nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Sweden avoiding lockdown

frillyleaf

Does Sweden have the right approach to this and how is their healthcare system being able to manage Covid19 cases?

What are the differences between Sweden and Ireland and why can’t we continue similar to how Sweden is managing Covid19?

I’m not suggesting either is right or wrong. I would just like to know how Sweden can continue as normal and other countries can’t. Thanks ðŸ˜Š

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Gary kk

niallo27 wrote: »

Or people realise that this virus is going no where and we will have to follow this approach eventually.

niallo27

Augeo wrote: »

Indeed, folk seem oblivious to this or genuinely too thick to figure it out.

Or people realise that this virus is going no where and we will have to follow this approach eventually.

[Deleted User]

Gary kk wrote: »

Ah here now we are spreading to the infection rate to help save lives by trying not to overload the health service.

Sweden is letting people die that may have been saved if they followed suit.

Indeed, folk seem oblivious to this or genuinely too thick to figure it out.

lawrencesummers

Hmmzis wrote: »

Until a treatment or vaccine is found, comparing death rates between countries is a bit misleading I think.
The virus is being spread faster with more people interacting, slower with less people interacting. It will still be spread unless all physical interaction between humans stops. Since that's not possible, we can only influence the speed of infection (that R0 if you will).

With that in mind, faster spread gives you a higher death rate per day, slower spread gives you a lower death rate per day, but at the end of the whole thing it's still going to be the same totals per capita. The assumption here is that we do not exceed the hospital and ICU capacities. The exact same number of people will die, in one case it'll be slower, in the other it'll happen faster.

The advantage of the faster approach is that you get the survivors back to normal life faster.
The advantage of the slower approach is that it gives time for reseaechers to find a treatment that reduces mortality and improves overall outcomes. Therfore reducing the total fatality rate compared to the faster approach.

Sweden is going with the fast option.
We are going with the slower approach hoping for a timely treatment option to become available.

In both cases it's a gamble of sorts.

Not to be pedantic here, but the virus will only be stopped if physical interaction between INFECTED people is stopped. This can been seen from the level of healthcare workers infected.

A lot of people have the misconception that the virus is everywhere, it’s not. It has the potential to be.

As an island if we severely limit travel into and out of the country, and we reduce internal movement drastically the virus will eventually die off on the island. Precisely what NZ have done.

This is complicated slightly by the North having a different approach, there should be a political acknowledgement that north and south will agree to implement changes simultaneously, and when the day comes that The virus is extinct enough in Ireland for movement to recommence we are sandwiched between and rely greatly on travel between two counties whose approach to this has left a lot to be desired.

If we open up travel to the US to soon then another wave is all but guaranteed.

In the meantime let’s try and be NZ

Gary kk

Ah here now we are spreading to the infection rate to help save lives by trying not to overload the health service.

Sweden is letting people die that may have been saved if they followed suit.

dubrov

Hmmzis wrote:

In both cases it's a gamble of sorts.

Great post. It really highlights why so many governments are taking different approaches.

Only time will tell what was the correct way to go.

degsie

Hmmzis wrote: »

Until a treatment or vaccine is found, comparing death rates between countries is a bit misleading I think.
The virus is being spread faster with more people interacting, slower with less people interacting. It will still be spread unless all physical interaction between humans stops. Since that's not possible, we can only influence the speed of infection (that R0 if you will).

With that in mind, faster spread gives you a higher death rate per day, slower spread gives you a lower death rate per day, but at the end of the whole thing it's still going to be the same totals per capita. The assumption here is that we do not exceed the hospital and ICU capacities. The exact same number of people will die, in one case it'll be slower, in the other it'll happen faster.

The advantage of the faster approach is that you get the survivors back to normal life faster.
The advantage of the slower approach is that it gives time for reseaechers to find a treatment that reduces mortality and improves overall outcomes. Therfore reducing the total fatality rate compared to the faster approach.

Sweden is going with the fast option.
We are going with the slower approach hoping for a timely treatment option to become available.

In both cases it's a gamble of sorts.

Thank you for a reasoned argument. It's refreshing.

Hmmzis

Until a treatment or vaccine is found, comparing death rates between countries is a bit misleading I think.
The virus is being spread faster with more people interacting, slower with less people interacting. It will still be spread unless all physical interaction between humans stops. Since that's not possible, we can only influence the speed of infection (that R0 if you will).

With that in mind, faster spread gives you a higher death rate per day, slower spread gives you a lower death rate per day, but at the end of the whole thing it's still going to be the same totals per capita. The assumption here is that we do not exceed the hospital and ICU capacities. The exact same number of people will die, in one case it'll be slower, in the other it'll happen faster.

The advantage of the faster approach is that you get the survivors back to normal life faster.
The advantage of the slower approach is that it gives time for reseaechers to find a treatment that reduces mortality and improves overall outcomes. Therfore reducing the total fatality rate compared to the faster approach.

Sweden is going with the fast option.
We are going with the slower approach hoping for a timely treatment option to become available.

In both cases it's a gamble of sorts.

2u2me

KiKi III wrote: »

Maybe if Irish people had listened to the government when told to self-isolate instead of immediately flocking to the beach/park/ mountains together, our government wouldn't have needed to introduce a lockdown either.

I recall things somewhat differently. This post from a few days ago sums it up for me a lot better.

Boggles wrote: »

The majority of businesses had decided to close or introduced complete work from home measures before the government acted. Also Paddy's Day was cancelled at council level before the government decided to cancel. Also "No issue" with 10,000 people going to a race meeting in the UK, etc, etc.

The idea the government and HSE are getting this right is farcical. Our testing plan has been a complete and utter failure by any metric and 20% of our PPE would be perfect if we had uoompa loompas on the front line.

It's people and the measures they are implementing as well as business to be fair that are halting the surge.

Spencer Brown

KiKi III wrote: »

Maybe if Irish people had listened to the government when told to self-isolate instead of immediately flocking to the beach/park/ mountains together, our government wouldn't have needed to introduce a lockdown either.

It's this really, we're a country of free spirits who don't like rules much.

Flyer1

KiKi III wrote: »

Maybe if Irish people had listened to the government when told to self-isolate instead of immediately flocking to the beach/park/ mountains together, our government wouldn't have needed to introduce a lockdown either.

A lockdown was always going to happen. There's no question about that

KiKi III

Maybe if Irish people had listened to the government when told to self-isolate instead of immediately flocking to the beach/park/ mountains together, our government wouldn't have needed to introduce a lockdown either.

[Deleted User]

Greentopia wrote: »

The vast majority are. Their PM told them they needed to take these measures and they did so because there is a high degree of trust in Sweden in the government and even more so for the health experts who are actually the ones who are driving these policies, not the Govt. They simply apply the measures the experts call for.

Here's what Anders Tegnell the state epidemiologist has said about why his country has chosen the path they have:
“Locking people up at home won’t work in the longer term. Sooner or later people are going to go out anyway.” He’s also repeatedly said it would be good for the Swedish population to gain immunity to the disease, even if he doesn't call it herd immunity.

He's taking a long term outlook on it as the best strategy for protecting the health of their citizens and saving their economy as much as possible. It's a Swedish middle way if you like between the madness of UK herd immunity and full lockdown. This way the economy is not entirely crippled and life can continue with some degree of normality until a vaccine is found.

Why are they keeping emergency legislation in reserve then? its kinda wanting it both ways to me it says we are trying this for the moment but if it dose not work we have something else. It is not saying we know for certain this is the correct approach.

Sweden has reached cross-party agreement on sweeping emergency powers to close shops, restaurants and schools in response to the coronavirus crisis – but the governnment has no immediate plans to use them.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/coronavirus-sweden-to-enact-crisis-powers-but-hold-them-in-reserve-1.4223367

timsey tiger

Spook_ie wrote: »

To test a vaccine you need a pool of uninfected people, to test drugs you need infected people.

To test a vaccine you need uninfected people yes, but you also need them to be exposed to the risk, so actually you need both.

Greentopia

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Could be they've miraculously and suddenly passed over the peak (which would be great) or could be they just report lower numbers over the weekend and will 'catch up' early in the week.

Could well be increased numbers next week yes, but they have acknowledged the numbers are lower over the weekend themselves.

Greentopia

thebaz wrote: »

Swedish figures released today :-

332 new cases
12 new deaths

Again , given experts predictions, why are these figures not so much higher ?
They are asking its citizens to behave in an adult manner, and social distance , maybe they actually are, without need for police enforcement and complete economic shutdown.

The vast majority are. Their PM told them they needed to take these measures and they did so because there is a high degree of trust in Sweden in the government and even more so for the health experts who are actually the ones who are driving these policies, not the Govt. They simply apply the measures the experts call for.

Here's what Anders Tegnell the state epidemiologist has said about why his country has chosen the path they have:
“Locking people up at home won’t work in the longer term. Sooner or later people are going to go out anyway.” He’s also repeatedly said it would be good for the Swedish population to gain immunity to the disease, even if he doesn't call it herd immunity.

He's taking a long term outlook on it as the best strategy for protecting the health of their citizens and saving their economy as much as possible. It's a Swedish middle way if you like between the madness of UK herd immunity and full lockdown. This way the economy is not entirely crippled and life can continue with some degree of normality until a vaccine is found.

Spook_ie

plodder wrote: »

Sweden could be doing the rest of us a favour because vaccines will have to be tested in a place where the virus is circulating widely

https://www.rte.ie/news/coronavirus/2020/0411/1129975-vaccine-coronavirus/

To test a vaccine you need a pool of uninfected people, to test drugs you need infected people.

Greentopia

Rvsmmnps wrote: »

We are pretty much over it. Things feeling normal again. We never did full lockdown either (Norway)
Not very much sensational news outlets here either

Even in Sweden where cases are higher the newspapers online are full of other news stories as well as corona I noticed and there's none of the sensational doomsday hysteria there about it as in other countries. Not even in Expressen or Aftonbladet.

marilynrr

Clark Dry Kidney wrote: »

Actually this is the exact approach being taken here, you do realise if you catch coronavirus as a resident in a nursing home that you're not going to be taken to hospital?

Most of our deaths have been in nursing homes and not in ICU because nursing home residents are not being admitted to hospital. They are receiving care on site in the nursing home.

Terribly sad state of affairs but that's what's been happening for the last few weeks.

I really don't think that that is true at all. My understanding of it is that they used to take the nursing home patients to hospital to try to avoid the spread of it in the nursing home, but that now unless they need to go to hospital then they are staying in the nursing home isolated from other patients who do not have covid-19. I've seen nothing to say that those who need hospital treatment in nursing homes are not being taken to hospital.

Also this article from Friday says "Of the 288 people who have died so far in the outbreak, 156 had been living in nursing homes prior to their deaths (54%), Dr Tony Holohan said.

Most of those deaths occurred in hospital settings."

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/nursing-home-residents-make-up-more-than-half-of-irelands-covid-19-toll-993501.html

sydthebeat wrote: »

Sweden has approx 20% more confirmed cases as Ireland, yet has almost 200% more deaths.

If ANYONE thinks that the actions they took were the proper ones then you need to take a long look at yourself and how you value life.

It's a very black and white way of looking at it though. Lives will be lost the other way too. Suicides, murder suicides etc. There are victims of abuse locked in with their abusers. Cancer patients who have had treatment cancelled. People are not seeking hospital treatment for other things even though they should and are at increased risk of death from that. There are so so many different people and situations being affected by this and i'm sure we'll be horrified by a lot of the stories of lockdown when this is all over.

Also if this goes on for months and months there will be elderly dying from other age related illnesses who spent their last bit of time without even a hug from their family members, completely isolated and lonely, Some of them would have rathered just take their chances instead of being cocooned. Some people wouldn't want to be just kept alive for the sake of it!!

It's just not nearly as black and white as you are making out.

People are allowed to discuss the approach that Ireland are taken without being shut down by being told to take a long hard look at themselves. It's a lazy argument designed to shut down any debate about it!

Jim_Hodge

Noris Bohnson wrote: »

Sadly it's eldery Sven who'll be saying goodbye soon.

Do you get a kick from this infantile behaviour? Seems a sad existence.

Jim_Hodge

Noris Bohnson wrote: »

Once all the elderly Swedes are dead they can be replaced with imported Africans. It's a very progressive policy from the Swedish government.

Bye...……...

eddie73

Work backwards from mortality rates to get the full picture. Waiting for tests etc means that we dont know the true numbers, ever. If you assume the mortality rate is 1% and there are 200 deaths in a week, multiply by 100 to give you the true case numbers of the 1st day, not the last day of the week sample. That would mean there would likely be 20000 cases on day one of the sample week.

This also assumes the best case scenario of optimum treatment where icu isn't over run.

Downlinz

Sweden have a very socially independent culture with one of the lowest population densities in Europe, they were social distancing before they even heard of the virus. If anyone could continue operations with reasonable success it's them.

Unfortunately we have a pub culture and an overcrowded capital city in the middle of a housing crisis so it's not especially relevant how well Sweden are coping since we can't really copy them without massive restrictions.

Idbatterim

thebaz wrote: »

Swedish figures released today :-

332 new cases
12 new deaths

Again , given experts predictions, why are these figures not so much higher ?
They are asking its citizens to behave in an adult manner, and social distance , maybe they actually are, without need for police enforcement and complete economic shutdown.

Agreed, you would just have to assume, that the most vulnerable arent idiots and isolating as much as practical! the nursing home thing here, was an obvious one too. With the very quick testing when it comes about, would it be practical, for the nursing homes to be locked down in effect and staff only comes and go maybe once or twice a week and after being tested for it on re-entry?

Jim_Hodge

thebaz wrote: »

Fair eneogh, did not realise they had stopped testing , just looked at cases and deaths which struck me as much lower than i or many would have expected .
Seams crazy not to test every day.
But not testing should not effect the death rate, which to me seams surprisingly low given circumstances.

Their deaths figure are not low. Death today dropped as they don't collect figures at the weekend but they have 89 deaths per million.

dubrov

In fairness, the way the numbers are recorded in each country varies widely.
So hard to compare.

No one will know what the correct strategy is until long after this crisis has dissipated.

[Deleted User]

thebaz wrote: »

Swedish figures released today :-

332 new cases
12 new deaths

Again , given experts predictions, why are these figures not so much higher ?
They are asking its citizens to behave in an adult manner, and social distance , maybe they actually are, without need for police enforcement and complete economic shutdown.

Maybe they have less of the types being discussed in this video?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HbYv0FcOjQ8

thebaz

Memnoch wrote: »

Don't know how many times I need to say it...

Their death rate was climbing fast last week. Then it looks like they just stopped testing. (54,700 total tests - unmoved for 3 days now)

Of course mortality statistics are going to fall if you don't test any more people...

Fair eneogh, did not realise they had stopped testing , just looked at cases and deaths which struck me as much lower than i or many would have expected .
Seams crazy not to test every day.
But not testing should not effect the death rate, which to me seams surprisingly low given circumstances.

Jim_Hodge

thebaz wrote: »

Swedish figures released today :-

332 new cases
12 new deaths

Again , given experts predictions, why are these figures not so much higher ?
They are asking its citizens to behave in an adult manner, and social distance , maybe they actually are, without need for police enforcement and complete economic shutdown.

Their deaths recorded drop every Sunday. Have a look over the pas month.

Memnoch

Don't know how many times I need to say it...

Their death rate was climbing fast last week. Then it looks like they just stopped testing. (54,700 total tests - unmoved for 3 days now)

Of course mortality statistics are going to fall if you don't test any more people...