Sweden avoiding lockdown

sheepysheep

Another good scientific article on the risk to children from those crazy yahoo's in the British Medical Journal.

https://www.bmj.com/content/369/bmj.m1669/rr-4

To help provide some context for parents, teachers, clinicians and policymakers grappling with this, we examined age-specific mortality data which shows that deaths from COVID-19 fortunately remain infrequent in children and young people[4]. Across the USA, England, Italy, Germany, Spain, France and Korea there were 43 deaths from COVID-19 in 0-19 year olds (total population 135,691,226) in the three months to 12 May 2020 [4–6]. In this period, in these countries, we estimated from published Global Burden of Disease data that we would expect more than 36,000 deaths from all causes in this age group, including over 3,000 from unintentional injury and 891 from lower respiratory tract infection including influenza [7]. COVID-19, by this measure, was responsible for an estimated 0.117% of deaths of 0-19 year old in these three months.

charlie14

sheepysheep wrote: »

As Norway is a constant comparison to Sweden regarding lockdown, here's some Norwegian perspective on their decision now.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/norway-health-chief-lockdown-was-not-needed-to-tame-covid

http://outbreaknewstoday.com/norway-covid-19-widespread-testing-has-no-purpose-health-director-says-lockdowns-were-unnecessary-22365/

Some highlights for those who dislike reality.

Norwegian Institute of Public Health chief, Camille Stoltenberg, said in an interview (computer translated) she warns against such a shutdown again – even if the infection rates should increase somewhat.

“Our assessment now….is that we could possibly have achieved the same effects and avoided some of the unfortunate impacts by not locking down, but by instead keeping open but with infection control measures,” she said.

‘It looks as if the effective reproduction rate had already dropped to around 1.1 when the most comprehensive measures were implemented on 12 March, and that there would not be much to push it down below 1… We have seen in retrospect that the infection was on its way down.’

‘Our assessment now, and I find that there is a broad consensus in relation to the reopening, was that one could probably achieve the same effect – and avoid part of the unfortunate repercussions – by not closing. But, instead, staying open with precautions to stop the spread.’ This is important to admit, she says, because if the infection levels rise again – or a second wave hits in the winter – you need to be brutally honest about whether lockdown proved effective.

in Stoltenberg’s opinion, ‘the academic foundation was not good enough’ for lockdown this time.


Fairly insightful stuff if people were genuinely interested in understanding the situation rather than sticking to a now rather frazzled sacred lockdown script.

She may be correct that Noeway`s RO was 1.1 on thw 12th of March and it may even have been the same in Sweden.
If it was then it just shows the benefit off lockdown.

One month after Noeway locked down on the 12th of March for the 7 days 12th. - 18th April.
Covid-19 deaths in Sweden. 624.
Covid-19 deaths in Norway. 45
Fairly insightful figures as to the difference between lockdown and no lockdown if some could only bring themselves to acknowledge the fact.

biko

42939 known cases
4639 officially dead
11% of known cases have passed

Numbers from FHMs own tracking page
https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/09f821667ce64bf7be6f9f87457ed9aa

charlie14

biko wrote: »

42939 known cases
4639 officially dead
11% of known cases have passed

Numbers from FHMs own tracking page
https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/09f821667ce64bf7be6f9f87457ed9aa

77 deaths and 1,156 new confirmed cases.
Their new confirmed cases have gone through the roof the last few days.
That cannot all be down to old historical cases can it?

sheepysheep

charlie14 wrote: »

She may be correct that Noeway`s RO was 1.1 on thw 12th of March and it may even have been the same in Sweden.
If it was then it just shows the benefit off lockdown.

One month after Noeway locked down on the 12th of March for the 7 days 12th. - 18th April.
Covid-19 deaths in Sweden. 624.
Covid-19 deaths in Norway. 45

She's the Norwegian Institute of Public Health chief.

She has the credentials to change her mind. And she has.

She's looked at the data and concluded with brutal honesty that the academic level of evidence is not sufficient to justify the lockdown policy.

Sweden was right. They displayed great foresight and bravery in developing their Covid-19 response but screwed up on nursing homes.

That's about the long and short of it.

Lockdown has been holed below the waterline. The body of analysis, evidence and critiques of the policy is all in one direction now.

I don't particular blame government for adopting the policy. I blame the Chinese for providing bad data to begin with.

The bottom line is that Sweden was provided with the same data and were mature enough to make a different and correct diagnosis.

They should be applauded,

charlie14

sheepysheep wrote: »

She's the Norwegian Institute of Public Health chief.

She has the credentials to change her mind. And she has.

She's looked at the data and concluded with brutal honesty that the academic level of evidence is not sufficient to justify the lockdown policy.

Sweden was right. They displayed great foresight and bravery in developing their Covid-19 response but screwed up on nursing homes.

That's about the long and short of it.

Lockdown has been holed below the waterline. The body of analysis, evidence and critiques of the policy is all in one direction now.

I don't particular blame government for adopting the policy. I blame the Chinese for providing bad data to begin with.

The bottom line is that Sweden was provided with the same data and were mature enough to make a different and correct diagnosis.

They should be applauded,

Academia and facts are often two different universes as we have seen from Sweden`s academic modelling figures and the results of antibody tests.
Actual figures do not lie.


If Norway and Sweden both had a similar RO on 12th of March, with lockdown Norway one month later had 45 deaths for the 7 days 12th.-18th. April. Sweden had 624.


If both had started from the same position on 12th. March, then other than lockdown how can you explain the huge difference in deaths between the two neighbouring countries ?
The real, as you put it, long and short of it, is that you will just not accept real quantifiable facts.

dloob

charlie14 wrote: »

77 deaths and 1,156 new confirmed cases.
Their new confirmed cases have gone through the roof the last few days.
That cannot all be down to old historical cases can it?

No it's not historical, Tegnell has said the rate of infection in Sweden seems to be increasing.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-sweden-cases/sweden-sees-increase-in-coronavirus-infections-fall-in-deaths-idUSKBN23B20T?il=0

“Unfortunately, in Sweden, we can see an increase in cases again,” Chief Epidemiologist Anders Tegnell told a news conference, urging people not to ease up on social distancing.

Tegnell said the increases in new cases was seen primarily in Western Sweden and among younger people.

I think other countries which now appear to have the virus under control will be wary of opening up to them.

charlie14

dloob wrote: »

No it's not historical, Tegnell has said the rate of infection in Sweden seems to be increasing.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-sweden-cases/sweden-sees-increase-in-coronavirus-infections-fall-in-deaths-idUSKBN23B20T?il=0




I think other countries which now appear to have the virus under control will be wary of opening up to them.

Thanks for that. Not good, but then I suppose it was only a matter of time. As you say, it looks as if it will be some time before Swedes can enjoy those sun holidays they love so much.

sydthebeat

sweden are now very close to needing to increase their covid restrictions significantly.

thats 3 continuous days of their highest new cases ever.

so either they have upped their testing levels significantly, in which case what they are showing now is more of the norm that what they have been reporting... or the testing numbers havent increased.... so the increase in new cases is down to uncontrolled community spread...

in which case they need to take action or naturally their death rates will rise even further, and at this stage is very hard not to see that as anything but negligent

charlie14

sydthebeat wrote: »

sweden are now very close to needing to increase their covid restrictions significantly.

thats 3 continuous days of their highest new cases ever.

so either they have upped their testing levels significantly, in which case what they are showing now is more of the norm that what they have been reporting... or the testing numbers havent increased.... so the increase in new cases is down to uncontrolled community spread...

in which case they need to take action or naturally their death rates will rise even further, and at this stage is very hard not to see that as anything but negligent

There was something this week that they were going to increase their testing numbers so perhaps that is the reason.
Although with Tegnell saying last week that care homes were accounting for around 30 deaths weekly for the previous weeks, then their have been high numbers of deaths from the general community which would indicate higher community spread of the virus.

That said their levels of infections have probably been that high for quite some time without them doing much of anything to find out the real level. It would explain the 12% ratio of confirmed cases to deaths.


Rather than take action, they are now allowing unlimited travel within the country. Negligence or not knowing what to do at this stage, it`s difficult to see which.

bb1234567

Why have Sweden stopped posting their daily tally at the usual time?

Breezin

charlie14 wrote: »

She may be correct that Noeway`s RO was 1.1 on thw 12th of March and it may even have been the same in Sweden.
If it was then it just shows the benefit off lockdown.

Any which way, innit?



She's right (and has been for some time) except when she's wrong.



She, the public health chief of one of the countries most assiduously cited by lockdowders, unambiguously has said that the lockdown wasn't necessary.

charlie14

Breezin wrote: »

Any which way, innit?



She's right (and has been for some time) except when she's wrong.



She, the public health chief of one of the countries most assiduously cited by lockdowders, unambiguously has said that the lockdown wasn't necessary.

As much as I know you would love them too, the figures do not lie.:D
Sweden Covid-19 deaths 12th.-18th April. 624.
Norway Covid-19 deaths 12t.-18th April 45.


Sheer coincidence that one month after one country locksdown and its neighbour does not that there is such a huge disparity ?

Breezin

charlie14 wrote: »

As much as I know you would love them too, the figures do not lie.:D
Sweden Covid-19 deaths 12th.-18th April. 624.
Norway Covid-19 deaths 12t.-18th April 45.


Sheer coincidence that one month after one country locksdown and its neighbour does not that there is such a huge disparity ?

Well, you'll just have to ask Dr Stoltenberg why that is. She says it's not the lockdown.

biko

bb1234567 wrote: »

Why have Sweden stopped posting their daily tally at the usual time?

Their press conferences are 2pm their time.
Just after that their page is updated https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/09f821667ce64bf7be6f9f87457ed9aa

charlie14

Breezin wrote: »

Well, you'll just have to ask Dr Stoltenberg why that is. She says it's not the lockdown.

From the actual figures I find it difficult to see what other reason could be attributed to the huge disparity in numbers.
Seems you and another poster I have asked the same off cannot come up with a reason either.
It didn`t by any chance cross your mind that she may have wished to follow the same strategy as Tegnell but the Norwegian government saw more sense ?

paddar

sheepysheep wrote: »

She's the Norwegian Institute of Public Health chief.

She has the credentials to change her mind. And she has.

She's looked at the data and concluded with brutal honesty that the academic level of evidence is not sufficient to justify the lockdown policy.

Sweden was right. They displayed great foresight and bravery in developing their Covid-19 response but screwed up on nursing homes.

Funny you mention Camilla Stolenberg and brutal honesty, she has published an article in today's Dagbladet on how she and the FHI (the Norwegian Health Agency) have been misinterpreted and how it is too early to draw conclusions. She also suggests they would of recommended additional measures in the case of Sweden.

''They claim that I conclude that "the shutdown of Norway on March 12 was not necessary". It's wrong. I certainly haven't concluded that. I want a thorough evaluation of the basis for and the effects of the measures before and after 12 March so that we can have a better basis if we, again, locally, regionally or nationally, see signs of increasing dissemination.''

''They claim that Swedish health authorities have given their government the same advice as FHI has given the Norwegian government. It's wrong. I do not know the Swedish health authorities' advice in detail, but FHI has always pointed to the need to adjust measures according to developments in the epidemic. Of course, with a development like in Sweden, we would have recommended additional measures.

Camilla Stoltenberg, direktør ved Folkehelseinstituttet, 5th June 2020
https://www.dagbladet.no/kultur/for-tidlig-a-konkludere/72531672[/url]

bb1234567

biko wrote: »

Their press conferences are 2pm their time.
Just after that their page is updated https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/09f821667ce64bf7be6f9f87457ed9aa

Wow so nearly 80 more deaths again today.Still such large death numbers being reported by them. I don't think some people realise how much of an increase on average mortality rates this is, about 245 people die in a typical day in Sweden. Yeh they are really performing miracles:rolleyes: How do they do it..

Breezin

paddar wrote: »

Funny you mention Camilla Stolenberg and brutal honesty, she has published an article in today's Dagbladet on how she and the FHI (the Norwegian Health Agency) have been misinterpreted and how it is too early to draw conclusions. She also suggests they would of recommended additional measures in the case of Sweden.

''They claim that I conclude that "the shutdown of Norway on March 12 was not necessary". It's wrong. I certainly haven't concluded that. I want a thorough evaluation of the basis for and the effects of the measures before and after 12 March so that we can have a better basis if we, again, locally, regionally or nationally, see signs of increasing dissemination.''

''They claim that Swedish health authorities have given their government the same advice as FHI has given the Norwegian government. It's wrong. I do not know the Swedish health authorities' advice in detail, but FHI has always pointed to the need to adjust measures according to developments in the epidemic. Of course, with a development like in Sweden, we would have recommended additional measures.

Camilla Stoltenberg, direktør ved Folkehelseinstituttet, 5th June 2020
https://www.dagbladet.no/kultur/for-tidlig-a-konkludere/72531672[/url]

Quite.

Widdensushi

bb1234567 wrote: »

Wow so nearly 80 more deaths again today.Still such large death numbers being reported by them. I don't think some people realise how much of an increase on average mortality rates this is, about 245 people die in a typical day in Sweden. Yeh they are really performing miracles:rolleyes: How do they do it..

Mortality rate must be higher than that in a country with 10 million people?

Widdensushi

Google says you are correct, seems very low for the population

bb1234567

Widdensushi wrote: »

Mortality rate must be higher than that in a country with 10 million people?

No..90,000 people die per year in Sweden. Thats about 246 per day.
It's actually much higher than Ireland's annual mortality rate per capita, in Ireland just 32,000 die per year on average. I guess Sweden has a much older population than us.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/525353/sweden-number-of-deaths/

As I said a lot of people clearly don't seem to realise that the number of deaths being reported in Sweden are actually still very high!

charlie14

Breezin wrote: »

Well, you'll just have to ask Dr Stoltenberg why that is. She says it's not the lockdown.

Thanks to paddar no need to ask her. Seem that is not what she said as regards the lockdown.

joeysoap

glad that’s cleared up, it was a bit like millionaires saying saying that money doesn’t make you happy.

tobefrank321

Sweden has proportionally about 50% more older people than us - 20% vs 13%.

You'd expect their covid 19 deaths to be more because of this, possibly even 50% more.

So if we had 7 deaths a day, you'd expect the Swedes to have about 21 deaths a day if proportionally equivalent.

Twice our population x 1.5 = 21 deaths per day.

charlie14

tobefrank321 wrote: »

Sweden has proportionally about 50% more older people than us - 20% vs 13%.

You'd expect their covid 19 deaths to be more because of this, possibly even 50% more.

So if we had 7 deaths a day, you'd expect the Swedes to have about 21 deaths a day if proportionally equivalent.

Twice our population x 1.5 = 21 deaths per day.

For the past 5 weeks Sweden has had on average 60 deaths per day..

fisgon

sheepysheep wrote: »

Lockdown has been holed below the waterline. The body of analysis, evidence and critiques of the policy is all in one direction now.

The bottom line is that Sweden was provided with the same data and were mature enough to make a different and correct diagnosis.

They should be applauded,

The fans of Sweden's approach seem not to want to face reality, and instead prefer to just assert what they want to be true as fact. Still no engagement with the actual numbers.....

Sweden's population density is tiny - 24 people per square km. It is in fact many times lower than Ireland's, and we have a low pop density. In general, places with lower population density have found it easier to control the spread of the virus - the Dakotas in the US for example have low rates - and high density areas have been badly effected - New York, Madrid, Northern Italy, Belgium.

Given its density of population, Sweden really should have been able to control the virus relatively easily - just look at Norway and Finland, two countries with a similar density.
Norway - 8522 cases, 238 deaths.
Finland - 6941 cases, 322 deaths
Sweden - 41,883 cases, 4639 deaths

But that is not all. The difference is only growing every day - Norway and Finland's numbers are hardly going up at this stage (like Ireland's), and Sweden's are still increasing at rates that only much more densely populated European countries have seen, at their worst.

You can praise Sweden for their great approach all you want, but unless you address the actual figures then your position is lacking in any credibility.

bb1234567

Not that I disagree with the gist of your points but population density is not necessarily a good measure of how closely people of that country live together.

Rate of urbanisation is a much more representative measure. Australia is also very sparsely populated because the landmass is so big and the people live in a small number of populated urban areas. But of course cities like Melbourne or Sydney where most of Australia's population live are not what we would call sparsely populated places. So most Australians live in reasonable densely populated places, yet the country's population density rate overall gives a poor reprentation of the actual typical living arrangement. Same with Canadians,a lot of wilderness where nobody lives at all, and a few very large dense cities, and similar story for Swedish people, Sweden is in fact very urbanised despite a low population density.

Ireland has truly low population density because outside of Dublin most Irish people live in small towns and one off housing and the population is thinly spread across the entire country.

Polar101

fisgon wrote: »

You can praise Sweden for their great approach all you want, but unless you address the actual figures then your position is lacking in any credibility.

They'll only look good if there is a "second wave" that hits other countries harder than Sweden. If that doesn't happen, then it's clear they screwed up in their approach.

daithi7

Polar101 wrote: »

They'll only look good if there is a "second wave" that hits other countries harder than Sweden. If that doesn't happen, then it's clear they screwed up in their approach.

I wouldn't be so certain that is correct either. Measuring for Covid 19 deaths only isn't the full story, there will be many more resultant deaths in countries who went into full lockdown because of things like missed/ postponed elective surgeries,
treatments, screenings for other health conditions, relationship breakdowns and economic hardship (impacts on people's health), not to mention very long term things like the cost of kids missing out on 1/3 of the year at school, leaving cert , college exams, etc. All that will have costs , only some measurable, that may not become anyway apparent for ~10+ years maybe....

It's a complicated thing, epidemiology.