Sweden avoiding lockdown

No idea what you are on about, the study referenced the Israeli study, it did not endorse it.

In the real world, people vaccinated 3-6 months ago encountered the vaccine and show superior protection versus the virus to those with natural immunity.

Your posts imply that natural immunity is superior in every respect to vaccines, that it does not wane and may be lifelong.

That is contradicted by the study I linked to and is without foundation.

I think natural immunity offers some protection, but I think people who have recovered from covid should still be taking a vaccine, though perhaps only a single dose.

Without question, it is far better for a society to encounter the virus with a highly vaccinated population rather than go for a 'herd immunity' strategy of letting it rip through a naive population, because of the additional deaths the latter strategy brings - as can be seen from Sweden's deaths versus its neighbours. More people would die in attaining natural immunity than via vaccination.

If we could isolate the kids and 20-30 somethings of the population from the rest, and let covid rip through them, it could have been done, but not in a multi-generational society.

Which is why I don't think Sweden's approach has any lessons for the rest of the world. That their strategy didn't lead to more deaths was down to:

(a) The voluntary compliance of the Swedish population as can be seen in the reduction in spending and travel during Spring 2020

(b) Being surrounded by low density neighbours such as Norway and Finland which took the virus seriously and buttressed Sweden - so Sweden in some respects had a free ride

(c) Sweden being a primarily low density country with many single person households

(d) Sweden's regional authorities intervening with restrictions when the herd immunity strategy was an obvious failure, even publicly rebuked by the King of Sweden

Whilst I would fully agree with the first half of your post, and wholeheartedly believe that vaccination is an imperative, I find the second half more questionable. For a start, I can’t help but find the constant quoting of the King of Sweden’s views to be particularly odd — and I’m always inclined to respond to that with a “so what?”. His view is no more compelling than had it come from the mouth of Freddie Ljungberg, any other random Swede, or someone on Boards.

At the end of the day, your post could equally be read as a criticism of the very modelling on which much of the international criticism of the Swedish strategy was based — i.e. models which predicted that even with restrictions they would still have had several tens of thousands more deaths. If the modelling was wrong, the modelling was wrong — if the modelling did not accurately capture circumstantial aspects or take into account the obvious fact that a disease affecting a vulnerable class would effect behavioural changes among that class and those around them, then the modelling was wrong. It then leads to the question of how accurate the modelling was elsewhere in the world, and with that the necessity of the extremity and longevity of measures adopted. It’s all well and good saying “oh the models were wrong because these things happened” — but then how applicable might that be in Ireland etc ?

In the end, the outcome of Sweden’s strategy can hardly be waved about as a joyous success story, but by no means either was it the abject catastrophe it was supposed to be. They had a sizeably elevated mortality rate in 2020 but nothing in the same stratosphere of what we were told to expect — while it remains to be seen come the end of this year whether figures will show that mortality displacement was also at play and that the Covid crisis accelerated mortality in a cohort that might not have much left on the years of life lost (YLL) scale.

Unreal isn't it, and people think they fucked up.I'm pretty sure there is plenty of countries who would of swapped places with them in a flash if they could.

I never held out a lot of hope there would be, and even less so now when we see the speed at which this virus can mutate. Hopefully this variant is an indicator of where this virus is going. Even if it is much more transmissable it does appear to cause less serious health problems. With a bit of luck it will become like flu where an annual shot of vaccine will be sufficient. Especially when the present vaccines were not even designed to combat delta, but were still doing well against it and the boosters seem to be doing well against omicron. Happy Christmas to yourself and everyone.

oh the neighbours thing again - ad nauseam

Charlie with all respect yes there may be countries closer to Sweden that had fewer deaths with harsher restrictions. So I get it from your point of view Sweden could have done better and they didnt so they're bastards.

But that does not invalidate the point being made. Its just your silly little get out deflection trick so that you dont have to engage with the argument being made. You're fooling no one.

Sweden is doing a LOT better than countless countries where their governments live out their little totalitarian wet dream. And they treated their citizens and 'the science' respectfully and not as their playthings.

Calamari I have no need to attempt to fool anyone. The figures for Swedish deaths when compared to their neighbours, as do comparing our deaths to those of neighbour, prove the point that the initial strategy of both Sweden and the U.K. on restrictions caused needless deaths. If you and some others wish to ignore that, then you and they are fooling nobody other than yourselves.

At least the U.K recognised the folly and changed course, but not before following a strategy has left them with twice our deaths. Sweden has many multiples more deaths compared to their neighbours and only changed their strategy in October 2020 when the local authorities put a stop to the insanity while Tegnell and crew were in denial of Sweden being in the midst of another wave, planning to increase the numbers at public events, opening up nursing homes to visitors and telling the elderly and vulnerable it was safe to mingle in general society.

The king of Sweden publicly declared it a mistake following the strategy. Even Tegnell, one of the main architects, was eventually forced to admit it was immoral. That some here are still attempting to defend it is beyond bizarre.

Seems you may have hit the Christmas day sherry a bit early bren. If you have, enjoy, but I do not have even the vaguest idea what you are saying.

If you never understood Carl XVI Gustaf of Sweden publicly declaring it a mistake following the strategy, try looking on it as Elisabeth II of the U.K. doing the same for context.

Sweden for 2020 did not have average deaths. They had excess deaths over 10% greater than 2019.

If there is one thing we can thank Sweden for it`s showing us the insanity of people who should have know better using their population in an immoral experiment that cost lives.

Thankfully their regional health authorities as soon as they got back the power to make their own decisions, forced the government to sideline those that really should have known better, yet who were still determined to continue with opening up while being in denial that Sweden was in the midst of another wave when all metrics showed the strategy had been a failure.

As if our elected one's were any better... LEO sorry, meant LOL