!" types tend to be as insufferable as they are. It's one of the main criteria on which Americans define their greatness. For comparison, in Sweden contrarian assholes end up poor and destitute because "you don't go against the mainstream". They define their greatness as massive passive pressure to conform. It's why Sweden has one of the highest is not the highest rate of white flight in the world, where just a couple of percent of foreigners is enough to trigger it. The moment Swedes see someone who isn't acting as expected, they reject this person. Collectively.
All Nordics have this mindset to an extent, but Sweden takes it to an extreme that none of its neighbours find palatable. It's where the Danish skit about Malmö's MENA/former Yugoslavia gangsters being investigated for horrible crimes by Swedish police results in nothing, but when a Danish policeman points this out at a crime scene which involves both nations, his Swedish colleague arrests him for hate speech.
Re:No. (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes, that would be "we collectively conformed when it was expected of us and once conformity resulting in undeniable failure, we conform in denying that we ever knew why conformed". A very Swedish thing to do. Even the excuses are collective.
Idea what Sweden is doing in fact was well enough defined that all of its three primary neighbours had to make a decision about three months ago on what to do about it. Especially here in Finland, where Swedish medical system in the north is massively dependent on Finnish workers travelling across the border. The idea was that Sweden sacrifices a large amount of people to keep economy open and reach herd immunity faster. It's completely in line with Swedish line of "conformity first" culture, as most of those dying were well documented to be undesirables: elderly stressing the welfare system and immigrants of the kind that grenade each other in bigger cities in Sweden on near daily basis. And just like with past events where everyone conformed until absurdity, and then situation was so obviously in your face horrible that it could not longer be denied, "I'm Swedish and I have no idea what government was doing" was a common line to absolve personal responsibility. I.e. the "Sweden as a humanitarian superpower" narrative and the same immigrants that are most exposed to currently relevant coronavirus. Just like "I'm Swedish and I have no idea what government was doing" was an excuse for forced sterilizations after they were finally ended, laws that said that gypsy men could be hanged on sight and so on. It's a culturally correct excuse for "we knew what we were doing, but it didn't work out the way we expected" in Sweden.
It's also exceedingly obvious hypocrisy to outsiders interacting with Swedes, which is why Norwegians, Danes and Finns mock Swedes for it as a matter of routine. A good chunk of Danish satire related to them having problems with Malmö's crime world specifically criticises this aspect of Swedish culture as one of the primary running jokes. Essentially, Swedes behaving like this fool no one but themselves. And that's probably the point.
Re:No. (Score:5, Informative)
What's freaky strange is that Swedish people still seem to believe in their special status as a really sensible nation and that belief is only just beginning to break down [theguardian.com] in the face of Sweden's overwhelming practical and moral failure.
It ain't over until the fat lady sings. Sweden may still come out on top, long term.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The pandemic is a test of every culture, and every region within a culture. While Swedes think their specialness will protect them, our own anti-science conspiracy theorists have politicized their medical responses. Yes, what medications people are taking and whether or not they distance and wear masks, is actually being determined by politics. There are people who believe that some large gatherings are okay if they are gatherings of their own social tribe, while the virus will strike down gatherings of the
Re: No. (Score:4, Interesting)
Here in Switzerland we got down to under 10 cases a day nationwide with 2 months of lockdown. After almost a month of reopening including schools, shops, and restaurants, we are back up to over 60 cases a day. (Out of 8.5M people.) And so far they are still able to test and trace everyone, and are ready to close down business segments that cause a resurgence. Last week there was a super-spreader event in a nightclub in Zürich so now they are considering shutting them all down again. There were a group that came from Serbia so now people coming there are more closely monitored. The point is that by getting the cases so low before reopening, we could reopen more economy quicker and get better data about what is working. Now we will be doing business while US residents start to stay home again whether the businesses are open or not.
Re: (Score:3)
Oh, and for what it's worth, the US's fatality rate is much lower than Swedens. 387 vs 523/M
Re:No. (Score:5, Interesting)
The U.S. is also crazy dangerous and the EU is likely to ban U.S. tourists for quite a while.
So saying, "look- I only killed 50 people -- look at that CRAZY guy across the room!!! He's killed 51 people!!!" isn't really buying you much here.
You share a lot in common with U.S. republicans (not U.S. *conservatives* -- two different things these days). U.S. republicans constantly try to use "whataboutism" to change the subject.
The subject here is that Sweden is behaving in an evil manner. The policy they gave out to doctors says, "Even when hospitals have room available- give older patients morphine and do not give them oxygen." That's cold blooded murder.
They pushed for herd immunity and they have gotten 1/12th to 1/14th of the way- on the back of one of the highest covid deaths per million in europe-- and dramatically higher than all of their surrounding neighbors.
Re:No. (Score:5, Interesting)
Okay that's either trying to rewrite history or flat out gaslighting.
Boris Johnson had UK on the Swedish plan for 6 critical days at the worst possible time. This lead to the UK having 10x as many cases as if they hadn't tried for herd immunity. His plan was criticized as "eugenics" and as cases rose he had to stop after a week.
And before you point to Belgium- they have a policy of radical honesty for covid19 cases. That's the closest picture to what's really happening out there. Other nations are under counting- avoiding testing the dead- etc. etc. to keep the numbers lower.
Re: (Score:2)
"you know good and well that "reporters" are paid to push a narrative, and that science has never ever been in their wheelhouse"
If it bleeds, it leads.
Re: (Score:3)
you know good and well that "reporters" are paid to push a narrative, and that science has never ever been in their wheelhouse
Yep. Nowhere does it mention that Sweden are currently in 7th place WRT number of deaths per head of population, that above them are countries that locked down their population tightly and wrecked their economies.
They also don't mention that mighty USA is only two places behind them and infections are starting to go up exponentially again, whereas Sweden's daily death rate is dropping towards single digits.
Re: (Score:3)
Yep. Nowhere does it mention that Sweden are currently in 7th place WRT number of deaths per head of population, that above them are countries that locked down their population tightly and wrecked their economies.
I know nothing about Belgium (in top spot), but the other countries above them got got hit hard early and locked down way too late when the hospitals were already overwhelmed.
https://www.statista.com/stati... [statista.com]
Sweden is simply proof you can have high mortality without overwhelming your health care system.
Sweden vs. LA (Score:5, Interesting)
So Sweden is doing about as good (or bad) as L.A. county (roughly the same population), but L.A. county went through
a 2.5 month stay-at-home order. What is different about Sweden that they achieved the same curve without a lock-down?
Re:Sweden vs. LA (Score:4, Insightful)
What is different about Sweden that they achieved the same curve without a lock-down?
Population density might have something to do with it.
Sweden: 59 per square mile
LA County: 2100 per square mile
Re:Sweden vs. LA (Score:5, Insightful)
What exactly do remote tracks of Swedish forest have to do with infection spread in the places where people actually live (like Stockholm, Gothenburg, Malmö, etc)?
It's amazing how many people don't understand the difference between population density and urbanization. Sweden has a relatively low population density. It's also very urbanized [google.com]. That is, to say, most people live in cities with significant populations, rather than small towns or in the countryside.
Re: (Score:3)
Sweden has exactly two cities with a significant population.
Re: (Score:2)
If someone has a good breakdown on Swedish cases we could probably have a better discussion, but as it stands we have a lot of people comparing apples to orangutans.
Re: (Score:3)
"Urbanized" means lives in a city. It doesn't make any claim as to the size of the city. It's quite telling your mention Malmo, that barely qualifies as a large town in the USA.
In other news Australia has an incredibly "urbanized" population, but know how they kept the spread low, by limiting movement of people to within 50km of where they live, a policy would would infect most of the country I live in. In doing so they effectively kept entire major cities virus free, because urbanisation does not tell you
Re: (Score:3)
Malmö (Sweden's third largest city, and the capitol city of of Skåne) is larger than the capitol city of all but 14 US states.
Stockholm would be roughly tied for the US's 11th largest city.
Sweden has only 3% of the population of the US.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Note that the reported figures are for Stockholm County (population of 2,383,269, density of 366 people per km^2), but you seem to be giving the number for Stockholm municipality (population of 975,904, density of 5,191 people per km^2).
It's a bit like mixing up Greater London and City of London.
Re: (Score:3)
It's a good thing for your credibility that Swedes are evenly distributed across the Swedish countryside, rather than clustered in urban areas.
Fucking drooling moron.
So all clustered in urban areas that add up to the same size as LA?
Re: (Score:3)
So you mean comparing an entire country that is mostly rural to a county that is largely urban may not be a fair comparison? Gee, what a concept.
Re: (Score:2)
Is it really that hard to spot the obvious differences? This is why Sweden was compared mostly to other Scandinavian countries in infection rates.
Re: Sweden vs. LA (Score:2)
New Zealand seems to have stopped the virus without the aid of a vaccine
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
What is different?
1. Sweden has lower population density than Los Angeles County, as pointed out by other posters.
2. Sweden has better air quality; this fact is important as conditions like asthma are contributory to poor COVID-19 outcomes.
3. Swedish citizens have universal access to high-quality health care.
4. Sweden has substantially lower levels of poverty, indigency, and illiteracy.
Those are just good guesses. I don't have proof that any of those factors had any actual influence.
Re: (Score:2)
"What is different about Sweden that they achieved the same curve without a lock-down?"
They are all blonde, fit, not type A-blood people.
Re: (Score:2)
lockdowns were only intended to destroy small/midsized businesses and never did anything to prevent spread
Well, they succeeded beyond anyone's wildest expectations.
Re: (Score:2)
"asymptomatic super spreaders was a media boogeyman from the beginning"
El Cuco will get you.
Re:Sweden vs. LA (Score:4, Interesting)
You'd need even more space to contain a Finnish group, but only because they won't stand next to each other [google.com] ;)
This also applies to the so called 1st world? (Score:2)
that just days later, on Wednesday, Sweden reported 1,610 new infections — roughly one infection for every 6,354 people in Sweden and its highest number of daily infections since the outbreak began.
I thought statements like these [only] applied to the 3rd world; where not much ever works as it should some say.
The USA is not much different but there's an explanation for this: We have what some [on the [left] have called demagoguery from its leaders.
For Sweden I cannot explain why.
Drama too much (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Drama too much (Score:5, Insightful)
This.
Reactions to the virus will only be something that can be evaluated in hindsight after we have effective herd immunity, be that vaccine or be that everyone got it and the susceptible are dead.
As long as their hospitals aren't overloaded, having a higher death rate for a shorter period of time, vs a lower death rate for a longer period of time...if those are equal or close, I'd pick the former. This lockdown thing sucks. Its bad for my family's physical and mental health and we're suffering none of the (direct) economic consequences of it.
Re: (Score:2)
Good lord, could you people try to stop being such pussies? 3 months of living at home alone and you're acting like the world is ending.
Re:Drama too much (Score:4, Insightful)
This.
Reactions to the virus will only be something that can be evaluated in hindsight after we have effective herd immunity, be that vaccine or be that everyone got it and the susceptible are dead.
As long as their hospitals aren't overloaded, having a higher death rate for a shorter period of time, vs a lower death rate for a longer period of time...if those are equal or close, I'd pick the former. This lockdown thing sucks. Its bad for my family's physical and mental health and we're suffering none of the (direct) economic consequences of it.
Why do you choose between those two? There is a completely different alternative as in Vietnam, New Zealand and Slovenia. You lock down properly for a couple of months, eliminate the virus, then open up again and only close down small groups of people in particular areas where infection starts again, if it does.
Alternatively, do what Japan does and have everybody wearing masks. It achieves almost the same effect without lockdown but with a bit more waste paper.
Re: (Score:3)
..if those are equal or close, I'd pick the former
But they aren't. In June the 16th, a study was published that showed reduced mortality in grave cases by using dexamethasone. If you are sick after June the 16rh, and ill enough to be hospitalized, you have one third less possibilities of dying that if you were before that date. In a week or two, another treatment might be discovered, then annother. That's how it works. Getting AIDS now is much less life threatening than in the 90's. The more you flatten the curve, the less total deaths you get.
Re: Drama too much (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Drama too much (Score:4, Insightful)
The Sweden approach may turn out as the best one at the end.
Based on what? Killing people? Yeah I agree. Are you still under the delusion that the idea of getting herd immunity by affecting everyone is a good idea despite being universally panned by every qualified epidemiologist in the world?
Please learn to separate religion from science. Your "beliefs" have no place here.
Meanwhile, in America... (Score:4, Insightful)
Sweden reported 1,610 new infections — roughly one infection for every 6,354 people in Sweden and its highest number of daily infections since the outbreak began.
The numbers of infections in my county, as of a few days ago, puts us at more than one infection per 200 people. My city, just yesterday, announced a two-week poll to see whether citizens here wanted to make masks mandatory when out in public, before backpedaling three hours later and announcing they would be mandatory starting next week.
I mean, don’t get me wrong, Sweden needs to get its act together, but I’m not exactly in a position to throw stones here.
Sweden's long-standing contention is still valid (Score:3)
Re: Sweden's long-standing contention is still val (Score:5, Informative)
Swede here.
The problem is not really the Covid-strategy but the low-level care nursing homes have. The have very few medical personell and many worker are payed hourly and cannot afford to stay home when ill. The also did not have any protective equipment, no oxygen installed (that had been dismantled) and they did undertook to few protective measures. Many workers are also migrants that does not even read or speak Swedish. Migrants are also infected at a much higher rate than Swedes in general.
This situation have been built up over three decades and are essentially everyone's fault. Both the politicians and the voters who have allowed it.
Re: Sweden's long-standing contention is still val (Score:5, Interesting)
To highlight this, a friend of mine who lives in one of the more immigrant saturated suburbs of Stockholm shared two recordings(before quickly having them removed by Youtube for "hate speech" due to complaints).
One was from mid-march, of a turkish wedding, with 70+ people in close proximity. The other was from mid-may, and was of the same group holding a funeral for 3 people dead from Covid-19.
Re: (Score:3)
You are also neglecting cultural factors such as "screw science and the government" and "Social distancing? Insh'allah!!!!/As god wills it/other religious idiocy"
Re: Sweden's long-standing contention is still va (Score:2)
We don't know how deadly the virus is. We do know the direct mortality is high, but we also know that indirect mortality (organ failure due to blood clotting or oxygen starvation even when lungs are functioning) is higher still. You can die from Covid six months after being free of the virus.
Once all factors are considered, the mortality rate is closer to that of the black death than flu.
Wow, drama (Score:2)
The whole virus thing becomes a bad memory in a few months when the vaccine becomes available. Until then, try not to take it personally.
Also, don't use it as an excuse to be shitty to others.
Re: Wow, drama (Score:2)
There won't be a vaccine in months. A couple of years, possibly. But no other virus in this family has a vaccine, so odds are none will ever be available for this one.
Popular Scandinavian radio program? (Score:2)
I lived my whole life in different Scandinavian countries and I'm not aware of a popular radio program that everyone in Scandinavia listens to? Enlighten me please?
Re: (Score:2)
Nope, still busy getting rid of the geezers.
Re: (Score:2)
"Here, in the US, there was a token check thown to the proles, trillions thrown to big businesses so they can buy back stock and pay their C-levels a bonus, but small businesses are falling over left and right."
But also over a million (formerly) hard-working _dead_ people got money, no other country had that feature.
Re: (Score:2)
Cut them some slack, no other country had even remotely that amount of dead people.
Re: (Score:2)
Japan has the same attitude (you can't infringe on people's rights to movement / earn a living). They also undertest as well.
Main difference I see is that they're not at all averse to masks.
Re: (Score:2)
All European countries except the UK have constitutions. Your argument might have been sound a couple of centuries ago, but it is as obsolete as muskets and quills.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I have neither enough faces nor palms. [sharingsweden.se]
Re: (Score:2)
That's really a thing? I have heard that people can't tell Austria from Australia (despite being on nearly opposite ends of the globe) but this?
What's next, people confusing Iran for Ireland?
Re: Yes, and? (Score:2)
The dead are rarely the ones spreading the disease. It's a time out sort of situation.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not a biologist, but the abstract of the paper you linked doesn't mention mutations at all. It seems to be about measuring the immune response and the fact that if you measure mostly hospitalized people, you're going to get results that may not apply to the general population.
Re: (Score:2)
Sweden has 10 million people, and 5,000 CoVID-19 deaths. Belgium has 11 million people and 10,000 deaths. I didn't hear about countries banning travel from Belgium...
There was an effective Europewide stop on travel so people weren't travelling in and out of Belgium except with good reason. We are now talking about opening up and Sweden is being excluded from that. I put together a graph comparing Sweden and Belgium [ourworldindata.org] which should instantly explain to you why the two countries, with similar overall death rates, are now seen as completely different. The trajectories just are not even slightly the same.
Re: Well, they will be the first with herd immunit (Score:2)
There won't be here immunity.
A sensible lockdown could wipe out the disease in 14 days.
Re: Well, they will be the first with herd immunit (Score:2)
Herd immunity without vaccinations, as a deliberate strategy, is like balancing a housefly problem with more spiders.
The math says it will work, but why are we talking about it.
Re: (Score:3)