Sweden avoiding lockdown

Emblematic

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121022724#Comment_121022724

I think, however, the movement was greater on the part of other countries in terms of lockdowns, restrictions and the like.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121022730#Comment_121022730

A movement based on vaccines and the changing nature of the virus. Nothing to do with becoming more like Sweden, and discussing the changes without mentioning them is utterly disingenuous.

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121022712#Comment_121022712

You have it backwards. It's Sweden that changed. Even changed their legislation to facilitate restrictions. There's no probably about it.

Emblematic

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121022757#Comment_121022757

I'm not saying they did not change at all but rather that the bigger change was with the countries that had heavy restrictions and lockdowns as they eventually became more like Sweden. Sweden also relaxed their restrictions but, because those restrictions were fairly minimal even at peak, they had less distance to travel.

Thanks to the lower levels of restrictions and closures in Sweden during the pandemic, they seem to be suffering less excess deaths overall.

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121022791#Comment_121022791

You mean eventually the pandemic was over. All countries lifted their restrictions.

Sweden no different in that regard. They didn't invent the ending of a pandemic, or a return to normality.

Irish normality is a health service in crisis.

https://www.thejournal.ie/new-childrens-hospital-completion-date-6150517-Aug2023/

https://healthmanager.ie/2023/06/ireland-may-have-1000-bed-capacity-deficit-in-public-hospitals/#:~:text=Winter%202022%2F2023%20also%20saw,in%20public%20acute%20adult%20hospitals.

astrofool

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121020509#Comment_121020509

A libertarian most likely as Sweden's economic performance during the pandemic was worse than most comparable countries (and much worse than Ireland).

Goldengirl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121022982#Comment_121022982

And that " study " makes no mention of deaths or elderly left to die...but why would you mention that when discussing the effects of Covid ?!

charlie14

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121017433#Comment_121017433

I have no idea if a measure was introduced in one region it was counted as affecting the whole country either, but if it the index was compiled on that basis then I would look on it as being somewhat scattergun. It`s not the high ground I would choose to compare one country to others on the severity of lockdow. Especially when there were so many different elements involved with lockdown and how their severity were rated in in index. TBH I would look on it somewhat like a SWOT analysis whereby you can bascally present whatever result you favor at the outset.

Emblematic

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121022922#Comment_121022922

No, the discussion was about how much each country moved. The assertion (I think you supported this too) was that Sweden moved to become like other countries when in fact, due to a much less restrictive policy, the movement from no restrictions to light restrictions and back to no restrictions was much less than than, say, Ireland where we went from no restrictions to quite heavy restrictions and eventually back again.

People seem to be attempting to establish a narrative that Sweden essentially gave up on having no restrictions and imposed the same level as everyone else, thus proving (according to the narrative) that that Sweden was wrong. The big shifts and impositions on the public, however, were mainly in countries other than Sweden.

Goldengirl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121024217#Comment_121024217

But the point is , surely , as per the thread title , that while they may have avoided heavier restrictions because of the timing of their change of strategy , in following the " no lockdown " policy initially for 2020 , they showed how bad things can get , with death rates so much higher than neighbouring countries and economy suffering , even in a country like Sweden where people are more inclined to distance and live alone .

astrofool

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121027947#Comment_121027947

Sweden were also one of the countries at the forefront of the vaccine rollout similar to Denmark (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-21055-0), which doesn't tally with their herd immunity strategy working (lest people forget, that was the reason for the reduced restrictions they had in 2020, rather than any libertarian play).

Also interesting to watch the anti vax and anti restriction groups clash here, as anti vax can't blame excess deaths on vaccine and anti restrictions can't explain away the 2020 numbers and later numbers aren't accounted for by a small % of missed diagnoses due to lack of screening (which doesn't happen yearly for most programs). It's almost as if there are a lot of complex factors at play.

Emblematic

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121028381#Comment_121028381

In fairness, I don't think they were ever against the use of vaccines complementing naturally acquired immunity. It is probably the combination of the two that allowed them to remain comparatively open throughout the pandemic. This may be one of the reasons that they have lower excess deaths overall from the pandemic than, say, Ireland that had quite strict measures and sadly had higher excess deaths.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121029396#Comment_121029396

Again, as has been pointed out to you multiple times on the thread, you are making statements of fact about excess deaths and drawing conclusions that you have not established.

You are quoting excess death figures that are not age adjusted. Then drawing inferences from that.

You have made an assumption about excess deaths that you have not established.

Your continue to repeat time trying to establish it as a narrative - it is without foundation.

Emblematic

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121029428#Comment_121029428

I'm just suggesting it as possibility not an established fact. It does make a certain amount of sense though that lockdowns, although they may have an effect of slowing down a virus, are likely in themselves unhealthy and this needs to be taken into consideration.

Part of the evidence might be that Sweden, as we have noted and contrary to predictions made early on, actually had lower excess deaths when you take into consideration the longer timeframe. Why exactly this is the case will need to be investigated further but it is certainly too early to rule out, as I think some are doing, that allowing normal life to continue to a large extent in Sweden was good for the country's health. For me it seems fairly obvious but that is just my opinion.

As for age adjustment, I have not seen evidence put forward that the differing age profile of Sweden worked in Sweden's favour to produce the more favourable outcome that they had. If anything, Sweden's generally older age profile should have worked against them. It is, after all, older people who succumb more to infections and viruses and generally need more medical care. But if you have something to substantiate your claim please put it forward.

Of course it could also be some other unknown factor that worked in Swedens favour. Again, the onus is on Sweden's critics to find this other factor if that is what they want to base their argument on. I think you will agree that merely suggesting it could be something else is not sufficient.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121029494#Comment_121029494

No. You misunderstand how excess deaths are calculated. A countrys age profile is built into the baseline.

The age adjustment is of the excess death figures themselves to take into account demographic changes since last baseline. The further from the baseline of 2019 or 2015-2019 the less reliable any comparisons are.

When the UK did this their supposed excess death increase in 2022 was negligible.

If you are using non age adjusted figures excess deaths for 2022 for Sweden, Ireland, UK etc that is 'built on sand' when it comes to drawing any lessons.

BlueSkyDreams

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121028381#Comment_121028381

If comparing multiple data sets & finding no consistent logic, despite analysis & inclusion of all identifiable simple & complex factors, then:

A) any singular factor in isolation is usually not overly influential vs the remainder of the factors (otherwise we spot the correlation of definitive factors with a certain outcome)

B) and/or, we haven't accounted for the most pertinent factors.

There are known unknowns. But there are often unknown unknowns.

The scenario outlined makes for conflicting data sequence analysis & with no clear root cause identifiers vs outcome.

I dont know much about covid, but general rules of problem solving would still apply.

Emblematic

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121029566#Comment_121029566

Then apply the appropriate adjustment to Sweden and show how the the published figures are misleading in their case. In your view, should the adjusted figures be much higher for Sweden and what basis do you have for holding this view?

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121029600#Comment_121029600

Applying the appropriate adjustment is a non trivial process involving experts and access to official data sets.

The onus is on your to show how the figures you are citing are fit for purpose \ valid for comparison, to support the claims that you are making.

I have demonstrated with reference to the UK how comparisons based on unadjusted excess death figures would be totally misleading.

Emblematic

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121029739#Comment_121029739

Yes and now you need to show that you can provide the adjusted figures for Sweden in order to show they were wrong.

I know you might think this is unfair but you've got to understand that the excess deaths figures, at least on the face of it, prove you glaringly wrong if you're one of the people who thought Sweden would have huge amounts of deaths over the extended period. There's all sorts of adjustments that could be made but if you feel that adjusting for age will make Sweden's death toll from combined Covid plus lockdowns and restrictions seem greater, then provide that analysis. Merely stating that it might be this or that won't cut it, I'm afraid.

Had the figures been different and indicated that Sweden, over the extended period, had overall high excess deaths, then the onus would be on me to prove that the figures were (in this counterfactual situation) misleading. But that is not the case.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121029810#Comment_121029810

I need to do no such thing. You are the one making claims on the basis of facts that may not bear the weight of argument placed on them. The onus is on you to support and validate them, or at least acknowledge the caveats. To pretend otherwise is utterly disingenuous.

With reference to the UK example, I have proved the hazards of using unadjusted excess death figures, where a supposed 7% increase when age adjusted was determined to be 1% reduction.

If you continue to falsely misrepresent the figures as fact and valid for comparison, I will continue to point this out. If it is phrased as 'the excess deaths figures suggest', that is a different matter.

Goldengirl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121029494#Comment_121029494

Their health service and their preparedness . Its been said and shown repeatedly here but for some reason you don't appear to register it.

Emblematic

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121029841#Comment_121029841

The reason you might want to do such an analysis is to show that in the case of Sweden is to show, if it is indeed the case, that Sweden's apparent low excess deaths are misleading.

I take your point that excess deaths can be misleading in certain circumstances. All figures need to be treated with caution in that respect. An example of this would be that during the first year of the pandemic, Sweden appeared at various points to have a higher official covid death rate than Ireland. However when the older age profile of Sweden was taken into consideration, the result was pretty much the same as here.

You might therefore wish to show how changes in Sweden's age profile over the last few years might give a lower than expected result other things being equal.

In the absence of any such analysis, however, we're forced to go with the figures even though they are not perfect. They are the best we've got.

Flinty997

The data doesn't support your assertions. No matter how you try to skew and mispresent any data.

Emblematic

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2023/09/06/opinion/sweden-response-covid-19/

Noticing more of these articles in the mainstream media praising Sweden's balanced science-based approach.

Extract: "For that reason, Norberg spotlights “excess deaths,” a category that includes all the additional lives lost to the pandemic, including those not necessarily encompassed by a given country’s official COVID data. By that metric, Sweden appears to have outperformed every country in Europe. Its excess-death rate during the pandemic was just 4.4 percent higher than the previous norm. That’s less than half of the European average of 11.1 percent and lower even than the 6.77 percent average of its Nordic neighbors.

Sweden’s strategy paid off in other ways, too. While Europe’s overall economy shrank by 2.1 percent during the pandemic lockdowns, the Swedish economy expanded slightly. Students in many nations fell behind by as much as a year in one or more subjects, but Swedish children suffered no learning loss. Lockdowns forced tens of millions of kids worldwide to miss out on childhood vaccinations; in Sweden, the juvenile vaccination rate went up. And though a dreadful spike in domestic abuse and suicides was reported in many countries, no such phenomenon was observed in Sweden."

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121078540#Comment_121078540

More dodgy excess deaths claims to dupe those who dont understand excess deaths.

I expect the rest of the 'study' to be as reliable on the rest of its claims. Cherry picking and weasel words.

And again the central assumption without foundation... that Swedish results would have followed if Swedish approach followed in eg New York when they didnt even get them in a London.

Flinty997

I think it's unlikely someone here "just noticed" by "accident", a COVID article about Sweden in a Boston newspaper.

Cato Think Tank. Interesting organisation. Especially when you consider who owns it and why.

https://www.influencewatch.org/non-profit/cato-institute/#:~:text=The%20controversy%20led%20to%20a,Koch%20agreed%20to%20end%20their

Emblematic

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121078668#Comment_121078668

True it is the Cato Institute that commissioned the study but the Boston Globe is a well respected news source and would be unlikely to report on the findings had the basic facts not checked out.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121079631#Comment_121079631

It's an opinion piece in the Boston Globe that references the study. I highly doubt the Boston Globe did a detailed fact check on all 50 footnotes, some of which are in Swedish.

I had a quick look at the 'study' and it is very dubious. It is not at all clear when it makes the claims for Sweden it is using the same basis to make claims about other countries.

To take one example, what does this mean exactly?

In the initial months many countries reported fewer suicides, but a 2022 review of 1,052 studies of suicide found that a majority of studies reported an increasing trend in the number of suicides during the pandemic. In Sweden, there was no increase in suicides, but rather a small decrease from 2019 to 2021.

It is comparing a "majority of studies" to some other figure from Sweden.

It is a gish gallop, that would take considerable time to establish exactly what is claimed, and does the data support that exact claim.

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121079631#Comment_121079631

I don't think it's accidental that you don't do even basic checking of the sources and background of the information you post. It's wrong too often to be accidental.

https://dankennedy.net/2023/05/04/andrea-estes-has-disappeared-from-the-boston-globes-online-directory/

Emblematic

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121080061#Comment_121080061

Different journalist and shows that making factual errors is a resigning matter at the Globe.