The Swedish experiment of doing remarkably little about Covid-19

[Sandokan]

Sweden during the Pandemic | Cato Institute
Part 6
How Did It Turn Out?

Analysts from other countries—and even some Swedish scholars—predicted disaster. One influential Swedish model, inspired by the famous British Imperial College study, predicted that Sweden would have 20,000 COVID-19 patients needing intensive care by early May 2020 and a need for intensive care units around 40 times over capacity. By July 1, Sweden would have 82,000 COVID-19 deaths.20 The Imperial College model predicted between 66,000 and 90,000 deaths without mitigation efforts, and a peak demand of intensive care unit patients 70 times higher than capacity.21

Sweden’s public health agency planned for a worst‐case scenario that was much less pessimistic, suggesting a peak of around 1,700 intensive care patients in the middle of May. Still, that was more than three times the pre‐pandemic capacity in health care.

Sweden did suffer quickly and on a large scale. Swedish children have an annual weeklong winter break, during which many Swedish families go to the Italian and Austrian Alps for skiing. In 2020, Stockholm schools had this break from February 17 to February 23, at the same time that infections surged in northern Italy, so Stockholm families imported the virus on a large scale before it was considered a major concern and before lockdowns were even discussed in other Western countries. The importance of this timing is revealed by the fact that infections did not surge in Sweden’s second‐ and third‐largest cities, Gothenburg and Malmö, which had their winter break in the two preceding weeks.
Click link above for full article.

At the beginning Sweden had some of the highest covid death rates in Europe. Sweden failed to protect elderly nursing home residents adequately. More than 50% of all death are of people living in elderly care home, which was a significant reason that deaths were higher. By July 2020, Sweden had 517 covid deaths per million people, which was more than 5 times higher than Norway, Denmark, and Finland. Sweden’s approach to covid look like a fiasco. But by June 2023, Sweden had a total of 2,322 covid deaths per million people, only 40% higher than its Nordic neighbors. In reality, what happened is that at the beginning of the pandemic many countries with strict lockdowns, delay the deaths rather that preventing them. Sweden has been more successful with its relatively relaxed approach to managing the coronavirus pandemic than many of the EU countries and the U.S.

 

[MrNiceGuy]

At the beginning Sweden had some of the highest covid death rates in Europe. Sweden failed to protect elderly nursing home residents adequately. More than 50% of all death are of people living in elderly care home, which was a significant reason that deaths were higher. By July 2020, Sweden had 517 covid deaths per million people, which was more than 5 times higher than Norway, Denmark, and Finland. Sweden’s approach to covid look like a fiasco. But by June 2023, Sweden had a total of 2,322 covid deaths per million people, only 40% higher than its Nordic neighbors. In reality, what happened is that at the beginning of the pandemic many countries with strict lockdowns, delay the deaths rather that preventing them. Sweden has been more successful with its relatively relaxed approach to managing the coronavirus pandemic than many of the EU countries and the U.S.

The whole point of "flatten the curve" in the lockdown countries was to delay, but not prevent, deaths. When the curve is flattened, the peak is lowered, but the area under the curve remains the same because the decline is slower and lasts longer. The whole theory is that you're not going to stop the virus from spreading. All you can do is slow it down, so health care resources aren't as overstressed while it happens.

 

[Luce]

The whole point of "flatten the curve" in the lockdown countries was to delay, but not prevent, deaths.

Um, no. It was to keep everyone from needing a ventilator at the same time, hopefully saving lives in the process.

 

[MrNiceGuy]

Um, no. It was to keep everyone from needing a ventilator at the same time, hopefully saving lives in the process.

It might save some lives if the hospital system got overstressed, yes. No disagreement. But over time the numbers even out, because flattening the curve makes the pandemic last longer.

Oh, and the ventilator fad killed a shit ton of people. The medical profession, well meaning, made the error of calling for ventilators way way more than was needed. Anyone with much experience with hospitals knows that once that tube goes in and the longer it stays in, the odds of coming out of it go down dramatically.... I watched that happen in real time in 2020. It was like, watching a slow motion train wreck.

 

[Gimmesometruth]

The whole point of "flatten the curve" in the lockdown countries was to delay, but not prevent, deaths.

False. It was an attempt to not have the health system overwhelmed, ie, not be able to care for those infected, ie, prevent deaths.

Good grief.

 

[MrNiceGuy]

False. It was an attempt to not have the health system overwhelmed, ie, not be able to care for those infected, ie, prevent deaths.

Good grief.

Dude - the deaths are delayed - everyone's going to get it anyway. It just lasts longer.

Measures to flatten the curve might have an effect, but a lockdown only pushes the severe cases into the future —it will not prevent them. Admittedly, countries have managed to slow down spread so as not to overburden health-care systems, and, yes, effective drugs that save lives might soon be developed, but this pandemic is swift, and those drugs have to be developed, tested, and marketed quickly. Much hope is put in vaccines, but they will take time, and with the unclear protective immunological response to infection, it is not certain that vaccines will be very effective.
In summary, COVID-19 is a disease that is highly infectious and spreads rapidly through society. It is often quite symptomless and might pass unnoticed, but it also causes severe disease, and even death, in a proportion of the population, and our most important task is not to stop spread, which is all but futile, but to concentrate on giving the unfortunate victims optimal care. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31035-7/fulltext

 

[Gimmesometruth]

Dude - the deaths are delayed - everyone's going to get it anyway. It just lasts longer.

No, they are not, unless you are going to stupidly argue everyone that contracts covid will die with or without medical intervention.

You made a stupid argument to begin with, now you have doubled down as you are want to.

I suppose you will continue to dig that hole, it is your M.O..

 

[CaughtInThe]

False. It was an attempt to not have the health system overwhelmed, ie, not be able to care for those infected, ie, prevent deaths.

Good grief.

They don't do logic when they dig in.

 

[Gimmesometruth]

They don't do logic when they dig in.

Covidiocy+Libertarian revisionism=Lesson not learned.

 

[Sandokan]

Sweden during the Pandemic | Cato Institute
Part 7
Excess Deaths

However, the number of COVID-19 deaths is not as simple a statistic as it seems. Some countries did not count deaths outside hospitals. When patients died at home or in nursing homes they were not automatically included in the data sets. In Sweden, by contrast, authorities automatically checked the lists of people who were infected against the population register, so everyone who died and had tested positive for the virus was counted as a COVID-19 death, even if they died from a heart attack or a fall. So in effect, Sweden reported many who died with COVID-19, not of COVID-19.

Even in a country as similar to Sweden as Norway, deaths were counted as a COVID-19 death only if the attending physician concluded that COVID-19 was the cause of death and called the country’s public health agency to report it. “It is possible that Norway could have a higher number of registered deaths if we counted as Sweden,” said a doctor at Norway’s public health agency in April 2020.29

This is why so many scholars and decisionmakers insisted that it was necessary to wait for a broader perspective and look at excess deaths, that is, the number of deaths over a period compared to a previous period or an expected value. Now we have those numbers. When you look at excess deaths during the three pandemic years, 2020–2022, compared to the previous three years, you get a very different picture. According to this measure, Sweden’s excess death rate during the pandemic was 4.4 percent higher than previously. Compared to the data that other countries report to Eurostat, this is less than half of the average European level of 11.1 percent, and remarkably, it is the lowest excess mortality rate during the pandemic of all European countries, including Norway, Denmark, and Finland (see Figure 2).30
Click link above for full article.

In reality the number of people that died from covid was less than the number reported since “everyone who died and had tested positive for the virus was counted as a COVID-19 death, even if they died from a heart attack or a fall. So in effect, Sweden reported many who died with COVID-19, not of COVID-19.” The other Nordic countries only reported it when was concluded that COVID-19 was the cause of death. Due to this fact, Sweden real number of covid death per million will be closer to their neighbors. numbers.

 

[Sandokan]

Sweden during the Pandemic | Cato Institute
Part 8

Other Indicators

The Swedish economy is very open and export dependent, so when the world suffers, so does Sweden. However, Sweden’s economy did much better than comparable countries. The world economy was 2.9 percent smaller after 2021 than it would have been according to the Organization for Economic Co‐operation and Development forecast before the pandemic; the Eurozone 2.1 was percent smaller, and the U.S. economy 1.2 percent smaller. The Swedish economy was 0.4 percent bigger.36 This is even more exceptional since the Swedish government introduced much less fiscal stimulus than most other countries.

Of more importance for the future is the learning loss in countries where children were not allowed to go to school for months, and, in some cases, years. An international study in Nature Human Behaviour finds that on average, students lost out on more than a third of a normal school year’s worth of learning. Most worrying, those closures hit poorer families harder, as they could not compensate from school closures in the way socioeconomically advantaged families could.37

The U.S. Department of Education concluded that half of America’s students began 2023 a full year behind grade level in at least one subject. “We’re seeing that they’re starting the school year off about the same as they were last year,” says Rachel Hansen at the National Center for Education Statistics.38

In sharp contrast, Swedish elementary schoolers suffered no learning loss during the pandemic, according to a study in the International Journal of Educational Research that examined word decoding and reading comprehension. The scores were not lower during the pandemic and children from low socioeconomic backgrounds were not especially affected.39.
Click link above for full article.

Sweden took the right measures at the right time in response to Covid. Rather than enforce a nationwide lockdown, the Public Health Agency gave recommendations: to stay home if you've got symptoms, to keep a distance to others and to avoid public transport if possible. The government decided not to through the economy under the bus, and Sweden economy grew 3% in 2022. Avoiding the closing of schools and very long lock downs had positive consequences. Sweden young people are doing much better compared to those of other nations with strict lockdown.

 

[Ishm]

Dude - the deaths are delayed - everyone's going to get it anyway. It just lasts longer.

Incorrect! Lets compare Sweden to New Zealand for instance who used all the lockdown, social distancing etc ideas, and in fact spent much of the global covid peak period with covid totally eliminated by those measures and people living normal lives. Today Swedens covid death rate to date is 2680 per million. In NZ it is 1160. Controlling and delaying the spreading of covid allowed the NZ population to get vaccinated before they got ill. Hospitals were never under huge pressure. The sick got well cared for, and those that got covid after being vaccinated mostly never got ill enough to die or even need a hospital. Economic growth in the 2 countries in 2022 was almost the same.

 

[MrNiceGuy]

No, they are not, unless you are going to stupidly argue everyone that contracts covid will die with or without medical intervention.

Of course everyone doesn't die from covid. Covid is largely similar to a bad cold, for most people. It's a danger for the elderly, infirm and obese, generally speaking.

You made a stupid argument to begin with, now you have doubled down as you are want to.

I suppose you will continue to dig that hole, it is your M.O..

LOL - flattening the curve can certainly help to not overwhelm the hospitals. That's not to say that most everyone is not going to get Covid. Most everyone did.

The numbers would have been a ton better had authorities protected the elderly and infirm, instead of locking everyone down, and the ventillator craze was ridiculous. They snaked tubes down people's throats and many of those would otherwise have survived, because the practice for a while was to ventillate early, and those things are not great - they are sometimes necessary, but once that tube goes in, every doc will tell you it needs to come out as quickly as possibly..

 

[MrNiceGuy]

Um, no. It was to keep everyone from needing a ventilator at the same time, hopefully saving lives in the process.

You have no idea what you're talking about. But that is par for the Left's course.... y'all think we should ban dihydromonoxide.

It has become clear that a hard lockdown does not protect old and frail people living in care homes—a population the lockdown was designed to protect.
3 Neither does it decrease mortality from COVID-19, which is evident when comparing the UK's experience with that of other European countries.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31035-7/fulltext

If you look through media posts and if you truly listen to medical experts, they use specific language as it relates to "Flattening the curve" and they are not saying phrases like "reducing total infections" or "reducing total number of deaths."
The sole purpose of the "flatten the curve" movement is to allow the hospitals to care for the critically sick patients but it is anticipated that the Area under the Curve (i.e. the total number of infections) will remain close to the original estimates even with social distancing and "Safer at Home" legislation.

Why "Flattening the Curve"â doesn't necessarily mean fewer total cases of COVID-19

Since most states are rolling out prolonged (i.e 30 day) "Safer at Home" legislature and laws, I started to have some great conversations with people in my family and various past relationships.

www.linkedin.com

 

[Luce]

You have no idea what you're talking about. But that is par for the Left's course.... y'all think we should ban dihydromonoxide.

Okay. We're done.

Not because of your stupid condescension act, but because you trotted out that ancient never-was-funny-in-the-first-place dihydrogenmonoxide hackery.

Your appeal to ridicule and everything you post from here on out is dismissed.

 

[Luce]

But over time the numbers even out, because flattening the curve makes the pandemic last longer.

Holy shit. That's the stupidest ****ing thing I've ever heard, and I have to interview felons every day.

Huzzah! Your posts are dumber than those of a career criminal! Take a bow!

 

[Slavister]

COVID Deaths per million people (as of today)

Sweden vs neighbors (similar climate, culture, etc.)

Sweden 2680
Finland 2153
Denmark 1511
Norway 1204

source

 

[Luce]

It might save some lives if the hospital system got overstressed, yes. No disagreement. But over time the numbers even out, because flattening the curve makes the pandemic last longer.

Oh, and the ventilator fad killed a shit ton of people. The medical profession, well meaning, made the error of calling for ventilators way way more than was needed. Anyone with much experience with hospitals knows that once that tube goes in and the longer it stays in, the odds of coming out of it go down dramatically.... I watched that happen in real time in 2020. It was like, watching a slow motion train wreck.

You have no idea what you're talking about. But that is par for the Left's course.... y'all think we should ban dihydromonoxide.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31035-7/fulltext

Why "Flattening the Curve"â doesn't necessarily mean fewer total cases of COVID-19

Since most states are rolling out prolonged (i.e 30 day) "Safer at Home" legislature and laws, I started to have some great conversations with people in my family and various past relationships.

www.linkedin.com

Hilarious that you answered my post twice and contradicted yourself in the process.

 

[MrNiceGuy]

Hilarious that you answered my post twice and contradicted yourself in the process.

I did not contradict myself at all.

You're just unwilling to accept reality, since you're so invested in the narratives you adopt.

 

[MrNiceGuy]

Holy shit. That's the stupidest ****ing thing I've ever heard, and I have to interview felons every day.

Huzzah! Your posts are dumber than those of a career criminal! Take a bow!

This is the CDC illustrating the concept. In theory, ti reduces the peak of infections by slowing the rate of spread, but the areas under the curves are about the same. That's why they do not say "mitigation measures will reduce the number of infections...." - they say it will "slow the spread...." -- slow - not stop.

You have to pay attention to what they say - because the health officials are careful with their language. The politicians want you to think that "slow the spread" and "flatten the curve" means that total infections will be fewer, but that isn't what they actually are saying.

And I said "the pandemic lasts longer..." and the published explanations from the CDC bear that out. Look at the two curves. The "with protective measures" curve predicts the pandemic would last longer -- without, you get a peak - and the problem there is that too many patients are rushing the health care facilities. So, they want to slow it down, so it draws it out, but at a more manageable level.

They conveniently draw the "healthcare system capacity" right at the top of the "protective measures" curve, but that's arbitrary, because that all depends how effective the protective measures are. I the case of Covid, remember, even though we did all the protective measures recommended by the CDC and Fauci/Birx, there were still claims that the hospitals were being overrun and bodies were being stacked in hallways and cooler trucks.

In any case, you seem unwilling to look at the facts.

You're also hypocritical, as Covid hasn't gone away - but you no longer care so much about grandma and grandpa, because even though people are dying every day from Covid (even though the tracking is far far less than it was in 2020), you don't advocate for continuing lockdowns now, you aren't calling for anything - you have accepted that daily deaths, no tracking, no mandatory vaccinations, etc. are fine. Gone are the days of "you don't care about your fellow man," and "if it saves only one life."

Some of us remember what you people did and said in 2020 and onward, when it suited a purpose of yours.

 

[MrNiceGuy]

Okay. We're done.

Not because of your stupid condescension act, but because you trotted out that ancient never-was-funny-in-the-first-place dihydrogenmonoxide hackery.

Your appeal to ridicule and everything you post from here on out is dismissed.

Much of what I get from you is ridicule directed at me. Don't complain if you get an in-kind response.

Your posts are idiotic and dishonest. What's worse, I think you know it.

 

[Luce]

Much of what I get from you is ridicule directed at me.

Ask yourself why that might be. Your premise that slowing the curve leaves you with just as many casualties is absolutely absurd.

 

[MrNiceGuy]

Ask yourself why that might be. Your premise that slowing the curve leaves you with just as many casualties is absolutely absurd.

It's because you're rude and generally not a nice person, and you, like many on your ideological side, have almost no ability to hold a civil conversation, because you view these issues as activism and that you on some moral crusade to defeat the evildoers. You can't talk about issues without insulting people, and then you object when someone calls you out on it. Maybe learn to present an argument and back it up, rather than make declarations and then insult.

 

[Luce]

It's because you're rude and generally not a nice person, and you, like many on your ideological side, have almost no ability to hold a civil conversation, because you view these issues as activism and that you on some moral crusade to defeat the evildoers. You can't talk about issues without insulting people, and then you object when someone calls you out on it. Maybe learn to present an argument and back it up, rather than make declarations and then insult.

It's not my fault that my side has been made into elitists de facto.

So your argument is that if you need hospital care and the hospital is full, it is the same as if you need hospital care and they have room?

I mean, that sort of dumbass thinking makes anyone smart enough to parse a sentence an elitist.

 

[Luce]

View attachment 67502762

This is the CDC illustrating the concept. In theory, ti reduces the peak of infections by slowing the rate of spread, but the areas under the curves are about the same. That's why they do not say "mitigation measures will reduce the number of infections...." - they say it will "slow the spread...." -- slow - not stop.

Yes. and are the people in the red above the line representing hospital capacity MORE or LESS ****ed than all the people below the capacity line?