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.

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.

False

Sweden finally joins Denmark and Norway.

BREAKING: Sweden's government to announce that it's dropping all restrictions against COVID-19 - Expressen

— BNO Newsroom (@BNODesk) February 2, 2022

If Sweden went on Joe Rogan, Spotify would delete the episode, and the White House would cheer.

I think that's a problem. https://t.co/571tYgy0p4

— Vinay Prasad, MD MPH 🎙️📷 (@VPrasadMDMPH) February 8, 2022

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.

NPIs don't work. And they are right again about not vaccinating children

petebaker said:

---

If Sweden went on Joe Rogan, Spotify would delete the episode, and the White House would cheer.

I think that's a problem. https://t.co/571tYgy0p4

— Vinay Prasad, MD MPH 🎙️📷 (@VPrasadMDMPH) February 8, 2022

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.

---

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?

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

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.

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.

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.

I think this graph by @orwell2022 sums up the effect of the Covid measures nicely (or nastily if we’re being honest). pic.twitter.com/MOxQaPU9NY

— Making Waves (@MakingC19Waves) June 12, 2022

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.

How is New Zealand all the way on the left? I thought they had an extremely stringent COVID response like Australia?

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.

Adjusted for age, Sweden had fewer Covid deaths per capita and students there did not suffer learning losshttps://t.co/RSVTRJWUD1

— Marty Makary MD, MPH (@MartyMakary) September 16, 2022

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.

I've always liked Stossel, he seems to try to be honest.

Sweden did have decently high excess mortality during the first year or so of the pandemic, but it's made up for it by having very low excess mortality since then. A lot of narratives about it are out-of-date.
(via @OurWorldInData) pic.twitter.com/qmkmGv679C

— Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) March 7, 2023

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.

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.