Sweden avoiding lockdown

charlie14

Deleted User wrote: »

Around Hornstull, where I was, there were restaurants that were quiet, but then there were other restaurants, and cafés, that were full. Particularly around the metro station. And Espresso House always seemed to be full. It was often impossible to find a seat.

When you say full it does not sound as if some of those establishments were complying with the recommendations/restrictions.
If not then it`s as good an explaination as any for the large numbers of new infections.

charlie14

charlie14 wrote: »

When you say full it does not sound as if some of those establishments were complying with the recommendations/restrictions.
If not then it`s as good an explaination as any for the large numbers of new infections.

Sorry, I mean full, but within the restrictions. I saw tables taped off in cafés and signs on doors about the maximum people allowed in.

charlie14

Deleted User wrote: »

Sorry, I mean full, but within the restrictions. I saw tables taped off in cafés and signs on doors about the maximum people allowed in.

Not questioning your own experience, but from reading The Local.se there have been many complaints from local authorities, and even the PHA, of large scale public ignoring of restrictions/recommendations.
That to me at least would go a long way to explaining their consistently large new case numbers.

newboard

charlie14 wrote: »

Not questioning your own experience, but from reading The Local.se there have been many complaints from local authorities, and even the PHA, of large scale public ignoring of restrictions/recommendations.
That to me at least would go a long way to explaining their consistently large new case numbers.

So actual Swedish people are considering the virus a threat and want to see lower case numbers?

Some people would have you thinking that Sweden is a utopia of "free-minded" people living entirely unaffected by the pandemic.

charlie14

newboard wrote: »

So actual Swedish people are considering the virus a threat and want to see lower case numbers?

Some people would have you thinking that Sweden is a utopia of "free-minded" people living entirely unaffected by the pandemic.

If the local authorities and the PHA reports in The Local se. are to be believed, large number of the Swedish population are ignoring the restrictions/recommendations.
With the large numbers of day on day new cases I cannot see any other reason for that other than non-compliance.


Personally I believe it`s a stick the PHA cut for themselves that they are now being beaten with on non-compliance by their downplaying of infection numbers when they were still chasing naturally acquired herd immunity.

greyday

newboard wrote: »

So actual Swedish people are considering the virus a threat and want to see lower case numbers?

Some people would have you thinking that Sweden is a utopia of "free-minded" people living entirely unaffected by the pandemic.

Unfortunately not enough Swedes see the virus for what it is, they have close to 20 times our infection rate but low deaths at present, hard to believe they could have the highest rate of infection in Europe but one of the lowest death rates even allowing for vaccinating the most vulnerable first which most other Countries have also done, very odd to see this happening.
The messaging in Sweden has been very light from the start, we may be getting bored with it all at this stage but they were basically told at the start it was nothing to worry about and as late as October Tegnell wanted the place opened up fully as they would not get a third wave because of his earlier actions, of course none of this was true.

charlie14

greyday wrote: »

Unfortunately not enough Swedes see the virus for what it is, they have close to 20 times our infection rate but low deaths at present, hard to believe they could have the highest rate of infection in Europe but one of the lowest death rates even allowing for vaccinating the most vulnerable first which most other Countries have also done, very odd to see this happening.
The messaging in Sweden has been very light from the start, we may be getting bored with it all at this stage but they were basically told at the start it was nothing to worry about and as late as October Tegnell wanted the place opened up fully as they would not get a third wave because of his earlier actions, of course none of this was true.

Not simply a third wave. Tegnell was in denial that Sweden even had a second wave at that stage.

newboard

greyday wrote: »

Unfortunately not enough Swedes see the virus for what it is, they have close to 20 times our infection rate but low deaths at present, hard to believe they could have the highest rate of infection in Europe but one of the lowest death rates even allowing for vaccinating the most vulnerable first which most other Countries have also done, very odd to see this happening.
The messaging in Sweden has been very light from the start, we may be getting bored with it all at this stage but they were basically told at the start it was nothing to worry about and as late as October Tegnell wanted the place opened up fully as they would not get a third wave because of his earlier actions, of course none of this was true.

I don't get it - they have a really high infection rate, (20x?!) but really low death rate. Does that not indicate Covid has a much lower mortality rate than other countries' stats would suggest?

If they're seeing high numbers on the regular, but not much impact in terms of deaths then I can understand why they're not taking it as seriously?

greyday

newboard wrote: »

I don't get it - they have a really high infection rate, (20x?!) but really low death rate. Does that not indicate Covid has a much lower mortality rate than other countries' stats would suggest?

If they're seeing high numbers on the regular, but not much impact in terms of deaths then I can understand why they're not taking it as seriously?

They have multiple numbers of deaths and infections of their neighbours but doing as well or better than the rest of Europe, no doubt we will find out at some stage in the future why they did far worse than the Countries closest to them and as well as a lot of other Countries that had lockdowns, I don't think anyone would argue that locking down costs more lives in the short term, very much the opposite in fact, obviously Sweden wants to be compared to the rest of Europe rather than their closest neighbours even if its only for good PR.

Bit cynical

newboard wrote: »

I don't get it - they have a really high infection rate, (20x?!) but really low death rate. Does that not indicate Covid has a much lower mortality rate than other countries' stats would suggest?

If they're seeing high numbers on the regular, but not much impact in terms of deaths then I can understand why they're not taking it as seriously?

A lot could account for that though.

As mentioned earlier there's probably a much higher general level of immunity in the population there from the early outbreak. Vaccinations though slow like the rest of Europe are probably having some effect among the most vulnerable. Possibly new treatments reducing deaths in critical cases. Sweden are likely to be more active here than other countries. Better protection of nursing homes than before. Warmer weather improving health outcomes etc.

Finally, case numbers by themselves don't mean much without knowledge of how many tests are being carried out and how those tests are being targeted.

greyday

Bit cynical wrote: »

A lot could account for that though.

As mentioned earlier there's probably a much higher general level of immunity in the population there from the early outbreak. Vaccinations though slow like the rest of Europe are probably having some effect among the most vulnerable. Possibly new treatments reducing deaths in critical cases. Sweden are likely to be more active here than other countries. Better protection of nursing homes than before. Warmer weather improving health outcomes etc.

Finally, case numbers by themselves don't mean much without knowledge of how many tests are being carried out and how those tests are being targeted.

I doubt they would have the highest infection rate in Europe if their immunity levels were higher than the rest of Europe, higher immunity should equal less infections.

Bit cynical

greyday wrote: »

I doubt they would have the highest infection rate in Europe if their immunity levels were higher than the rest of Europe, higher immunity should equal less infections.

This is true but remember that there are several variants circulating at the moment and prior immunity to the original variant may not totally prevent infection but instead provide a measure of protection from serious symptoms.

StefanFal

Heres a laugh...

I’m travelling north this week for work. Spent Sunday through Wednesday in Gävle. Currently Gävleborgs lan has the highest spread of infection in the country.

Sunday evening the 2 pubs I visited were full ( table seating only). All the swedes are sitting quietly at their tables and all the paddies going buck mad, shouting and laughing, hugging etc.

Curiously I got chatting to one of the lads at the bar and he said there are over 1000 of them here working on a data center for Microsoft. He was saying they are out every night on the beer. How there’s no outbreak there “yet” is beyond me.

greyday

Bit cynical wrote: »

This is true but remember that there are several variants circulating at the moment and prior immunity to the original variant may not totally prevent infection but instead provide a measure of protection from serious symptoms.

The Swedes have said from their testing that the UK variant is the one there in numbers, other variants have been kept out to a large extent thus far, AFAIK immunity from the first wave of Covid virus still gives immunity to the UK variant.

biko

https://www.tv4.se/artikel/4WVi7UCSVvgAgqUDC9T1g7/vaccinatoerer-foerbjuds-beraetta-vilket-vaccin-som-ska-anvaendas
https://www.tv4.se/artikel/3iMk1VFRHxpHQGf4SpF2ld/astra-zeneca-vaccin-riskerar-att-slaengas-i-sverige

Stockholm vaccinators are prohibited from telling people what vaccine they will receive.
Probably because of the AZ scandal which may cause doses to be thrown away as people don't want it.

biko

Minister of Social Affairs Lena Hallengren (S) can not answer what should have been done differently to reduce the spread of infection among the elderly this spring. She was asked the question on Sunday night in SVT's corona special.

In the program, both she and state epidemiologist Anders Tegnell denied that herd immunity was the Swedish strategy, despite the fact that email exchanges showed that this was the case.

https://www.varldenidag.se/nyheter/hallengren-omojligt-saga-vad-vi-kunde-gjort-annorlunda/reptlp!4NGnJkIJAriF0rmtyBr43w/

greyday

greyday wrote: »

They have multiple numbers of deaths and infections of their neighbours but doing as well or better than the rest of Europe, no doubt we will find out at some stage in the future why they did far worse than the Countries closest to them and as well as a lot of other Countries that had lockdowns, I don't think anyone would argue that locking down costs more lives in the short term, very much the opposite in fact, obviously Sweden wants to be compared to the rest of Europe rather than their closest neighbours even if its only for good PR.

Future may also tell us why their neighbouring countries are the real outliers rather than Sweden...

charlie14

brenbrady wrote: »

Future may also tell us why their neighbouring countries are the real outliers rather than Sweden...

It may even tell us that it was nothing to do with the different strategies adopted by their neighbours and rather that they have a special gene that makes them more immune to the virus. Doubt it though.

charlie14

charlie14 wrote: »

It may even tell us that it was nothing to do with the different strategies adopted by their neighbours and rather that they have a special gene that makes them more immune to the virus. Doubt it though.

For example, what did Finland, Norway and Denmark do differently to Holland, Belgium and Germany?

charlie14

brenbrady wrote: »

For example, what did Finland, Norway and Denmark do differently to Holland, Belgium and Germany?

Your post was on Sweden`s neighbouring countries. Finland, Norway and Denmark are just that.
Along with Sweden they are even collectively know as the Nordic countries. Holland, Belgium and Germany, no more than Chile or China, are neither

charlie14

charlie14 wrote: »

Your post was on Sweden`s neighbouring countries. Finland, Norway and Denmark are just that.
Along with Sweden they are even collectively know as the Nordic countries. Holland, Belgium and Germany, no more than Chile or China, are neither

All the countries I mentioned are on the same continent and share a common travel area. You can get to Germany from Sweden by car in approx. 5 hours.
Chile and China are in separate continents, are thousands of km from one another and share no land borders.

The question still remains, what have Finland, Norway and Denmark done differently to other European countries including Sweden???

humberklog

brenbrady wrote: »

All the countries I mentioned are on the same continent and share a common travel area. You can get to Germany from Sweden by car in approx. 5 hours.
Chile and China are in separate continents, are thousands of km from one another and share no land borders.

The question still remains, what have Finland, Norway and Denmark done differently to other European countries including Sweden???

You're talking to the wall there Bren. Some posters can only frame Sweden's performance in a Skandi context.
Should Ireland be only be measured against British Isle countries? Holland in BeNeLux? Portugal in Iberia? Croatia in the Balkans? Vermont in New England States?
It doesn't strike me that there's much to gain from consistently only using metrics such as those.

But like you, I'd like to know what have DK, N and F done differently than other EU countries.
Usefully (for learning about the behaviour of the virus) Sweden has taken a different approach than its neighbours.

Let's measure educational attainment in Darndale against educational attainment in Howth, after all they're nearish enough and who cares if there are vastly different demographic trends - what matters is they're both in Ireland and you can reach one from the other by car pretty quickly.
Hell, let's measure educational attainment in Howth against educational attainment in Vrhóvci in Ljubljana. They're both in the EU!

I can give an endless number of examples to show why certain datasets get grouped for comparison. Many users have already explained why the Nordics are grouped together, after all, it's not as if we haven't had this conversation tens of times. Certain users are wilfully ignorant, rather than unintentionally ignorant.

Hey cnocbui, remember talking nonsense about Delhi and herd immunity a few months ago? Bad news for you - you were wrong then and here is yet more confirmation https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-56798248
I look forward to your quality postings, as ever.

PintOfView

I recently saw something that said the Scandinavian countries take Vitamin D supplements due to their low sunlight levels in the winter, and relating that to the possible beneficial effects of Vitamin D when it comes to fighting respiratory infections, such as Covid

RTE on Vit D (Nov 2020) -> https://www.rte.ie/brainstorm/2020/1124/1180110-covid-19-vitamin-d-ireland/
TCD study (Apr 2020) -> https://tilda.tcd.ie/news-events/2020/2010-vitd-couldhelp-covid19/
Swedish study (2015) -> https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.3402/ijch.v74.27963

Here are impressions I have re Sweden ...
- Sweden seems to have done much worse that it's immediate neighbours (DK / NO / FI) as regards excess deaths, and cases
- Sweden didn't have as many restrictions as its neighbours, which would have allowed higher transmission
- Higher transmission would likely account for greater case numbers, and deaths.
- Swedes of non-European origin fared worse
- Swedes of non-European origin are more likely to be vitamin D deficient
(no study has concluded that these last two are related, but not impossible)

- Sweden seems to have fared much better, on the excess death scale, than many other countries in Europe who did implement more restrictions (UK, Spain, Belgium, etc.)
- Taken as a geographic area the Nordic countries, including Sweden, seem to have done better than might be expected.

- There has to be an explanation, and it's surely not that lockdowns cause excess mortality (instead they must reduce transmission)!!
- So what is the explanation?

Have any other factors been suggested?

charlie14

brenbrady wrote: »

All the countries I mentioned are on the same continent and share a common travel area. You can get to Germany from Sweden by car in approx. 5 hours.
Chile and China are in separate continents, are thousands of km from one another and share no land borders.

The question still remains, what have Finland, Norway and Denmark done differently to other European countries including Sweden???

You started out with Sweden and it`s neighbours and within two shakes of a lambs tail we are off on a car journey.
When you have arrived in Germany you can actually drive on as far as China. Outer Mongolia even, as well as many other destinations.


You appear new here and tbh I have neither the time nor the inclination to go ploughing the old road you appear to wish to go down as it has been ploughed and harrowed here so often at this stage.

It`s all here already. Claims, counter-claims,charts, statistics etc etc. There is even an Economist report that dived Europe into four regions and as well as stating that Covid became more virulent as it travelled east in Europe, also termed Sweden`s Covid deaths as an exception compared to the others in the region.

The facts are that Sweden, with no lockdown, have had 460 deaths in those under 60. So for people under 60, with few restrictions, CV-19 carries a similar risk as dying in a car crash. This is the point where everyone shouts, "car crashes aren't contagious". CV-19 is and in Sweden it was given the opportunity and space to spread, so the argument that thousands of middle aged and young people aren't dead in Ireland because we stopped it by restrictions are proven irrelevant by the Swedish results. 9384 of their deaths occurred in those over 80, 3698 of those were over 90.

CV-19 is a minimal risk to those under 60, basically not worth worrying about on a personal level, but is dangerous in the older cohort. We can learn from this, and comparing Sweden and other SK countries to other EU countries who have had different outcomes is a perfectly legitimate question.

Ireland has done a great job of not releasing data on deaths in the daily briefings, and at no time seemed willing to be honest about who is at most risk from this disease. With the restrictions we have, for those under sixty the chances of dying of CV-19 are vanishingly small. The chances of these same people dying from the complications which WILL arise from our year of lockdowns is not.

greyday

brenbrady wrote: »

The facts are that Sweden, with no lockdown, have had 460 deaths in those under 60. So for people under 60, with few restrictions, CV-19 carries a similar risk as dying in a car crash. This is the point where everyone shouts, "car crashes aren't contagious". CV-19 is and in Sweden it was given the opportunity and space to spread, so the argument that thousands of middle aged and young people aren't dead in Ireland because we stopped it by restrictions are proven irrelevant by the Swedish results. 9384 of their deaths occurred in those over 80, 3698 of those were over 90.

CV-19 is a minimal risk to those under 60, basically not worth worrying about on a personal level, but is dangerous in the older cohort. We can learn from this, and comparing Sweden and other SK countries to other EU countries who have had different outcomes is a perfectly legitimate question.

Ireland has done a great job of not releasing data on deaths in the daily briefings, and at no time seemed willing to be honest about who is at most risk from this disease. With the restrictions we have, for those under sixty the chances of dying of CV-19 are vanishingly small. The chances of these same people dying from the complications which WILL arise from our year of lockdowns is not.

No one is disagreeing with you on risk to those under 50 and those most likely to suffer the most (over 60), the glaring omission though is that the more it is allowed spread in society the greater the chances of those in vulnerable groups getting the disease, this has been articulated time and time again but some selfish people seem to think its not their problem as their risk is tiny and shur we will do other stuff to protect the most vulnerable other than reducing our freedoms.

cnocbui

Maybe we could prioritise vacination the elderly, or would that be selfish? I know it's a radical thought, but maybe worth considering. :rolleyes:

charlie14

cnocbui wrote: »

Maybe we could prioritise vacination the elderly, or would that be selfish? I know it's a radical thought, but maybe worth considering. :rolleyes:

Why do you appear to believe we are not doing just that

greyday

Known fondly as Kermit by his closest friends Charlie, hope that answers your question.