Sweden avoiding lockdown

Cupatae

Think this sums up 99% of the covid debates.

Bit cynical

I think the other thing charlie14 is not taking into account is that the instant the particular immunity figure is reached is not the point when the elderly and vulnerable can go about as normal. It is the beginning of the process by which the virus starts to diminish. Over time infections are reduced to a point where everyone can finally go outside.

Hmmzis

charlie14 wrote: »

I could see Stockholm possibly getting to 35%, even with an Ro below 1, but that would be considerable lower for the other 80% of the population.
But even if that percentage had full immunity to this or subsequent waves, without a vaccine I cannot see how much restrictions on the vulnerable could be eased.

If the Re is below 1, there cannot be a further wave, assuming that value stays below 1.
Even at an infection ratio of 35% and no restrictions whatsoever you'd at most get local outbreaks, not an all out epidemic wave.

charlie14

Hmmzis wrote: »

That's the thing, with adjusted human behaviour you don't need the percentage to be 70%. The lower we can get the Re (the effective, not unrestricted), the lower the inflection ratio for "herd immunity". One thing to keep in mind here is that humans cannot be assumed a homogeneous mass of randomly moving entities. Not everyone is contacted by everyone, some people have less contacts, some more, that's why herd immunity as such is even possible without 100% vaccination and/or infection rates.

For effective herd immunity without a vaccine as far as I have seen from different case studies the level would need to be in the high 80% range. I cannot see that being achievable with this virus. In Ireland over 14% of our population is over 65.The pecentage for all others vulnerable would be high as well.I doubt even if we tried a 70% could be possible here.

charlie14

Hmmzis wrote: »

If the Re is below 1, there cannot be a further wave, assuming that value stays below 1.
Even at an infection ratio of 35% and no restrictions whatsoever you'd at most get local outbreaks, not an all out epidemic wave.

Our level is below one so with rapid testing results and contact tracing similar to South Korea, then should the same not be the case here. Local outbreaks and not an all out epidemic.

charlie14

Bit cynical wrote: »

I think the other thing charlie14 is not taking into account is that the instant the particular immunity figure is reached is not the point when the elderly and vulnerable can go about as normal. It is the beginning of the process by which the virus starts to diminish. Over time infections are reduced to a point where everyone can finally go outside.

The theory I always got but, I thought it a very risky strategy. What I do not see is with Sweden`s figures for Stockholm and their Ro number, when, or how, they will get to an appreciable level without a vaccine where everyone can finally go out.
It actually looks as if their population locked themselves down to near enough our level for the last number of weeks.

Bit cynical

charlie14 wrote: »

The theory I always got but, I thought it a very risky strategy. What I do not see is with Sweden`s figures for Stockholm and their Ro number, when, or how, they will get to an appreciable level without a vaccine where everyone can finally go out.
It actually looks as if their population locked themselves down to near enough our level for the last number of weeks.

I got the impression from your earlier answers e.g.:

charlie14 wrote:

If this 60 -70% can still pass it on to someone vulnerable how weakened it would be is questionable. (What I would find even more questionable is if you are immune how would you be passing it on) Either way to me it seems that without a vaccine it is no difference too the present for the vulnerable.

that you were considering only the point in time at which the 60 or 70% was reached and that you were not considering that at that point infections would still occur but their number would be less and less as time goes on.

I agree with you that if Sweden had been going for herd immunity as quickly as possible then the numbers are too low. However their restrictions are fairly mild compared with other countries relying largely on voluntary actions. They can gradually ease up on these as more and more people become immune.

Of course this depends on there being a fairly long lasting immunity - it need not be lifetime - to the virus. I think it is expected that there will be some immunity found but it is not yet known how long it will last.

I think the Swedish model could be considered a failure is if cheap effective treatments or a vaccine becomes available quickly. Then countries like New Zealand may be seen to have had the correct strategy of keeping the numbers of infections low at all times, but it is too early to tell.


Conversely if it takes a long time to develop treatments or vaccines, then the Swedish approach will be seen as a success since they have a much more sustainable approach than all-out lockdown.

Hmmzis

charlie14 wrote: »

Our level is below one so with rapid testing results and contact tracing similar to South Korea, then should the same not be the case here. Local outbreaks and not an all out epidemic.

Yes, that's very much correct. The early identification of active infections and possible contacts and the isolation of those will lower the Re with lesser behaviour adjustments needed, requiring an even lesser proportion of the population to have acquired immunity. S Korea and Iceland have been very good doing that.

charlie14

Bit cynical wrote: »

I got the impression from your earlier answers e.g.:

that you were considering only the point in time at which the 60 or 70% was reached and that you were not considering that at that point infections would still occur but their number would be less and less as time goes on.

I agree with you that if Sweden had been going for herd immunity as quickly as possible then the numbers are too low. However their restrictions are fairly mild compared with other countries relying largely on voluntary actions. They can gradually ease up on these as more and more people become immune.

Of course this depends on there being a fairly long lasting immunity - it need not be lifetime - to the virus. I think it is expected that there will be some immunity found but it is not yet known how long it will last.

I think the Swedish model could be considered a failure is if cheap effective treatments or a vaccine becomes available quickly. Then countries like New Zealand may be seen to have had the correct strategy of keeping the numbers of infections low at all times, but it is too early to tell.


Conversely if it takes a long time to develop treatments or vaccines, then the Swedish approach will be seen as a success since they have a much more sustainable approach than all-out lockdown.

I was using the 60-70% because the poster I was replying to seems to be off the opinion that is the the magic number, reaching it is imminent it, and Sweden will never need a vaccine.

Sweden`s restrictions may be milder, but I cannot see they would have been effective here. There was government advice about distancing, crowd numbers and travel. Week-end before the lockdown pubs, clubs, beaches and scenic public areas were thronged. Even though their restrictions were milder than ours from their numbers it seems to me that the population in the last few weeks locked themselves down to close to the extent of our mandatory restrictions.

Way to early to judge which strategy will be judged the best, but I believe deaths will also be a major consideration.

Bit cynical

charlie14 wrote: »

I was using the 60-70% because the poster I was replying to seems to be off the opinion that is the the magic number, reaching it is imminent it, and Sweden will never need a vaccine.

Sweden`s restrictions may be milder, but I cannot see they would have been effective here. There was government advice about distancing, crowd numbers and travel. Week-end before the lockdown pubs, clubs, beaches and scenic public areas were thronged. Even though their restrictions were milder than ours from their numbers it seems to me that the population in the last few weeks locked themselves down to close to the extent of our mandatory restrictions.

Way to early to judge which strategy will be judged the best, but I believe deaths will also be a major consideration.

Yes the number will depend on a lot of factors and it isn't know yet.


Yes I agree it may not work in other countries.

charlie14

Hmmzis wrote: »

Yes, that's very much correct. The early identification of active infections and possible contacts and the isolation of those will lower the Re with lesser behaviour adjustments needed, requiring an even lesser proportion of the population to have acquired immunity. S Korea and Iceland have been very good doing that.

I`m not sure what the plan is, or if there is one, but a contact-tracing app would be a major help in that.

Kermit.de.frog

Cupatae wrote: »

Think this sums up 99% of the covid debates.

It's a small group of posters in the restrictions thread who thank each other for posting mostly straight up lies and propaganda regarding the measures.

Fair enough they may be badly impacted themselves but it's a small minority.

Most people are fine and doing the right thing.

Ginger n Lemon

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

It's a small group of posters in the restrictions thread who thank each other for posting mostly straight up lies and propaganda regarding the measures.

Fair enough they may be badly impacted themselves but it's a small minority.

Most people are fine and doing the right thing.

CSO unemployment figure of 28.2% is not a lie.

I am unsure whether majority are fine. I ll take your word for it?

Posted 4 days ago:

"Official figures show the Sweden's economy shrank by just 0.3pc in the first three months of 2020, a far smaller decline than most forecasters and its central bank expected. The Riksbank had pencilled in a drop of between 0.8pc and 1.8pc.

The smaller scale of the fall contrasts with record slumps seen elsewhere across the Eurozone over the quarter as governments imposed much more stringent measures. France's economy tumbled 5.8pc, Italy's 4.7pc and Spain's by 5.2pc,
"

Their pandemic unemployment? not even 10%. Could be 10% in the summer. 18% less than Ireland.

https://www.reuters.com/article/health-coronavirus-sweden-unemployment/swedish-unemployment-rate-could-reach-10-by-summer-labour-board-idUSL5N2C2300

From economic perspective they are doing 2.5 times better in terms of unemployment and 5 times better in terms of GDP, from deaths perspective they have 20 deaths more per million than Ireland. 0.002% more deaths per million than Ireland.

Seems like Sweden's approach is by far more superior. (and they havent been turning people away for their cancer screening/appointments)

biko

Tegnell: face masks are very unpleasant
https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.expressen.se%2Fnyheter%2Fcoronaviruset%2Ftegnell-munskydd-ar-valdigt-otrevliga%2F


Sweden's leading epidemiologist suddenly coughs into his hands
during Corona press conference

dubrov

It is strange that the Swedish currency has not really strengthened against the Euro during the pandemic.

If Sweden is to take a lighter hit on the economy you would expect the currency to strengthen (that is unless the Swedish government are buying foreign assets on the quiet).

charlie14

Ginger n Lemon wrote: »

CSO unemployment figure of 28.2% is not a lie.

I am unsure whether majority are fine. I ll take your word for it?

Posted 4 days ago:

"Official figures show the Sweden's economy shrank by just 0.3pc in the first three months of 2020, a far smaller decline than most forecasters and its central bank expected. The Riksbank had pencilled in a drop of between 0.8pc and 1.8pc.

The smaller scale of the fall contrasts with record slumps seen elsewhere across the Eurozone over the quarter as governments imposed much more stringent measures. France's economy tumbled 5.8pc, Italy's 4.7pc and Spain's by 5.2pc,
"

Their pandemic unemployment? not even 10%. Could be 10% in the summer. 18% less than Ireland.

https://www.reuters.com/article/health-coronavirus-sweden-unemployment/swedish-unemployment-rate-could-reach-10-by-summer-labour-board-idUSL5N2C2300

From economic perspective they are doing 2.5 times better in terms of unemployment and 5 times better in terms of GDP, from deaths perspective they have 20 deaths more per million than Ireland. 0.002% more deaths per million than Ireland.

Seems like Sweden's approach is by far more superior. (and they havent been turning people away for their cancer screening/appointments)

5 times better in terms of GDP.
That figure really does stand out.

Especially as the Riksbank, Sweden`s Central Bank believes otherwise.
Their predictions depending on how long the spread of infection continue and how long the restrictions implemented to slow it down are in place were best case scenario GDP contracts by 6.9%, worst case GDP contracts by 9.7%.

I.M.F. predictions for Germany 6.5%, Britain 7.0%, France 7.2%, Spain 8.0%,Finland 6.0%, Denmark 6.5%
I do not see anywhere there that Sweden`s GDP is predicted to contract 5 times less than any of those.

Best case scenario according to their own Central Bank their GDP is being predicted to contract more than some of their immediate neighbours that imposed lockdowns

Blut2

charlie14 you realise the post you're trying to question is listing official figures from the Riksbank, and linking to them, yes? Your "predictions" and unsourced speculation don't exactly stand up next to them.

charlie14

Blut2 wrote: »

charlie14 you realise the post you're trying to question is listing official figures from the Riksbank, and linking to them, yes? Your "predictions" and unsourced speculation don't exactly stand up next to them.

Those figures, far as I can tell, were for the first 3 months of 2020 ?

What I have posted is a CNBC market reports article from 30th.April of the Swedish Central Bank predictions for their GDP for 2020. Both best and worst case scenarios.
I also posted the I.M.F. 2020 GDP predictions for other countries that imposed lockdowns, including neighbours of Sweden.

Trading Economics also has Sweden`s GDP annual growth rate 2020.
Q1 0.5%, Q2 -12.6%, Q3 -5.2%, Q4 -5.8%

Make of them what you will, but governments when making economic policy decisions for the future do not do so on past growth figures.They do so on future projections of their Central Bank primarily.

Just speculation on my part, but on a recent post as to why the Krona was not trading higher than the euro, those predictions that Sweden`s GDP for the year was going to be no better than other European countries would go a long way to explaining that.

biko

25921 cases
3220 dead
12.4% of known cases have passed

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

niallo27

biko wrote: »

25921 cases
3220 dead
12.4% of known cases have passed

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

Very stable numbers last 10 days, still early days, I think you may be correct that Sweden had the right approach all along.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

tobefrank321 wrote: »

The bovine coronavirus vaccine is a weakened live virus vaccine.

The problem with live virus vaccines is they cannot be given to pregnant women or those with weakened immune systems, which kind of invalidates the whole purpose of a coronavirus vaccine. You'd be dependent on herd immunity to do its job.

So it might not be as straightforward as the bovine vaccine.

It doesn’t invalidate it at all. All vaccine programmes factor in herd immunity. The herd immunity we’ve been hearing about in the media for the last six weeks is an unfettered, untested type of herd immunity but for every vaccine introduced, there are people who can’t get it because of allergies or being immunocompromised. With vaccines, the herd immunity idea is that enough people are immune to the infectious agent because they are vaccinated that it stops it spreading those who couldn’t be vaccinated. Healthy people getting the vaccine in high enough numbers will protect those who can’t get it by stopping the virus in its tracks.

This pandemic seems to have given people the wrong idea about herd immunity. It seems like people think of it pejoratively now because of the unrestrained version of it that was briefly touted by certain countries.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

tobefrank321 wrote: »

Young people with underlying conditions.

Really? I must tell the healthy, non-smoking, late 30s woman I know who has been in on an ventilator for a month and who is also having her heart supported and who will likely never return to the health she enjoyed previously that COVID19 is no biggie.

She’ll survive which is great but her health will not be what it was and that is nothing to be flippant about. It’s not just about survival.

Kermit.de.frog

charlie14 wrote: »

5 times better in terms of GDP.
That figure really does stand out.

Especially as the Riksbank, Sweden`s Central Bank believes otherwise.
Their predictions depending on how long the spread of infection continue and how long the restrictions implemented to slow it down are in place were best case scenario GDP contracts by 6.9%, worst case GDP contracts by 9.7%.

I.M.F. predictions for Germany 6.5%, Britain 7.0%, France 7.2%, Spain 8.0%,Finland 6.0%, Denmark 6.5%
I do not see anywhere there that Sweden`s GDP is predicted to contract 5 times less than any of those.

Best case scenario according to their own Central Bank their GDP is being predicted to contract more than some of their immediate neighbours that imposed lockdowns

I hope you don't expect a response to these facts?

sydthebeat

niallo27 wrote: »

Very stable numbers last 10 days, still early days, I think you may be correct that Sweden had the right approach all along.

stable?? LOL

stably high

Ginger n Lemon

I think people in this thread are unaware of Sweden's death numbers per year.

Below for full picture.

2019: 89k

2018: 92k

2017: 92k

2016: 91k

2015: 91k

Covid so far? 3k.

I think this thread does highlight tendency to look at covid deaths and be like "oh wow. terrible, they are all dying there". When in reality the 3k deaths from covid will easy roll into the 91k or 88k.

Given that there has never been a vaccine developed for a human corona virus, their strategy can be justified at any stage.

While we might spend next 18 months feeling effects of 2nd wave, 3rd wave, 4th wave etc.

Vinnie222

Ginger n Lemon wrote: »

I think people in this thread are unaware of Sweden's death numbers per year.

Below for full picture.

2019: 89k

2018: 92k

2017: 92k

2016: 91k

2015: 91k

Covid so far? 3k.

I think this thread does highlight tendency to look at covid deaths and be like "oh wow. terrible, they are all dying there". When in reality the 3k deaths from covid will easy roll into the 91k or 88k.

Given that there has never been a vaccine developed for a human corona virus, their strategy can be justified at any stage.

While we might spend next 18 months feeling effects of 2nd wave, 3rd wave, 4th wave etc.

With only 26k affected in Sweden, if they was a 2nd wave, surely they will be in the same boat as other European countries ?

wakka12

Ginger n Lemon wrote: »

I think people in this thread are unaware of Sweden's death numbers per year.

Below for full picture.

2019: 89k

2018: 92k

2017: 92k

2016: 91k

2015: 91k

Covid so far? 3k.

I think this thread does highlight tendency to look at covid deaths and be like "oh wow. terrible, they are all dying there". When in reality the 3k deaths from covid will easy roll into the 91k or 88k.

Given that there has never been a vaccine developed for a human corona virus, their strategy can be justified at any stage.

While we might spend next 18 months feeling effects of 2nd wave, 3rd wave, 4th wave etc.

How do you possibly think it is represenatative to compare the number of deaths in an entire year to those from COVID over just 7 weeks?
Next mid-March, come back and look at those stats maybe and compare. Thousands more Swedish people will have died

I think this thread highlights a ridiculous compulsion to underplay the severity of an outbreak of a virus that thus far killed over 150,000 people in the European Union in 7-8 weeks.(with tens of thousands more undereported deaths), despite a lockdown which has almost entirely halted rate of infection growth the last month. Theres no downplaying those figures

biko

Regular deaths still occur, then you add covid deaths on top of that.

Ginger n Lemon

wakka12 wrote: »

How do you it is represenatative to think a year of deaths is comparable to the number of deaths from COVID in 7 weeks?
Next mid-March, come back and look at those stats maybe and compare. Thousands more Swedish people will have died

I think this thread highlights a ridiculous compulsion to underplay what the severity of an outbreak of a virus that thus far killed over 150,000 people in Europe Union in 7-8 weeks.(with tens of thousands more undereported deaths), despite a lockdown which has almost entirely halted rate of infection growth the last month. Theres no downplaying those figures

Its been proven that covid was in France in December.

Why would we be so certain that it made it's way to Sweden in mid March 2020?

I think it's been in Sweden a long time, if their officials believe their capital will have herd immunity this month.

It would be very impressive if their capital will reach herd immunity in the 7 weeks time frame you reference. (or even 10 weeks)

The thing to remember with death numbers is that deaths 100% will happen. A person who survived covid 19 in March, may unfortunately pass away with flu in October or November. At risk category is also a category that's hoovering around life expectancy. Their former chief epidemiologist believes that in the end there will be very little difference in total deaths, if any.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfN2JWifLCY&t=1s

wakka12

Ginger n Lemon wrote: »

Its been proven that covid was in France in December.

Why would we be so certain that it made it's way to Sweden in mid March 2020?

I think it's been in Sweden a long time, if their officials believe their capital will have herd immunity this month.

It would be very impressive if their capital will reach herd immunity in the 7 weeks time frame you are reference. (or even 10 weeks)

The thing to remember with death numbers is that deaths 100% will happen. A person who survived covid 19 in March, may unfortunately pass away with flu in October or November. At risk category is also a category that's hoovering around life expectancy. Their former chief epidemiologist believes that in the end there will be very little difference in total deaths, if any.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfN2JWifLCY&t=1s

Serum testing in several Europecountries has shown relatively low rates of infection. So there was some cases in France in December, it still was not widespread, otherwise many more people would have virus antibodies.

And I didnt say it only arrived in March in Sweden, but that is when the first official death was recorded. So it is from that point onward that you compare the number of covid deaths to other figures. Comparing the number of deaths in an entire year in Sweden to the official deaths from COVID over the course of two months is a bizarre and illogical comparison