Sweden Keeps on Winning Path!

[PeteEU]

Nice cherry picking:

Belgium has 11.6 million people with 60.094 total cases and 9,805 deaths.

So if lockdowns were supposed to work, why does Belgium have almost double the deaths compared to herd immunity Sweden?

Coronavirus Update (Live): 14,969,351 Cases and 615,853 Deaths from COVID-19 Virus Pandemic - Worldometer

Because Belgium is an international hub of trade and travel, Sweden is not.

Sent from my Honor 8X

 

[Peter King]

The dilemma for us in the US is that our healthcare facilities would be overwhelmed and we literally do not want people dying on the street.

Well some republicans might be willing to sacrifice the elderly like has largely happened in Sweden (for some less economic pain) but most countries are not really willing to do such a dastardly thing.

 

[Visbek]

Look, when other European countries of western Europe also suffer similar or worse outcomes as Sweden, the question isn't why Sweden is number 5, but why did four other Western European countries that used lockdowns, masks, etc. rank in positions 1 through 4, followed by Sweden (5th) and France (6th)?

Good grief. We've been over this before.

Nations like Italy, Belgium and France got hit early, and were not sufficiently prepared. The virus was circulating in those nations in late December and early January, though no one knew it. Part of the lack of preparation was their own fault, but some was not -- we knew very little about the virus. The public also didn't respond well -- e.g. when news about an imminent lockdown was leaked days early in Northern Italy, some people left the area -- and took the virus with them.

Sweden's approach was no better -- in many ways, it was worse, including more people getting infected on a per-capita basis. People and companies also voluntarily self-distanced when case numbers started to rise. There is no magical "S-Curve" that explains the declines in cases, that's a result of social distancing and other measures.

And in the context of Western Europe, it is something to brag about given the tradeoffs. Unlike these other countries Sweden did very little to mitigate, let alone suppress, the pandemic and did as well or better than most of the major countries of Western Europe (Germany being the exception).

No, it didn't. On a per-capita basis, it did worse with cases and deaths than the EU as a whole, or numerous similar nations. Its economy was not spared, either -- though unlike the US, its government had actual safety nets that have kept people solvent and technically still employed (as the government is paying the salaries of furloughed employees).

In the process they have achieved near herd immunity....

BWAHAHAHA

No, dude. Just... No.

1) They are nowhere NEAR herd immunity. They have 78,000 confirmed cases; even if that's undercounting by a factor of 10, that is only 7% of Sweden's population. 40% is the minimum required for herd immunity, and it could easily be 50-60%.

2) We still don't know if herd immunity can be attained in the first place without a virus. You have no excuse not to know that by now.

It's a model the US should have followed.

lol

Yes, it's a model currently being followed by Florida, Texas, Arizona, and numerous other states. Got a tip for you: It's not working out so hot.

 

[danielpalos]

Well some republicans might be willing to sacrifice the elderly like has largely happened in Sweden (for some less economic pain) but most countries are not really willing to do such a dastardly thing.

We could be upgrading our economy to help mitigate pandemics and enable commerce to operate more conveniently. One petition for redress of grievance is that air filtration systems should be upgraded to the best technology available as a priority and that healthcare facilities are the best place to start building defensive capabilities for future pandemics. Metadata for the general welfare not the general warfare!

 

[minnie616]

6 weeks from when do you mean?

Time Line

February 4: First coronavirus case confirmed in Belgium. It's a woman who is one of nine Belgians returning from the city of Wuhan in China.

March 11: First three coronavirus-related deaths reported in the country. The WHO declares a "global pandemic".

March 12: The federal government adopts the first measures in the fight against Covid-19 by restricting certain activities.

March 17: The Wilmès II government is established. It is a minority government with special powers, set up for six months to deal
with the crisis. On the same day, the Prime Minister announces strict lockdown measures, effective from the following day until April 5.

Read more

Info from:


Page not found | Institut Montaigne

Side note

By contrast Michigan had a stay at home order 2 weeks after our first 2 cases were confirmed.

 

[Risky Thicket]

Comparing one Scandinavian to other Scandinavian countries is cherry picking? Hrmm...

Anyway, here's the answer, as far as I could find for you...

Coronavirus: Why so many people are dying in Belgium - BBC News

Excellent article! Thanks, Nate.

 

[Risky Thicket]

The dilemma for us in the US is that our healthcare facilities would be overwhelmed and we literally do not want people dying on the street.

Yep, I was wondering when someone would bring that up. A number of variables haven't been considered. One is healthcare.

Sweden has universal healthcare. If the US went balls to the wall for herd immunity just as Sweden did, while not having nor relying on universal healthcare, could the US expect death rates similar to Sweden's?

 

[Peter King]

Time Line

February 4: First coronavirus case confirmed in Belgium. It's a woman who is one of nine Belgians returning from the city of Wuhan in China.

March 11: First three coronavirus-related deaths reported in the country. The WHO declares a "global pandemic".

March 12: The federal government adopts the first measures in the fight against Covid-19 by restricting certain activities.

March 17: The Wilmès II government is established. It is a minority government with special powers, set up for six months to deal
with the crisis. On the same day, the Prime Minister announces strict lockdown measures, effective from the following day until April 5.

Read more

Info from:


Page not found | Institut Montaigne

Side note

By contrast Michigan had a stay at home order 2 weeks after our first 2 cases were confirmed.

The first case might have been on the 3rd of February, but he came from Wuhan and did as far as is known not someone who infected others. He was better by the 15th of February.

The second case was on the 29th of February, he came back with the virus from France.

The first deaths were as you wrote on the 11th or March. On the 17th of that month Belgium instituted a limited lock down. On the 20th it closed non-essential border traffic.

So as there was no need to go into lock down on the 3rd of February (isolated case from Wuhan). And within 18 days of the second infection they instituted a limited lock down. And earlier a travel ban from Italy was instituted for schools and on the 13th schools already closed and the bars/restaurants were closed.

So not sure as the 6 weeks waiting until a lock down is accurate. You will not close a country for 1 case coming from Wuhan IMO.

The problem started when the schools started up. In Belgium the vacation from carnaval period ended on March the 1st of this year. And just like in the Netherlands and Germany that is when infected people started coming home from their skiing vacations in Italy/Austria. Then they started infected people and that is when the problem started in Belgium so about 2.5 weeks after the problems started they locked down.

 

[danielpalos]

Yep, I was wondering when someone would bring that up. A number of variables haven't been considered. One is healthcare.

Sweden has universal healthcare. If the US went balls to the wall for herd immunity just as Sweden did, while not having nor relying on universal healthcare, could the US expect death rates similar to Sweden's?

It would take a lot more capacity than we currently have. What is the short term solution to get there from here?

 

[Airyaman]

This thread seems like a dick measuring contest by people who have little skin in the game.

 

[minnie616]

The first case might have been on the 3rd of February, but he came from Wuhan and did as far as is known not someone who infected others. He was better by the 15th of February.

The second case was on the 29th of February, he came back with the virus from France.

The first deaths were as you wrote on the 11th or March. On the 17th of that month Belgium instituted a limited lock down. On the 20th it closed non-essential border traffic.

So as there was no need to go into lock down on the 3rd of February (isolated case from Wuhan). And within 18 days of the second infection they instituted a limited lock down. And earlier a travel ban from Italy was instituted for schools and on the 13th schools already closed and the bars/restaurants were closed.

So not sure as the 6 weeks waiting until a lock down is accurate. You will not close a country for 1 case coming from Wuhan IMO.

The problem started when the schools started up. In Belgium the vacation from carnaval period ended on March the 1st of this year. And just like in the Netherlands and Germany that is when infected people started coming home from their skiing vacations in Italy/Austria. Then they started infected people and that is when the problem started in Belgium so about 2.5 weeks after the problems started they locked down.

Thanks you for sharing.

As soon as Michigan had 2 confirmed cases a state of Emergency was declared.

Within in the weeks all k-12 schools Including public, private and boarding schools were closed.

2 weeks after the 2 cases. Michigan was locked down except for essential business.

I read that most of the deaths In Belgium were in care homes and they were not confirmed cases.

With a population of approximately 11 million inhabitants, Belgium has reported more than 9,000 coronavirus-related deaths, i.e. the highest ratio of deaths per inhabitant in Europe. However, this sad record is not a sign of a failure of the health system. It is mainly due to the chosen measurement method. All the people who have died in care homes since the beginning of the crisis have been counted as coronavirus victims, even though they have not all been tested. On May 22, of the 9,186 people who had died until then, 48% died in hospitals and 51% in care homes. The deaths recorded in hospitals are almost all confirmed cases, while the deaths in care homes cover both confirmed (24%) and suspected cases (76%). Despite the high degree of transparency it implies, this accounting method has been staunchly criticized for the potential damage it could do to Belgium's international reputation during this crisis.

In order to ensure the figures are accurate, the government decided to massively and quickly increase the number of tests carried out, especially in care homes. The Belgian government focused first and foremost on hospitals, fearing a situation similar to that in the east of France, where there was a serious shortage of intensive care beds. However, the fact that deaths in care homes were only included in the statistics at a late stage might suggest that the "Belgian coronavirus tragedy" occurred mostly in the country’s care homes.

From:

Europe Versus Coronavirus – Belgium: Successful Crisis Management Despite Political Fragility

 

[Peter King]

Thanks you for sharing.

As soon as Michigan had 2 confirmed cases a state of Emergency was declared.

Within in the weeks all k-12 schools Including public, private and boarding schools were closed.

2 weeks after the 2 cases. Michigan was locked down except for essential business.

I read that most of the deaths In Belgium were in care homes and they were not confirmed cases.



From:

Europe Versus Coronavirus – Belgium: Successful Crisis Management Despite Political Fragility

In Belgium (and to some degree in the Netherlands) they counted "oversterfte" which is excess deaths (when translated to English). If you have, for example, week 13 in which normally (made up numbers) 400 people die during an average week in care homes. Now if you suddenly have 649 deaths then you have "excess fatality" and the Belgians mostly counted these deaths to the corona virus death number.

And Belgium has a very big problem, it actually is several governments in 1 country. One has a Flemish government, a Wallonia government, a federal government and then there is Brussels which houses the EU government. It is a hugely difficult country to govern.

 

[CaughtInThe]

where are the real pro-LIFE posters??

 

[maxparrish]

Among 48 European countries, Norway, Finland and Sweden are #3,4,5 for lowest population density (15, 18, 25 P/km^2 respectively).

Spain 94
France 119
Italy 206
UK 281
Belgium 383

So yeah, it makes more sense to compare Sweden to its neighbors, not only because of more similar cultures, travel patterns, use of public transit, but also because of similar population density.

Incorrect. Sweden does not have an evenly distributed population density. Most of it is confined to a much smaller area, with over 50 percent in the three even smaller regions. For epidemiological purposes it is those three regions were the hotspots are located and is, therefore, no different than any other similarly affected country of equal density and size.

That vast little populated territory exists within the borders of Sweden (or any other country) is beside the point.

 

[Slavister]

Incorrect. Sweden does not have an evenly distributed population density. Most of it is confined to a much smaller area, with over 50 percent in the three even smaller regions. For epidemiological purposes it is those three regions were the hotspots are located and is, therefore, no different than any other similarly affected country of equal density and size.

That vast little populated territory exists within the borders of Sweden (or any other country) is beside the point.

Nope - compare Swedish most populated cities to those other countries' most populated cities and population densities will again be MUCH larger in those other countries.

But nice try to misrepresent facts again.

 

[maxparrish]

Yes they are beating the U.S. in deaths per 100,000 and we can't have that. We need more deaths to catch up. Will you volunteer?

As you are the one feeling the "need", don't let my demurral dissuade you.

 

[maxparrish]

Nope - compare Swedish most populated cities to those other countries' most populated cities and population densities will again be MUCH larger in those other countries.

But nice try to misrepresent facts again.

First, were not speaking of most populated. We are speaking of the number and size of geographic areas whose population density is such that it can support a pandemic hotspot.

Second, there is nothing unique in Sweden's hotspots than in other western European countries. Be it Lombardy or Stockholm or Basque Country etc., the hotspots tend to thrive in areas of higher density, and whose size is fed (in part) by the total population available to infect in that area.

Third, there is no country whose experience is fully comparable to one other or a set of other countries. Anyone who cherry picks one or two countries in Europe for comparison is as "rational" as comparing the UK to Poland and Germany, or Belgium to Switzerland and Hungry. And this is equally true to Sweden vs. Norway:

https://www.thelocal.no/20200522/no...olled-infection-without-lockdown-health-chief

The head of the Norwegian Institute of Public Health believes Norway could have brought the coronavirus pandemic under control without a lockdown, and called for the country to avoid such far-reaching measures if hit by a second wave.

Camille Stoltenberg, the agency's Director General, told state broadcaster NRK that the agency's analysis now suggested less restrictive measures would have been sufficient.

"Our assessment now....is that we could possibly have achieved the same effects and avoided some of the unfortunate impacts by not locking down, but by instead keeping open but with infection control measures," she said.
B]The institute reported at the start of this month that the reproduction number had already fallen to as low as 1.1 even before the lockdown was announced on March 12.[/B]

This suggests that it would not have required heavy-handed measures such as school closures to bring it below 1 and so push the number of infected people in the country into a gradual decline.

So for whatever reason, the pandemic was already in natural decline anyway...which makes a comparison moot.

Therefore the best one can do is compare many experiences, on average, to one experience. Hence, as I stated, Sweden's experience is decent in that regard - neither great nor horrible in the western European nations. And whatever additional deaths they may have suffered by not adopting extreme measures it seems, save for their insufficient attention to old folks facilities, that they have mostly achieved their goal of herd immunity and mitigation of economic damage.

 

[maxparrish]

It is you who is short sighted. Sweden has a disgracefully high death rate compared to comparable countries. Comparing Sweden to Western European countries is nonsense.

Sweden's economy will suffer too, and the bit less debt is paid in blood of elderly people, great achievement :roll:

Emotive gushing is not persuasive. "Disgracefull", "a bit", and "nonsense" are entirely subjective and pejorative.

 

[maxparrish]

Good grief. We've been over this before.

And I have noticed that the quality of your posts drop in proportion to the realization that you are losing the debate (which is why I didn't bother to answer your last post, an unsupported rant, in another thread on the sunbelt states and covid).

It is completely irrelevant to my point if "Italy, Belgium and France got hit early, and were not sufficiently prepared." The point was that compared to these and other western European states "Sweden's approach was no" WORSE and in many way better, "including (getting) more people getting infected on a per-capita basis." so that their population will have a degree of herd immunity should a second wave it, and economic damage mitigated.

And your charts, by the way, are useless as evidence of anything other than your increasing frustration. You didn't bother to label any of the data or identify any of the origins of the individual plot lines. No one, other than you, have a clue what you are attempting to illustrate.

No, it didn't. On a per-capita basis, it did worse with cases and deaths than the EU as a whole, or numerous similar nations. Its economy was not spared, either --

Yes 1/2 of the EU did worse than that the EU average as a whole, that's called statistics. And in the case of Sweden and the 1/2 of Europe, the region of Western Europe, where the virus hit hardest Sweden's results were decent - better than some, not as good as others...as I already illustrated.

No, dude. Just... No.

1) They are nowhere NEAR herd immunity. They have 78,000 confirmed cases; even if that's undercounting by a factor of 10, that is only 7% of Sweden's population. 40% is the minimum required for herd immunity, and it could easily be 50-60%.

2) We still don't know if herd immunity can be attained in the first place without a virus. You have no excuse not to know that by now.

I've already tutored you extensively on this. Why don't you show even a thimble of more sophisticated understanding of herd immunity? For an education on herd immunity, the effects of heterogeneity, and why herd immunity is near for the most populated areas:

The progress of the COVID-19 epidemic in Sweden: an analysis | Climate Etc.

Original post at: The progress of the COVID-19 epidemic in Sweden: an analysis – Nicholas Lewis

Notwithstanding that a month ago antibodies were only detected in 6.3% of the Swedish population, the declining death rate since mid-May strongly suggests that the herd immunity threshold had been surpassed in the three largest regions, and in Sweden as a whole, by the end of April.

In the absence of a change in trends, it seems likely that the epidemic will peter out after a thousand or so more deaths, implying an overall infection fatality rate of 0.06% of the population (0.04% excluding COVID-19 deaths of people in care homes). This is broadly comparable to excess deaths from influenza infections over two successive above-average seasons, such as 2016–17 plus 2017–18.[17]

The absence of a lockdown order, with the government largely trusting people to make their own individual decisions regarding their behaviour, informed by their particular circumstances, has enabled life to continue with less disruption and reduction of people’s autonomy in Sweden than in most other western European countries. While this has also meant that COVID-19 deaths to date have been higher than in some (but not all) other countries in which a lockdown was imposed, the wider spread of the epidemic in Sweden means that the future COVID-19 outlook there is better.

The herd immunity threshold is likely lower at present than it would be if people were behaving completely normally; it may also be seasonally lower. However, the continuing spread of infections since the peak of the epidemic, particularly among young people, should provide some margin of safety against its resurging when behaviour returns closer to normal and summer ends. That is, there is less risk of a second wave of the epidemic next winter. And if a second wave occurs, fewer measures should be needed to control it than in other countries.

 

[Peter King]

Emotive gushing is not persuasive. "Disgracefull", "a bit", and "nonsense" are entirely subjective and pejorative.

Except the mortality among senior citizens is appalling. And "a bit" is very correct because if their neighbors are getting into recession, and all other customers of Sweden are in a recession, then Sweden will also fall into a recession. That is a fact. And I wrote "a bit" is because nobody will know exactly how much the damage will be.

And comparing Sweden with Western European countries like Belgium/Netherlands/France is nonsensical and it remains nonsensical for all the reasons I have mentioned in this and other threads about this fake "high five the Swedish for beating corona" story.

 

[spud_meister]

It's a model the US should have followed.

What are factors do you believe enabled Sweden's success, that are also present in the US? And why do you believe the situation in the US would be more comparable to Sweden than to say, Germany?

 

[The AntiDonald]

An interactive visualization of the exponential spread of COVID-19 | 91-DIVOC

Norway has 5.4 million people, with 9034 total cases and 255 deaths.
Finland has 5.5 million people with 7340 total cases and 328 deaths.
Sweden has 10.3 million people, with 78,048 total cases and 5639 deaths.

Stop peddling your accelerationist propaganda, max. You have no clue what you are talking about.

Some people just don't care about human life. We have someone in the WH that feels the same way.

 

[fireflygmf]

Remember when Sweden was "doomed" because it did very little to stop the pandemic? Recall all the forum hysteria a few months ago, the uninformed assumption that pandemics exponentially increase forever unless aggressive measures are taken to suppress it? Recall those of us who pointed out that most infections are polynomial (not exponential) with a sudden rise and then decline IF left "unsuppressed"?

Well, it looks like Sweden just proved team apocalypse embarrassingly wrong and the critics right.

Avlidna is "fatalities" in english
Sjukdomsfall is "cases" in english
per dag is "per day" in english

View attachment 67288272


View attachment 67288273


View attachment 67288274

Here are the key takeaways:

1. The classic Gompers S-Curve for unsuppressed pandemic cases has been achieved, as predicted by Team Reality.
2. The total deaths per day has reached near zero for this mainly unsuppressed pandemic, as predicted by Team Reality
3. The age distribution of deaths has been heavily weighted towards senior citizens (1/2 or more in rest homes) as predicted by Team Reality.
4. Sweden has attained herd immunity in AT LEAST two of its three largest areas of infection.

In fact, only 70 people below the age of 50 have died from COVID in Sweden.

The future? A hotspot might occur in a second wave in the fall/winter (Malmo area) because evidence for herd immunity for that area is uncertain. But there is little doubt that where 50 percent of Sweden's people live, in densely populated areas, herd immunity is nearly complete.

I think this is quite reassuring news. It shows that long term immunity can be reached, and it also demonstrates that the virus isn't nearly as lethal as once believed. It's very possible that the current 0.5% death rate may be revised further downward in the weeks to come, with the new data about T-cell long term memory regarding coronavirus. Worth noting that the study around T-cell memory was a Swedish study.

It must be said that Sweden did pay quite a heavy price to achieve this, so it has yet to be seen whether it was the optimal plan, considering there are 10x the fatality rate compared to it's neighbours, but if the upside is an otherwise healthy and undisturbed society, healthy economy, healthy children who were allowed to see friends at school etc. it may very well been the right decision. I think it depends how much longer this all lasts.

We should acknowledge that we all paid a price for the lockdowns. We need to all be honest and ask ourselves what the tipping point is... a life lost is a huge deal, because it is final, and the only life that person will ever have, yet on the flip side there is well-being that was compromised in children losing their face to face interactions at school, lost exercise through sport, impacted friendship, impacted families in that they could not see each other for long stretches, jobs lost, which could impact food for families, shelter for families etc. There is a large list to consider. There must be a tipping point somewhere, is 1 life worth 100,000 people giving up their salaries for 2 months? Are 10 lives worth that much? I really don't know the answers because it feels callous to consider, but in reality the tradeoffs are real, and have to be measured in some sane way.

 

[Slavister]

First, were not speaking of most populated. We are speaking of the number and size of geographic areas whose population density is such that it can support a pandemic hotspot.

Second, there is nothing unique in Sweden's hotspots than in other western European countries. Be it Lombardy or Stockholm or Basque Country etc., the hotspots tend to thrive in areas of higher density, and whose size is fed (in part) by the total population available to infect in that area.

Third, there is no country whose experience is fully comparable to one other or a set of other countries. Anyone who cherry picks one or two countries in Europe for comparison is as "rational" as comparing the UK to Poland and Germany, or Belgium to Switzerland and Hungry. And this is equally true to Sweden vs. Norway:

https://www.thelocal.no/20200522/no...olled-infection-without-lockdown-health-chief



So for whatever reason, the pandemic was already in natural decline anyway...which makes a comparison moot.

Therefore the best one can do is compare many experiences, on average, to one experience. Hence, as I stated, Sweden's experience is decent in that regard - neither great nor horrible in the western European nations. And whatever additional deaths they may have suffered by not adopting extreme measures it seems, save for their insufficient attention to old folks facilities, that they have mostly achieved their goal of herd immunity and mitigation of economic damage.

You keep reaching. Yeah, obviously more populated areas will get hit worse. Guess what, Sweden most populated areas are FEWER and LESS DENSE than other countries you had brought up for comparison. So, higher numbers in those other countries (UK, France, Italy, Spain) are NOT comparable to Sweden. Duh.

And sure, no 2 countries are identical, but Sweden is clearly much more like Norway and Finland than those other countries. So again, while comparison is not perfect it makes much more sense to compare Sweden to its much-more-similar neighbors.

As to your last point, her one opinion does not change the comparison and outcomes Sweden experienced vs its neighbors.

 

[Thoreau72]

Thanks, I was sharpening my pencil and doing some long division; made my head hurt!




Basically, Sweden has fewer knuckleheads than we do........

Or, Sweden is not led and controlled by corrupt politicians and bureaucrats as we are. They are not as prone to false flag medical hoaxes as we are.