Did Sweden end up taking the best approach?

255,503 Views | 1675 Replies | Last: 5 mo ago by Enzomatic
Sapper Redux
How long do you want to ignore this user?
RandyAg98 said:

A good article about Sweden's success.

LINK

Quote:

sweden did very little to try to stop covid. they did not lock down, they did not wear masks, they closed few businesses, they left most schools open, undistanced, in person, and unmaksed.

many have endlessly screamed that "well look at the covid deaths! it was a disaster!" but here's the thing: it wasn't.



Sweden's population was less active outside the home than Denmark, its economic performance was average, and it retreated to more stringent measures by winter 2020. I wouldn't fall for a myth about how they approached Covid. Their initial approach did not do them any favors.
TheMasterplan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sapper Redux said:

RandyAg98 said:

A good article about Sweden's success.

LINK

Quote:

sweden did very little to try to stop covid. they did not lock down, they did not wear masks, they closed few businesses, they left most schools open, undistanced, in person, and unmaksed.

many have endlessly screamed that "well look at the covid deaths! it was a disaster!" but here's the thing: it wasn't.



Sweden's population was less active outside the home than Denmark, its economic performance was average, and it retreated to more stringent measures by winter 2020. I wouldn't fall for a myth about how they approached Covid. Their initial approach did not do them any favors.
The results were a lot less than the so-called experts predicted. You're moving the goal posts.
DadHammer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
False
PJYoung
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Sweden finally joins Denmark and Norway.

petebaker
How long do you want to ignore this user?

Sweden has decided against recommending COVID vaccines for kids aged 5-11, the Health Agency said on Thursday, arguing that the benefits did not outweigh the risks.

"With the knowledge we have today, with a low risk for serious disease for kids, we don't see any clear benefit with vaccinating them," Health Agency official Britta Bjorkholm told a news conference.




DannyDuberstein
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
NPIs don't work. And they are right again about not vaccinating children
ArmyAg97
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
petebaker said:


Sweden has decided against recommending COVID vaccines for kids aged 5-11, the Health Agency said on Thursday, arguing that the benefits did not outweigh the risks.

"With the knowledge we have today, with a low risk for serious disease for kids, we don't see any clear benefit with vaccinating them," Health Agency official Britta Bjorkholm told a news conference.





DadHammer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Come on PJ, you know Sweden was the most open low restriction country. By "dropping" Covid restrictions you mean you can now have huge parties at closed in retirement communities V's masking babies and lockdowns in Norway?

SamHou
How long do you want to ignore this user?
No.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-022-01097-5
SwigAg11
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
SamHou said:

No.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-022-01097-5


That was not a scientific publication. It was written in Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, and it reads like someone who just wants to be critical of the Swedish government. The authors did not present any data or basis for their claims.
nortex97
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Sweden did...basically just as well as the totalitarian lockdown/mask state of nearby Germany. Because...masks and other NPI's made no difference anywhere. But they didn't crush their economy in the process.
Quote:

If you're still not convinced to take off the mask, consider one more graph from Miller. It compares Germany with Sweden, the media's Covid villain for refusing to lock down or mandate masks. Sweden's initial Covid surge was blamed on those lax policies, but Sweden stuck to them and actually discouraged masks in most situations. As indicated on the graph, surveys during the pandemic showed that fewer than 10 percent of Swedes bothered to wear masks. In Germany, by contrast, more than 80 percent did so, but look at the similar trajectories of the daily Covid death toll in both countries from the summer of 2020 through March of this year.

The masks in Germany obviously didn't "beat Covid." From the start of the pandemic through this spring, the cumulative rate of Covid mortality has been slightly higher in Sweden than in Germany (by about 15 percent), but the rate of overall excess mortality has been slightly higher in Germany (by about 8 percent). Just as in the United States, the mask mandates in Germany produced no net benefits but plenty of inconvenience as well as outright harm. Covering up may give the maskaholics a false sense of securitybut they could breathe more easily if they'd just face the facts.



Yes, Sweden was right.
RGV AG
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Damm straight Sweden was right.

I keep harping on folks to look at Haiti for a really good example of what I believe, emphasis on what I believe, Covid was and what it will do. Haiti pretty much skated through this pandemic, while right across a fluid border another country was 6X more affected. The reasons? A lot fatter, less healthy population in the DR than in Haiti. Haiti didn't have the resources nor the means to go full lockdown and shutter everyone and if they didn't keep working they would have starved. Haiti has a young population, relatively speaking, and they are not fat, and tend to have been exposed to a lot of diseases. Basically for whatever reason that side of the island wasn't devastated even though it is unsanitary, poor as hell, and a mess.

Even if the numbers are under counted by 3 to 5 times the stats speak for themselves.



nortex97
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG


It wasn't just economies/kids that were harmed with the NPI measures, average life expectancies went down in a statistically significant way for the more 'stringent' (abusive) countries.
SwigAg11
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
How is New Zealand all the way on the left? I thought they had an extremely stringent COVID response like Australia?
Aston94
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
SwigAg11 said:

How is New Zealand all the way on the left? I thought they had an extremely stringent COVID response like Australia?
I think their response was to keep out travellers and lock down the country, but within country their measures were pretty non-restrictive. But honestly, they probably should not be on the graph.
corndog04
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Aston94 said:

SwigAg11 said:

How is New Zealand all the way on the left? I thought they had an extremely stringent COVID response like Australia?
I think their response was to keep out travellers and lock down the country, but within country their measures were pretty non-restrictive. But honestly, they probably should not be on the graph.


New Zealand was hardcore on the Zero Covid bandwagon for a very long time. When there were no cases they were loose, but would shut everything back down at the slightest tick up. It's really odd to see them ranked like this.
nortex97
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
corndog04 said:

Aston94 said:

SwigAg11 said:

How is New Zealand all the way on the left? I thought they had an extremely stringent COVID response like Australia?
I think their response was to keep out travellers and lock down the country, but within country their measures were pretty non-restrictive. But honestly, they probably should not be on the graph.


New Zealand was hardcore on the Zero Covid bandwagon for a very long time. When there were no cases they were loose, but would shut everything back down at the slightest tick up. It's really odd to see them ranked like this.
Their PM came out and gave them permission to have orgies again, once she deemed it safe.

I agree they shouldn't be on the chart, but meh, you could toss out any 3 or 4 that might be 'well I don't think that's right' and the overall curve would still be similar. Charting out NPI enforcement/restrictions by country is pretty challenging, imho.
petebaker
How long do you want to ignore this user?

WoMD
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Tread lightly…
01agtx
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
WoMD said:

Tread lightly…


NM
PerpetualLurker
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Thanks for sharing. Peer reviewed study on the NIH website. To my untrained eye that looks pretty good, certainly has a very large dataset. Important to learn lessons from the data to prepare for the next pandemic. Let the data drive the policy, not vice versa.
nortex97
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
More good news on Sweden having done the right thing, in not locking their people down like almost all others on earth over covid;

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2022/12/the-daily-chart-sweden-after-all.php

Quote:

New data from the OECD settles an argument that raged from the first days of the COVID hysteria: Sweden's decision not to lockdown turns out to have been the correct one. The OECD's calculation of total excess deaths from all causes (since COVID lockdowns increased other causes of death) was the lowest in the developed world, as seen here:


Also, no statistical variation/significance for N95 mask usage.

So, again, those 'shocking' videos from 2020 on page 1 here of Swedes walking around like normal in public were…not actually bad, and led to better outcomes. Never again.
nortex97
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Complete Idiot said:

Now sure why another thread was needed. For both threads, the results of different approaches around the world can't be determined until we have the final data and some hindsight.

Sweden is geographically between Finland and Norway, as of today the deaths per 1 million population (as shown at the link OP provided)

Sweden 89
Norway 23
Finland 10


But of course a country being more open now would have higher numbers at this stage of the pandemic. It would take about a year, or more, to get final data and see if there are waves that hit due to limiting of activities and then opening back up later.
That data is now in, fyi.
nortex97
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
More data/analyses, for anyone who cares/still questions this information.

Rongagin71
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I've always liked Stossel, he seems to try to be honest.

DeangeloVickers
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
PJYoung
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
AGBU 94
How long do you want to ignore this user?
A universal baseline is needed on this with no skewed data. I don't doubt Sweden's data, but there are other countries that I am skeptical about.
FlyRod
How long do you want to ignore this user?
No.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-022-01097-5
Jabin
How long do you want to ignore this user?
FlyRod said:

No.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-022-01097-5
After skimming that article there does not seem to be much data about actual results of Sweden's approach, other than the unsupported statement in the abstract: "During 2020, however, Sweden had ten times higher COVID-19 death rates compared with neighbouring Norway."

Why did they limit that statement to 2020? Why not through today or a longer period? The limitation is concerning because I thought that the argument for Sweden's approach is that while it may have taken more short-term damage from its approach, its long-term damage (including long term death rates) was better than the other Scandinavian countries, including Norway.

The article focuses entirely on Sweden's refusal to follow the recommendations of scientists, apparently assuming that the scientists were correct. It is an argument that Sweden did not follow the correct bureaucratic approach, rather than showing data that Sweden's approach failed.

The article also makes many assertions of fact without providing any citation or support for those assertions, such as the statement that masks work.

Although I am quite sympathetic to the point of the article, I found it to be far less than persuasive and more of a shrill complaint by scientists that they were not obeyed without question.
Enzomatic
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Jabin said:

FlyRod said:

No.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-022-01097-5
After skimming that article there does not seem to be much data about actual results of Sweden's approach, other than the unsupported statement in the abstract: "During 2020, however, Sweden had ten times higher COVID-19 death rates compared with neighbouring Norway."

Why did they limit that statement to 2020? Why not through today or a longer period? The limitation is concerning because I thought that the argument for Sweden's approach is that while it may have taken more short-term damage from its approach, its long-term damage (including long term death rates) was better than the other Scandinavian countries, including Norway.

The article focuses entirely on Sweden's refusal to follow the recommendations of scientists, apparently assuming that the scientists were correct. It is an argument that Sweden did not follow the correct bureaucratic approach, rather than showing data that Sweden's approach failed.

The article also makes many assertions of fact without providing any citation or support for those assertions, such as the statement that masks work.

Although I am quite sympathetic to the point of the article, I found it to be far less than persuasive and more of a shrill complaint by scientists that they were not obeyed without question.

Definitely read like a temper tantrum of a league of losing teams against a team that played by their own rules instead of doing what they were expected to do.
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.