Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Sweden avoiding lockdown

Options
1319320322324325338

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 15,150 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    I posted the stats on those aged 65 years and over just recently. They are not difficult to find. If you do not believe them then go find the stats yourself. You do not seem short on time from the amount of irrelevant data you keep posting here.



  • Posts: 4,727 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Every country had vaccines in 2021... Were Sweden's much more powerful or something?

    Why on earth would we not look at Sweden's or any countries overall performance?



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,150 ✭✭✭✭charlie14



    Practically every country other than Sweden went with lockdown to mitigate against the spread of the virus and had faith, or at least hope, that a vaccine could be developed to counter it. Sweden threw the scientific approach out the window and went for naturally acquired herd immunity.

    Early 2021 Sweden like everywhere else began administering vaccines. At that point the parameters to equate one strategy against the other went out the window as well. This has resulted in when comparing like for like on two such different strategies, the only data that is applicable is that between the start of the pandemic in 2020 and January 2021 before vaccines kick in. It`s really not that difficult to understand.



  • Posts: 4,727 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    So then we should have all came out of lockdown in early 2021. But we stayed heavily restricted for another year. Sweden didn't.



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,150 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    That is a completely different arguement where you are now attempting to throw in an imponderable to the mix that was not there for the first two waves when Sweden was solely chasing herd immunity and their neighbours were using lockdown to mitigate the spread hoping vaccines would be the answer rather than naturally acquired immunity. The data for that period,highlighted by the excess deaths during the height of the two waves in that period shows that Sweden`s strategy did not work.

    Sweden`s strategy was all based on get infected once and you are immune. That has been clearly shown to be incorrect. The statistics from those occupying hospital and ICU beds show clearly that from the disproportionate numbers of unvaccinated occupying those beds the best protection from serious illness or death is vaccination. To now attempt to convolute a narrative when Sweden were using vaccines like everywhere else, as a defense of their attempt at naturally acquired herd immunity as opposed to lockdown, really does have no validity when we know the stats when they were using just their herd immunity strategy.



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 4,727 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    If a country is looking to achieve natural immunity, its a no brainer that they'll do worse in the short term before seeing the mid - longer term benefits. Every other country kicked the can down the road with lockdowns.

    Over time though, we can see that things in Sweden went quite well. Better than most countries in Europe.

    And some of their neighbours are starting to do worse than them for deaths in 2022.

    Its a marathon Charlie, not a sprint. And right now Sweden look like they're in a strong enough position with a good blend of vaccine and immunity.



  • Registered Users Posts: 16,708 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    But not compared to the countries most similar to Sweden...

    We should have lifted lockdowns sooner after the vaccination rollout occurred, August rather than an attempt in October when Delta was prevalent, Denmark would be the model to follow for any other country, lockdowns in place, fast push for vaccines, open up quickly when a high enough % are vaccinated.

    And everywhere in Europe is in a strong position with vaccines, the acquired immunity isn't needed when you have vaccines as the acquired immunity has a chance of severe disease and death.



  • Posts: 0 ✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Correct me if I am wrong here, but didn't Denmark have a large wave (and lots of death) after high levels of vaccination (i.e. earlier this year). Peak of deaths in that wave was early March, at which point ~82% fully vaccinated and ~62% been boosted). I am not sure how to share the google 'widget' but here are links (https://www.google.com/search?q=denmark+covid+deaths&rlz=1C1GCEA_enIE758IE758&oq=denmark&aqs=chrome.0.69i59j69i57j69i59j69i60j69i65l2j69i60j69i61.736j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8) (https://www.google.com/search?q=denmark+covid+vaccination+rate&rlz=1C1GCEA_enIE758IE758&oq=denmark+covid+vacc&aqs=chrome.0.0i512l2j69i57j0i512l7.3488j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8)



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,150 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    You are ignoring a few very important fact in that.

    1. Sweden was talking back in 2020 of herd immunity being imminent any day now for Stockholm based on their numbers infected. Even their Ambassador to the U.S. got in on the act. When the antibody test results were revealed they were nowhere even close. In fact Spain who were using lockdown, antibody test results were higher for Madrid. The whole concept was flawed from the outset basing herd immunity on the perceived numbers infected. Amazonas,one of the worst hit areas, from test results of a much larger number actually infected from their first wave, believed at the start of their second wave they had achieved herd immunity. Two days after publishing this belief in medRxiv they went back into lockdown due to rising numbers.
    2. What Amazonas and many others found was that acquired immunity was short term, and not what the Swedish strategy was based on, become infected, survive, and you are immune for life. What has been proven effective is getting vaccinated and as the vaccines effect grows weak, get boosters. Your attempting to link acquired immunity to be some major benefit to antibody levels alongside vaccines, gets blown out of the water on that basis alone. We know that acquired immunity levels also drop, so for your theory to carry any weight would necessitate playing continuous Russian roulette with the virus hoping to survive and reboot your antibody levels each time.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,426 ✭✭✭FintanMcluskey


    Every time you post this rubbish that Sweden choose herd immunity you always omit one crucial fact.

    The Swedes had no choice, the constitution in Sweden is so robust, and built around the protection of basic rights to freedom, the mitigation measures could not be introduced.

    Countries like Ireland have a constitution built on wet toilet paper, where basic rights could be suspended indefinitely at the choice of over paid civil cervants. Completely supported by a significant portion of the citizens who couldn't understand the dangers of Covid



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 15,150 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    Is this what you are down to now Fintan, that legally Sweden could not use lockdown ? As the yanks say Fintan your a dollar and 2 years 5 months short on that arguement.

    The Swedes could have imposed lockdown using The Public Order Act (1993) or the Contagious Disease Act (2004). To further back up their powers to impose lockdown their parliament passed the Temporary Covid-19 Act January 8th 2020, but rather foolishly imo did not use it and let it laps, but then ended up scrambling around to get it re-introduced, end of 2020 as far as I recall.



  • Registered Users Posts: 110 ✭✭therapist3


    And will have appreciably lower cancer et al deaths in years to come because they were mature without the paranoia



  • Registered Users Posts: 30,582 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    Cancer services and screenings were interrupted and down in Sweden also

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Posts: 4,727 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    If Ireland had reintroduced the mask mandate earlier this year before cases dropped, you can bet your house that everybody would be talking about how the masks were responsible for the drop.

    The experts and the media got a little excited in 2020. They were desperate to sell us misery porn and convince us that we'd have insane death rates if we didn't lockdown hard. Thanks to Sweden, things got a little problematic for them. They just couldn't explain how things didn't go badly in Sweden.

    As time goes on, those same people struggle to explain how countries with no masks/restrictions have no more or no fewer cases/deaths than other countries with strict restrictions in place.



  • Registered Users Posts: 16,708 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    They did, which would be an argument for the Irish approach of not opening up last year, important thing at that point was that the hospitalisations were relatively under control (even accounting for the fact that the unvaccinated were taking up a lot of space relative to their small numbers). Denmark had 1/3 the deaths of Sweden with about 60% of the population even with that spike at the end, had Sweden followed Denmarks approach, 9000 more people would be alive today in Sweden.

    Crucially, Denmarks economy has fared better than Sweden's over the pandemic (and Ireland's is a whole level above again, if we are talking about economic impacts, Ireland is the country to follow for the next pandemic, but other factors do impact on the economy).



  • Posts: 0 ✭✭ [Deleted User]


    But my question was really this - and I asked it earlier (was not really answered) - why did Denmark not lockdown (earlier this year, at the emergence of the spike - they in fact did the opposite), once they saw that hospitalisations were increasing (although, as you stipulate - relatively under control)? It would have saved a lot of lives - no?

    Ireland is the country to follow for the next pandemic

    This statement concerns me immensely on civil liberties grounds. Ireland instated the most despotic and at times irrational restrictions throughout this pandemic (in the EU). Also, this approach only works for rich nations with low levels of poverty.

    I accept that liberty is not absolute, but I am afraid to say also that the preservation of human life is not absolute (or else we'd have locked down whenever hospitals were previously under pressure/flu season - we'd also be locked down now - people still die daily of COVID). In public health matters, there are no absolute right or wrongs - there are pros and cons.

    As a wise man once said, he who knows only his side of the debate knows little of that.

    I also accept that my views are in the minority but I think we need to look at the civil liberties side of the debate and we need to accept that just because the majority want protection from the state, the state can (and did) create rules/laws that are extremely oppressive to those who have a different point of view. Aside from light touch rules on mass gatherings and indoor dining/pub rules - Sweden did not create such rules. This has been my whole argument from day one.

    Post edited by [Deleted User] on


  • Registered Users Posts: 15,150 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    Very few now have a problem explaining how things went badly in Sweden while they were following their herd immunity strategy in 2020, but there are still a limited few in denial refusing to see that the statistics clearly show and are now also in denial of the findings of Sweden`s Coronavirus Commission.

    From Sweden`s Coronavirus Commission "The government should have assumed leadership of all aspects of crisis management from the outset" the commission said in the report, adding that the government had too one-sided dependence on assessments made by the Public Health Authority. "In February-March 2020 Sweden should have opted for more rigorous and intrusive disease and prevention control measures." adding that "Earlier and additional steps should have been taken to try as far as possible to slow the spread of the virus in the community" The Commission also found that shopping centers, restaurants, public indoor swimming pools, as well as indoor cultural and sporting events should have been cancelled already in March 2020. However this was not possible due to legislation that was not amended until mid April 2021. (see recent reply to Fintan on that) "This was, as we stated in our second interim report, to late" The Commission said in their final report.

    Sweden`s Public Health Agency also did an about face on mask wearing on public transport in December 2020 due to pressure from local authorities, but made it it so convoluted it only added to the confusion. The Commission finding on mask was "The Public Health Agency should not have dismissed the use of masks as a disease prevention and control measure in indoor settings and on public transport"

    At this stage I`m afraid all your arguements in defense of Sweden`s strategy have not just ran out of road, they have crashed into the wall at the end of that road.



  • Posts: 0 ✭✭ [Deleted User]


    The commission also concluded (https://www.thelocal.se/20220225/swedens-pandemic-strategy-fundamentally-correct-coronavirus-commission-2/):

    Sweden’s pandemic strategy ‘fundamentally correct’: Coronavirus Commission"


    EDIT:

    “It was fundamentally right to rely on issuing advice and recommendations,”

    This is what I have been arguing for - voluntary measures.

    “The state should not limit the freedom of the individual more than is necessary to limit a dangerous sickness.”

    Of course, it is possible to criticise any strategy (as I said, public health has no right or wrong absolutes, only trade-offs). I would criticise the Irish approach for being too long, too strict and ridiculous in banning zero (or minimal) risk activities outside of 5km/20km/county radius for long periods of time. Fining hillwalkers/beach goers was wrong - I wrote to my TD's back in jan 2021 that this was insane - outdoor transmission proved to be less of a danger (minimal risk activities). Exercise should be encouraged, not banned (or only permissible in small area from home).



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,150 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    Other than a generalisation of "fundamentally correct" there really is nothing specific to back up when you consider their finding on the restrictions the believe should have been imposed and when. restriction for a few that anywhere else other than this thread would aquate to lockdown, and their findings on mask wearing make a pig`s ear of Sweden`s mask wearing policy.

    I would disagree on public health having no right or wrong absolutes. For me public health policy should be based on ethics and science. Sweden`s herd immunity strategy was based on neither. Even Tegnell one of the main architects of their herd immunity strategy was eventually forced to concede that chasing herd immunity was unethical, and the data proved, not just in Sweden, but in anywhere else it was initially attempted or anywhere that believed they had achieved it, that in the words of Tegnell`s predecessor Annika Linde "like a dream with very little basis in reality"



  • Registered Users Posts: 16,708 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    Well, Denmark did reintroduce restrictions over Winter once they saw what was happening with the Delta variant, it did come too late to have any major impact (due to the lag in deaths after cases rise) and by then Omicron was becoming prevalent, once Omicron was seen to have a lower CFR than Delta, reintroducing restrictions didn't make much sense with a highly vaccinated population. Had Delta remained dominant, it's likely they would have been back to full lockdown.



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 ✭✭ [Deleted User]


    RE Denmark - are you sure (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-60215200 - 'Denmark Covid restrictions lifted despite increase in cases')?

    RE Omicron - Correct, we pretty much locked down until vaccine - that was the plan - we can also see that in the various SAGE briefing documents in the UK - stipulation (from SAGE) was that if the lockdown was not in place fully until such time as vaccine was available and widely distributed, further waves would have (and actually did) occur and; in their words ‘potentially produce an epidemic comparable in scale to what would have been seen had no interventions been adopted.’

    What actually happened though, and historians will report this - was that we locked down until vaccine AND (a big AND) a milder strain. It's important to note, that if Omicron never arrived - we'd probably have ended up in lockdown again. Milder variants is how pandemics were overcome previously in history where lockdown of healthy/uninfected people was not enacted (at least not in a democracy), or even an option (WFH not possible prior to invention of modern comms).



  • Posts: 0 ✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Not sure specifics are needed when the words "fundamentally correct" are used? Also, ethics and science are not absolute.

    Ethics and morality are relative and plural. (look at China's response, then look at Sweden's - different codes of morality).

    All evidence in science is provisional until such time as further evidence/knowledge reinforces or refutes it. There are broad, legitimate disagreements within the realm of scientific discovery.

    Post edited by [Deleted User] on


  • Registered Users Posts: 110 ✭✭therapist3


    We effectively cancelled ours

    Breastcheck is now at 4yrs, that means countless women will die because paranoia about an unavoidable airbirne illness that we now carry on like it's no threat at all



  • Registered Users Posts: 16,708 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    Eh, yea, why are you referencing a post-omicron news article from February? What's your agenda here?

    December 2021:

    Denmark and Norway rush in stricter Covid measures as cases soar | Denmark | The Guardian

    And again, managed it far better than Sweden in death rates and in economic performance, why would anyone copy the Sweden 2020 model given the disaster it was?



  • Posts: 0 ✭✭ [Deleted User]


    No agenda, aside from facts.

    I simply wondered (and nobody has answered) why they didn't lockdown as the cases (and deaths) were rising?



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,150 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    Their Coronavirus Commission were very specific stating that, "In Feb-March 2020 Sweden should have opted for more rigorous and intrusive disease and preventative control measures" as well as stating "Earlier and additional steps should have been taken to try as far as possible to slow the spread of the virus in the community". Anywhere else that equates to "lockdown should have been used like everywhere else" but inexplicably for a few here when it comes to Sweden that is not the case.

    The Swedish Coronavirus Commission were also very specific on masks "The Public Health Authority should not have dismissed the use of masks as a disease and control measure in indoor settings and on public transport" You cannot get much more specific than that.

    The ethics in health care have been defined for close on two thousand years by the Hippocratic Oath of "do no harm". Tegnell even admitted that chasing herd immunity was unethical, though why he did not know that when he put the strategy in place is a puzzle. But then perhaps he thought that people would still believe the lie that the strategy was not about herd immunity. Something that a few here still attempting to believe despite all the evidence to the contrary



  • Posts: 0 ✭✭ [Deleted User]


    If you are referencing the Hippocratic Oath - but lockdowns are enormously harmful - surely you don't dispute that?

    Ultimately, the report concluded 'fundamentally correct'. With caveats, agreed - but correct nonetheless.



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,150 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    Ireland was not unique in cancelling cancer check appointments during Covid. Sweden like most other countries also did. Made sense in that for people at high risk due to low immune levels, the last place you wanted them to be was in clinical setting with a risk of Covid crossover. Even when breastcheck appointments were resumed, (2021 I seem to recall), I remember reading a newspaper report that a huge percentage where not turning up to them.



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,751 ✭✭✭✭Goldengirl


    Yeah . So hard for some to finally admit that Ireland didn't do too badly on the economic front as well as excess deaths .

    It is hard for some to admit that they were wrong all along bashing Ireland and lauding Sweden !



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 13,751 ✭✭✭✭Goldengirl


    Yes lockdowns are very harmful astronomer .

    But comparing that to the unethical abandonment as evidenced by Tegnells disregard for them , better to be locked down and survive than let it RIP . In every sense if that word.



Advertisement