I didn’t really expect you to keep an open mind - but you might at least have come up with a less tortured metaphor. It may be too early to declare any kind of success; but the Swedish health system has never come close to being overwhelmed, large numbers of people are being tested while the % of people testing positive is extremely low, they haven’t imprisoned millions of people in their own homes nor shut down their economy, so their government’s approach clearly hasn’t been a total failure. And whatever point they have reached in the cycle, it’s probably not the same as that of their neighbours.
The Norwegian health system never came close to being overwhelmed, either. Neither did the Danish health system or the Finnish health system. And those countries also saw a smaller economic decline. And, again, 10x fewer dead people and probably 10x fewer people with long-term health issues. By what measure do you believe that Sweden succeeded relative to its closest comparitors? Edit: read this thread about how Sweden actually brought the virus under control: it was by doing the exact same things as other countries, after they abandoned the catastrophic failure that was their 'herd immunity' approach:
Sweden have had, so far, 86,194 cases and 5,843 deaths. Norway have had 11,801 cases and 265 deaths. Denmark have had 18,924 cases and 629 deaths.
Covid isn’t over, in Sweden or elsewhere. That’s my point. This has a long way to run, and we’re not seeing any success stories in the countries that enforced the strictest lockdowns.
COVID isn't over. But how does allowing a very high per-capita death rate earlier work in Sweden's favour at all? They are no less at risk of another wave than any other country with similar rates of urbanization, public transport utilization, etc. The reality is that Sweden succeeded when it started doing what its neighbours had been doing from the start: encouraging work-from-home, minimizing gathering sizes, mask usage, and widespread testing. Y'know, the social distancing stuff the experts were recommending, not the herd immunity strategy that got all the attention and which they quietly abandoned. They just won't admit that the initial strategy was a profound failure because, well, who stands in front of a microphone and admits that thousands of people died because you went against the advice of most of the experts? And make no mistake: herd immunity failed. Miserably. At one point, they were claiming it would be achieved by June in Stockholm. They later admitted that, rather than achieving that mark (which would have taken 60-70% of the population having gotten COVID), they were actually closer to 17% which offers effectively zero protection against another wave.
Yeah, not sure that’s actually what happened. But as usual, you are determined to fit the evidence to your conclusion rather than the other way around. I’m still not entirely convinced that turning 100% of the population’s lives upside down was the best way to protect the 1% who were most vulnerable, but maybe time will prove otherwise. It hasn’t, to my satisfaction, done so yet.
Explain what has happened, then. Explain why, on one side, you have virtually all of the medical professionals, and on the other you have a handful of members of the Swedish government, and the British tabloids. And why the latter side is more persuasive, beyond wanting to believe them. I'm sorry. If, against all evidence, you think this is a problem of 'just' 1% of the population (and that's a huge many people, when you're talking about deaths), there simply isn't anything to discuss here. You're clinging to a fantasy where if we really wanted to, we could just click our heels and go back to normal. Sorry. Not possible.
Lockdown was the correct thing to do once Covid spread rapidly throughout the country. The UK was unusual in not having the virus mainly located in one or two areas. The death rate showed lockdown was essential and the idea of herd immunity was abandoned (for the moment). Opening up the economy was also essential once the disease was under some control and treatments had improved as the disease was better understood. Now some kind of balance is being attempted...definitely not the time to go party.
I’m not clinging to any fantasy, I’m trying to keep an open mind. I’m sure you’ve very quickly jumped to the erroneous conclusion that I am belittling the seriousness of this Virus. Maybe; but perhaps no more than you are belittling the impact locking people in their homes and locking down entire economies, has had and will continue to have on every aspect of people’s lives. But you’re probably right; there isn’t anything to discuss here. Your mind was obviously made up months ago.
For about the 20th time: Sweden's economy not only didn't do better than its neighbours, it did worse. Because while other places were opening up, Swedes were still having to practice fairly strict social distancing because the disease was still running rampant Same goes for the psychological impact: Denmark and Norway were opening back up at a time when Sweden was actually tightening restrictions. Beyond wearing a mask in crowded places and not eating at indoor restaurants, my life has been broadly speaking normal for quite some time now. Believe me: I'm certain my mental and physical wellbeing is better off than it'd be if I was spending every night wondering whether my friends and family will be the next to die. Because I've been reading the opinions of the people who actually know things, almost all of whom the same opinion. The few medical professionals who were on the opposite side made assumptions that have been proven to be terribly wrong. That leads me to believe that, yes, we should probably continue listening to the people who actually know things. Alternatively: maybe someone who now has to have "Play up Pompeii" as a username and the 0-9 scoreline as an avatar might not be the best judge of probabilities.
So long as you’re alright then In case you didn’t know though; we’re all going to die. What matters is how we spend the time we have.
I'm alright because, like Sweden's neighbours, we took it seriously and effectively eradicated the disease, rather than just shrugging and resigning ourselves to it running rampant for months on end. Things aren't totally normal, but there is no option for totally normal. The closest one can come involves stamping out the disease as best possible and then opening back up, not closing our eyes and pretending that it's normal while people die.
Except Sweden’s neighbours haven’t eradicated the disease. Which brings us back to where we started; I’m not entirely convinced (note choice of words) that draconian lockdowns have been the best response to a problem that they clearly haven’t solved. Especially when the bill for not solving them is still in the post. Edit; and it certainly is normal for people to die. Historically, it’s entirely abnormal for people to routinely expect to live to 90.
Perhaps we should have covid parties like chicken pox parties. Except it is not only about who lives or dies, but quite a few who survive have long-standing health complications. So herd immunity but 0.01% will die and 2% will continue with a lower quality of life and ongoing costs to the state (numbers made up). I admit I can carry on WFH and I am reasonably happy in my lockdown, but my daughter is about to go off to university....... Some risks are not worth taking when you replace the numbers with the names of people you know.
Look at what constitutes spikes in those countries, though. Their worst days are similar to Sweden's better days over the past few months. And you're acting as if they've been stuck in draconian lockdowns all along: Norway's lockdown was lifted at the start of May. Finland started lifting theirs in mid-April. Denmark phased theirs out in May and it was fully lifted in June. At that point, Sweden was seeing increased social distancing, because the disease was still running wild. For the places that actually took this **** seriously rather than trying to wish it away, things got better. And yeah, second waves will happen, and it might be necessary to snap back to lockdowns for a spell. And there are some elements (like sit-down indoor service in a restaurant) that simply won't be advisable until this is over. But, again, that's how you get back to something that actually approximates normalcy in a reasonable timeframe.
Taking this out of the conversation and possible context it was being used... This is excellent. Probably the best comment on Covid I’ve read in 6 months
