Has Sweden Found the Right Solution to the Coronavirus?

[Shawnster]

Quote

 

Unlike other countries, it has so far avoided both isolation and economic ruin.

 

Lots of people are rushing to discredit Sweden’s approach, which relies more on calibrated precautions and isolating only the most vulnerable than on imposing a full lockdown. While gatherings of more than 50 people are prohibited and high schools and colleges are closed, Sweden has kept its borders open as well as its preschools, grade schools, bars, restaurants, parks, and shops.

 

Sweden has courageously decided not to endorse a harsh quarantine, and consequently it hasn’t forced its residents into lockdown. “The strategy in Sweden is to focus on social distancing among the known risk groups, like the elderly. We try to use evidence-based measurements,” Emma Frans, a doctor in epidemiology at Sweden’s Karolinska Institute, told Euronews. “We try to adjust everyday life. The Swedish plan is to implement measurements that you can practice for a long time.”

 

The problem with lockdowns is that “you tire the system out,” Anders Tegnell, Sweden’s chief epidemiologist, told the Guardian

 

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/04/coronavirus-response-sweden-avoids-isolation-economic-ruin/

 

I don't know how I feel about this article.  Something seems off. Something I can't put my finger on. 

 

However, the facts do speak for themselves and the facts show Sweden is low on the list of infected countries. 

[Bob]

4 hours ago, Shawnster said:

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/04/coronavirus-response-sweden-avoids-isolation-economic-ruin/

 

I don't know how I feel about this article.  Something seems off. Something I can't put my finger on. 

 

However, the facts do speak for themselves and the facts show Sweden is low on the list of infected countries. 

The "rush to discredit" their approach is predicated on (1) fear and (2) those are probably mostly places that were late or slow to respond, so heavy-handed lockdowns were necessary to mitigate the spread since the containment phase had long passed. Facts prove that early action is critical to avoid costly lockdowns. 

 

The Swedes, as far as I understand it, have a different relationship with their government officials and visa versa, than we have in the US. There is trust there. Here there is no trust. Trust goes a long way in citizens implementing government recommendations without the use of force. People here value personal rights and civil liberties above all things. 

 

But the Swedes are using an approach all countries can; use mild recommendations to get compliance, and then gradually use stricter ones when you don't get compliance. 

 

And lockdowns more importantly tire the citizens out, which fuels rebellion, especially when the government is merely buying time to beef up the healthcare system (which the US is doing) and preaches "slow the spread" (not stop the spread), which means they are wrecking the system just to delay the inevitable, that contracting the virus is something 97 percent of us will not avoid.

 

Just another nail in the coffin of the effectiveness of human rulership. 

[Bob]

Oh and I would like to know the extent of testing in Sweden. That's a huge factor in the amount of actual cases. 

[Bob]

The article does make a point I didn't think of. There is something to be said about giving the government and public health officials, basically, near absolute and unilateral powers to impose severe lockdowns concerning the spread and transmission of a disease they have little understanding of, because of the deep consequence of drug and alcohol abuse, suicides, domestic violence, and unprecedented job loss, when companies are forced to close and people are forced to isolate. 

 

For the sake of the US Government's relationship with its citizens, Sweden NEEDS to be wrong. Because if the Swedes are correct, the US can forget about ever asking its citizens to "shelter in place" which would have been proven to have accomplished NOTHING but completely wreck the lives of tens of millions of people. 

[Shawnster]

What doesn't make sense to me is the number of cases.

Quote

 

If social isolation worked, wouldn’t Sweden, a Nordic country of 10.1 million people, be seeing the number of COVID-19 cases skyrocket into the tens of thousands, blowing past the numbers in Italy or New York City? As of today, there are 401 reported COVID-19 deaths in Sweden.

 

The really good news is that in Sweden’s ICU census, which is updated every 30 minutes nationwide, admissions to every ICU in the country are flat or declining, and they have been for a week. As of this writing (based on currently available data), most of Sweden’s ICU cases today are elderly, and 77 percent have underlying conditions such as heart disease, respiratory disease, kidney disease, and diabetes. Moreover, there hasn’t been a single pediatric ICU case or death in Sweden — so much for the benefits of shutting down schools everywhere else. There are only 25 COVID-19 ICU admissions among all Swedes under the age of 30.

 

Sweden is developing herd immunity by refusing to panic. By not requiring social isolation, Sweden’s young people spread the virus, mostly asymptomatically, as is supposed to happen in a normal flu season. They will generate protective antibodies that make it harder and harder for the Wuhan virus to reach and infect the frail and elderly who have serious underlying conditions. For perspective, the current COVID-19 death rate in Sweden (40 deaths per million of population) is substantially lower than the Swedish death rate in a normal flu season (in 2018, for instance, about 80 per million of population).

 

For herd immunity to work then a larger portion of the population needs to be exposed to the virus.  Therefore, Sweden should be showing larger numbers of infected cases.  That's the only way herd immunity works - through exposure.  

 

2 hours ago, Bob said:

Oh and I would like to know the extent of testing in Sweden. That's a huge factor in the amount of actual cases. 

I think this goes to the point I was thinking about.  They should have a high percentage of cases because they are letting more people be exposed to the virus.  Therefore, the question is how much testing is being done?   The data being reported is only being reported on cases confirmed via testing.

[Thesauron]

Nobody knows yet who is right or who is wrong.

 

Sweden has a long tradition of having specialised authorities where the organisations aren’t changed depending on who is in charge. This means that the Prime Minister cannot give these jobs to his friends or even easily fire people he does not agree with. And the governments usually listen to the advice of the expertise within these authorities. This means that their advice usually shapes policy, not the other way around. Good or bad? God’s Kingdom is mankind’s ONLY hope!

 

 

[Thesauron]

9 minutes ago, Shawnster said:

For herd immunity to work then a larger portion of the population needs to be exposed to the virus.  Therefore, Sweden should be showing larger numbers of infected cases.  That's the only way herd immunity works - through exposure.  

They hope to accomplish herd immunity by controlled exposure. Will this work? I don’t think anybody knows.

[Thesauron]

Sweden now has 591 confirmed COVID-19 deaths and 7693 confirmed infections. This was true as of 14:00 today.

[Tortuga]

35 minutes ago, Thesauron said:

Sweden now has 591 confirmed COVID-19 deaths and 7693 confirmed infections. This was true as of 14:00 today.

California has 4 times the population,  twice as many cases and almost half the number of deaths..

[Bob]

1 hour ago, Shawnster said:

What doesn't make sense to me is the number of cases.

For herd immunity to work then a larger portion of the population needs to be exposed to the virus.  Therefore, Sweden should be showing larger numbers of infected cases.  That's the only way herd immunity works - through exposure.  

 

I think this goes to the point I was thinking about.  They should have a high percentage of cases because they are letting more people be exposed to the virus.  Therefore, the question is how much testing is being done?   The data being reported is only being reported on cases confirmed via testing.

You're right on both counts. That's called "critical thinking". And that is partly why some don't like Sweden's idea, as I heard someone say its the "herd immunity experiment". They have denied this obviously, as its appears to be a pretty sinister idea to put people in harm's way in like a "trial and error". 

 

But they have safeguards in place. It appears the US is bracing to the same thing when they beef up the healthcare system. Let the young and healthy out, while keeping "social distancing" in play, and hope some immunity can be achieve in lieu of a vaccine. 

 

I think its really the only way to go seeing how stopping the spread is virtually impossible now. 

[carlos]

I think it's undeniable that lockdown decreases the number of infections. If you stay home and don't get in touch with anyone there is no way you can be infected.

 

Also, achieving herd immunity by isolating those with higher risk of dying and letting the rest get infected is only doable if you have a very strong healthcare system that will be able to take care of many hundreds of people at once at hospital ERs. The US doesn't have that, and neither does Spain, but probably Sweden can afford that.

 

Now the effects on the economy and which of the two evils is preferable, that's a different discussion.

[Bob]

26 minutes ago, carlos said:

I think it's undeniable that lockdown decreases the number of infections. If you stay home and don't get in touch with anyone there is no way you can be infected.

 

Also, achieving herd immunity by isolating those with higher risk of dying and letting the rest get infected is only doable if you have a very strong healthcare system that will be able to take care of many hundreds of people at once at hospital ERs. The US doesn't have that, and neither does Spain, but probably Sweden can afford that.

 

Now the effects on the economy and which of the two evils is preferable, that's a different discussion.

I think the "herd immunity" approach does have some serious moral questions. Because you're basically allowing people to get infected, hoping most of them don't die.

 

Yet that depends on the make up of the people. Like Italy has an older population (I believe the second oldest on the planet by average age) and they have a societal norm of smoking at very young ages, which a recipe for preexisting, serious, conditions. 

 

So that may not be ideal there. 

[Bob]

4 hours ago, Thesauron said:

They hope to accomplish herd immunity by controlled exposure. Will this work? I don’t think anybody knows.

Its a risk. You can have a serious, uncontainable and uncontrollable outbreak on your hands. Its a HUGE risk for another reason as well.. the virus can mutate into a deadlier strain when its code adapts to the Immunol response. 

[Shawnster]

17 hours ago, Thesauron said:

They hope to accomplish herd immunity by controlled exposure. Will this work? I don’t think anybody knows.

According to the article, though, Sweden is not controlling exposure near as much as other countries.  All the countries with stay at home or shelter in place orders are controlling exposure.  Sweden's is different in that it's not as restrictive as other countries.

 

If it's not as restrictive, then that means there should be more cases of exposure.

[Bob]

1 minute ago, Shawnster said:

According to the article, though, Sweden is not controlling exposure near as much as other countries.  All the countries with stay at home or shelter in place orders are controlling exposure.  Sweden's is different in that it's not as restrictive as other countries.

 

If it's not as restrictive, then that means there should be more cases of exposure.

I think what is meant by "controlled exposure" is choosing to allow the young and healthy out and telling the more vulnerable to stay home. You're controlling who's exposed. Lockdowns or "shelter in place" orders are designed to limit exposure as much as possible to all citizens. 

[Shawnster]

13 hours ago, Bob said:

I think the "herd immunity" approach does have some serious moral questions. Because you're basically allowing people to get infected, hoping most of them don't die.

 

I dunno.  There does seem some merit in the herd immunity approach.  Isolate the ones that are most at risk.  

 

Kinda like people in the states having "chicken pox" parties.  While these have been discredited in recent years, many people did this throughout history.  Expose the children to chicken pox, let them get sick and get over it, then move on with life.

 

I think the thing is in the case of Covid-19 is that it's typically not that deadly to young healthy people.  

[trottigy]

The key is the testing IMO.

 

And this is what is missing in vast portions of America. They have no idea who does or doesn't have this. They don't know who to quarantine, etc.

On May 1 our boss sent out a message from the Emergency Operations Center (EOC) saying that all City employees were going to get tested. Then a day letter he corrected himself saying – only those with symptoms will get tested. I am hearing similar in other states – only those with major symptoms that have to be hospitalized are being tested.

 

If the only people getting tested are those who likely have it and most of the rest of the people aren’t – this is going to be a long 3 or 4 months as people return to “normal” and social distancing disappears as people stand in lines or go out to diner, etc. Then those that are carriers with low symptoms will be infecting everyone else.

 

It’s a crazy world, eh? I can’t wait for Jehovah to take full control!!

 

 ‘Yes, I am coming quickly.’”

“Amen! Come, Lord Jesus.”

 

[Bob]

3 minutes ago, trottigy said:

The key is the testing IMO.

 

And this is what is missing in vast portions of America. They have no idea who does or doesn't have this. They don't know who to quarantine, etc.

On May 1 our boss sent out a message from the Emergency Operations Center (EOC) saying that all City employees were going to get tested. Then a day letter he corrected himself saying – only those with symptoms will get tested. I am hearing similar in other states – only those with major symptoms that have to be hospitalized are being tested.

 

If the only people getting tested are those who likely have it and most of the rest of the people aren’t – this is going to be a long 3 or 4 months as people return to “normal” and social distancing disappears as people stand in lines or go out to diner, etc. Then those that are carriers with low symptoms will be infecting everyone else.

 

It’s a crazy world, eh? I can’t wait for Jehovah to take full control!!

 

 ‘Yes, I am coming quickly.’”

“Amen! Come, Lord Jesus.”

 

Or those with NO symptoms. Its a case of no matter what we do, it won't change the fact people will get infected. So yep, "sheltering in place" is just delaying the inevitable. 

 

Crazy. Like you said. Come Lord Jesus. 

[Lee49]

"The key is the testing IMO."    -   not always 100% correct

https://www.livescience.com/covid19-coronavirus-tests-false-negatives.html

 

"Conventional diagnostic tests for the novel coronavirus may give false-negative results about 30% of the time, meaning people with an active COVID-19 infection still test negative for the disease, according to news reports."

[Thesauron]

According to the article, though, Sweden is not controlling exposure near as much as other countries.  All the countries with stay at home or shelter in place orders are controlling exposure.  Sweden's is different in that it's not as restrictive as other countries.
 
If it's not as restrictive, then that means there should be more cases of exposure.

They are controlling it by the measures and recommendations they put into place. The authorities claim that shutting down the entire society and requiring mandatory isolation of everyone is a last resort that doesn’t have the desired effects. Instead, they want people to maintain distance, they have also banned large crowds and some other things. Is this a good approach? It is a political decision that we remain neutral to. As Witnesses, we follow the guidance from the authorities and also the Governing Body. The Governing Body asks us to quarantine if the authorities requires us to.

[Thesauron]

I think what is meant by "controlled exposure" is choosing to allow the young and healthy out and telling the more vulnerable to stay home. You're controlling who's exposed. Lockdowns or "shelter in place" orders are designed to limit exposure as much as possible to all citizens. 

They also recommend people not to travel even within the country. People are adhering to that quite well. One of the biggest travelling holidays is coming up, and a great majority of the regular travellers are choosing to stay at home this year. In fact, the recommendation is to stay at home as much as possible. No hard rules are set up. There is also a recommended distance of 1,5 to 2 meters whenever possible.

Trump said in his press conference that the Swedes are suffering. They are not. It is a bit of a hassle to navigate this new order of things. But New York seems to be much worse. Here is a response from The Local:

https://www.thelocal.se/20200408/we-dont-share-donald-trumps-opinion-about-swedens-coronavirus-situation

[Bob]

8 minutes ago, Thesauron said:

They also recommend people not to travel even within the country. People are adhering to that quite well. One of the biggest travelling holidays is coming up, and a great majority of the regular travellers are choosing to stay at home this year. In fact, the recommendation is to stay at home as much as possible. No hard rules are set up. There is also a recommended distance of 1,5 to 2 meters whenever possible.

I didn't know about that restriction. But while I agree with your point, I would like to know how many have been tested there.

[Thesauron]

I didn't know about that restriction. But while I agree with your point, I would like to know how many have been tested there.

Me too. I don’t have those figures.

They prioritise two categories at the moment: (1) Persons in need of hospital care. (2) Staff in healthcare and elderly care with suspected covid-19.

This disease of which many have very mild symptoms leads to extensive under-reporting. Thus, there are significantly more cases than have been reported. Targeted efforts are made to investigate how the disease is spread in the country, for example, collected influenza samples are also tested for covid-19.

[BenJepthah]

On 4/7/2020 at 6:33 AM, Shawnster said:

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/04/coronavirus-response-sweden-avoids-isolation-economic-ruin/

 

I don't know how I feel about this article.  Something seems off. Something I can't put my finger on. 

 

However, the facts do speak for themselves and the facts show Sweden is low on the list of infected countries. 

Huh! That’s pretty much the rout that I proposed a week or so ago. 

[BenJepthah]

On 4/8/2020 at 11:36 AM, Lee49 said:

"The key is the testing IMO."    -   not always 100% correct

https://www.livescience.com/covid19-coronavirus-tests-false-negatives.html

 

"Conventional diagnostic tests for the novel coronavirus may give false-negative results about 30% of the time, meaning people with an active COVID-19 infection still test negative for the disease, according to news reports."

Part of that result is just poor test samples. People really resist having a toothpick diameter plastic rod stick through their nose into the back of their throat. It’s uncomfortable. And those doing it are often also uncomfortable.