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

Wanderer78

niallo27 wrote:

Well they lose if they have tens of thousands of deaths like most models are predicting but for some reason has not materialized as of yet.

Will they care I'd they lose? Sounds like many swedes are just self restricting anyway

niallo27

biko wrote: »

The Swedish really can't lose with their current tactic.

If they fall below the European average death rate they will be lauded.
If they fall on average, or maybe a tad high, they will be lauded because they didn't lock down.
If they end up much higher they will just claim "we tried to save our economy".

If they continue to not test, and not report all the cases, they will probably come out of this looking pretty good.
The old folks would probably have died of other causes and the celebs that died will be martyrs somehow.

The government have managed to shield itself, fronting with the FHM who can easily be thrown under the bus should things go pear-shaped.

The best site is c19.se which aggregates the numbers continuously, not just once a day.

Well they lose if they have tens of thousands of deaths like most models are predicting but for some reason has not materialized as of yet.

biko

The Swedish really can't lose with their current tactic.

If they fall below the European average death rate they will be lauded.
If they fall on average, or maybe a tad high, they will be lauded because they didn't lock down.
If they end up much higher they will just claim "we tried to save our economy".

If they continue to not test, and not report all the cases, they will probably come out of this looking pretty good.
The old folks would probably have died of other causes and the celebs that died will be martyrs somehow.

The government have managed to shield itself, fronting with the FHM who can easily be thrown under the bus should things go pear-shaped.

The best site is c19.se which aggregates the numbers continuously, not just once a day.

Att vara en hest

There were not 170 deaths in Sweden over the last 24 hours, these are numbers catching up from weekend.. There were 12 deaths reported on Sunday, do you think that's the real number? It's a known thing that Sweden laggs behind on death numbers! Actually the highest number of deaths in a single day peaked on Apr 8 with around 90 people dead in 24 hours, ever since then the numbers of death per 24 hours has decreased.

As mentioned on the press conference today they are 'cautiously optimistic' that the curve for infections has plateaued in Stockholm which bodes well for the rest of the country.

https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/09f821667ce64bf7be6f9f87457ed9aa
^^^This is FOHM's own stats (folkhälsomyndigheten - department of public health), go to "Avlidna/dag" for deaths/day.

It's also not completely reasonable to compare Sweden directly to a country like Norway or Finland, Swedes do travel more abroad and especially people in areas like Stockholm. Sweden also had their "sport break" (similar to spring break) the same week as things went bad in Italian ski resorts, a lot of people came back infected from these areas.

There's also a large amount of immigrants in Sweden, in addition to the people returning from Italy there were also infected people coming from Iran.

Considering the different circumstances as well as the fact that the way deaths are counted is different, I'd say that Sweden is spot on with their tactic - especially considering it has very little impact on the everyday life of its citizens.

We've been under harsher restrictions here in Ireland for quite long and we're still seeing a large number of cases, in addition to that we also have the economy at a standstill.

In the end of the day, we won't know until later on who's right or who's wrong.. But to me, it looks like Sweden are doing something right.

Bushmaster64

eddie73 wrote: »

Lets not lose the run of ourselves yet.

While I agree that their restrictions are slack and could be better, you have to divide their death rate by 2 to get the island of Ireland average. we are doing somewhat better, but not by a hell of a lot.

Today they took a hammering. 170 deaths is a lot.
Lets see at the end of the month how they look. Its a big gamble. Should they be doing this? who knows.

To say that the hard left has disregard for the elderly is a strange statement.

How much bigger is Sweden than Ireland? Ireland has much more of a dense population than Sweden and still doing better than them.

Lots of left wing Sweden lovers are going to be very disappointed at the end of all this to see how the poster child for 'caring' socialism put the economy ahead of the people.

dubrov

We won't really know until the end of the year. Sweden might get 170 a day for a month while we get 30 a day for 6 months as the growth was slower

eddie73

Bushmaster64 wrote: »

Clearly obvious now that Sweden have ballsed it up. By far the worst of the Scandinavian countries. More deaths than any other country compared to the number of cases.

I mean maybe we didn't expect left wing Sweden to sacrifice their older population with such disregard, but it's always been a bit of an odd country. They might just have said "feck it" take the hit on deaths, the health system can cope with the cases and at the end of it all their economy may be the best in Europe.

The hard left have sometimes shown disdain toward older people, maybe that's at play here.

Lets not lose the run of ourselves yet.

While I agree that their restrictions are slack and could be better, you have to divide their death rate by 2 to get the island of Ireland average. we are doing somewhat better, but not by a hell of a lot.

Today they took a hammering. 170 deaths is a lot.
Lets see at the end of the month how they look. Its a big gamble. Should they be doing this? who knows.

To say that the hard left has disregard for the elderly is a strange statement.

niallo27

Bushmaster64 wrote: »

They have 3 -5 times as many deaths for their rate of infection than any of the closest countries to their known cases.

I'm not sure how this can level out in Sweden's favour now.

Using rate of infection is wrong, it's all about deaths and icu numbers. For example by using postive cases, sweden has the same number per population as norway or denmark. Limited lockdown but same chance of testing postive.

Bit cynical

Bushmaster64 wrote: »

They have 3 -5 times as many deaths for their rate of infection than any of the closest countries to their known cases.

I'm not sure how this can level out in Sweden's favour now.

However I don't think the actual rate of infection is known for any country. Sweden is doing fairly low amounts of testing for the population size and this may account for the apparent high figure.

Bushmaster64

dubrov wrote: »

Way too early to be making calls like that

They have 3 -5 times as many deaths for their rate of infection than any of the closest countries to their known cases.

I'm not sure how this can level out in Sweden's favour now.

dubrov

Bushmaster64 wrote: »

Clearly obvious now that Sweden have ballsed it up. By far the worst of the Scandinavian countries. More deaths than any other country compared to the number of cases.

Way too early to be making calls like that

Bushmaster64

Clearly obvious now that Sweden have ballsed it up. By far the worst of the Scandinavian countries. More deaths than any other country compared to the number of cases.

I mean maybe we didn't expect left wing Sweden to sacrifice their older population with such disregard, but it's always been a bit of an odd country. They might just have said "feck it" take the hit on deaths, the health system can cope with the cases and at the end of it all their economy may be the best in Europe.

The hard left have sometimes shown disdain toward older people, maybe that's at play here.

Blut2

bubblypop wrote: »

It's staff.
staff in care homes are, in general, on really rubbish contracts, part time hours, zero hour contracts etc.
so they have to take on extra work, sometimes in other care homes, sometimes other places altogether.
also, agency staff are sent from one care home to another, every day, so without anyone wearing PPE, the virus is easily spread.

The average salary for a care worker in the UK is £17,000 a year. And its similar in a lot of countries. Its pretty horrifying - both because they do a very hard job that I wouldn't want to do, and because of the responsibility of it - they literally have vulnerable people's lives in their hands all day.

Ideally post-corona Western societies might reconsider the benefits of actually paying care workers a living wage... but we'll see, I wouldn't hold out too much hope.

iamwhoiam

IAMAMORON wrote: »

I am in many cases. If they didn't give it directly they gave it to their mummies and Daddies who were either working there or were visiting their mummies and Daddies.

Don't forget our first official case of Covid 19 was a teenager in a school.

You have no way of knowing that actually . We don’t know if the staff got it from each other or from their children

Greentopia

bubblypop wrote: »

It's staff.
staff in care homes are, in general, on really rubbish contracts, part time hours, zero hour contracts etc.
so they have to take on extra work, sometimes in other care homes, sometimes other places altogether.
also, agency staff are sent from one care home to another, every day, so without anyone wearing PPE, the virus is easily spread.

Yes privatisation of some of the care of the elderly there has not worked well. I think after this there will be a re-examining of those policies by the Soc. Dems.

Greentopia

mariaalice wrote: »

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.

Because it's a novel virus and no scientist will say they know for certain the course it will take in their respective countries in the future. They can only say what's happening now and what most likely to happen in the coming days and weeks going on their data and modelling.

They're just being prepared in case they do need to widen bring in further restrictions.
It's a sensible, long term, measured approach.

[Deleted User]

iamwhoiam wrote: »

The clusters in care homes only came to light about 2 weeks ago . Children haven’t been allowed in care home since about the beginning of March . I am not convinced children did in fact infect the care home clients .

It's staff.
staff in care homes are, in general, on really rubbish contracts, part time hours, zero hour contracts etc.
so they have to take on extra work, sometimes in other care homes, sometimes other places altogether.
also, agency staff are sent from one care home to another, every day, so without anyone wearing PPE, the virus is easily spread.

biko

For the Swedish elderly in home settings I'm sure they got infected by staff.
The staff just don't have any PPE so will easily carry the contagion from one person to another.

But in general it was fine to move around if you didn't feel sick so visiting elderly was not an issue.
Also, of course that staff at nursing homes can carry the contagion around, especially if they feel fine.
But they can still transmit the disease.

IAMAMORON

iamwhoiam wrote: »

The clusters in care homes only came to light about 2 weeks ago . Children haven’t been allowed in care home since about the beginning of March . I am not convinced children did in fact infect the care home clients .

I am in many cases. If they didn't give it directly they gave it to their mummies and Daddies who were either working there or were visiting their mummies and Daddies.

Don't forget our first official case of Covid 19 was a teenager in a school.

iamwhoiam

IAMAMORON wrote: »

Not even the children visiting their grandparents?

The reason it has spread so successfully through nursing homes is the lack of hygiene being practised by patients, this is both voluntary and involuntary, but as a rule the older you get the less vigilant you become hygienically. Throw in the necessity for asymptomatic workers and family visits and you have a problem.

Young adults and children are battering the virus away very quickly. Their immune systems are powerful enough to deal with it, they are all getting it, but not indicating symptoms. The cloaking of the virus behind such hosts has been one of its' most contagious efficiencies, people are simply not aware it is in the room.

The clusters in care homes only came to light about 2 weeks ago . Children haven’t been allowed in care home since about the beginning of March . I am not convinced children did in fact infect the care home clients .

IAMAMORON

iamwhoiam wrote: »

Was it ever proven or researched that children are a huge virus carrying group ?
Not disputing it but just wondering if they actually are a source of the spread ?
Then the spread in care homes for example was not children at all .

Not even the children visiting their grandparents?

The reason it has spread so successfully through nursing homes is the lack of hygiene being practised by patients, this is both voluntary and involuntary, but as a rule the older you get the less vigilant you become hygienically. Throw in the necessity for asymptomatic workers and family visits and you have a problem.

Young adults and children are battering the virus away very quickly. Their immune systems are powerful enough to deal with it, they are all getting it, but not indicating symptoms. The cloaking of the virus behind such hosts has been one of its' most contagious efficiencies, people are simply not aware it is in the room.

greenfield21

Fair play to Sweden, true trailblazers. They will be looked back on as hero's in the years to come.

biko

Errr ok, not sure what you're trying to say.

2u2me

biko wrote: »

Geographical distance means less than you think these days.
It's not like people get to these countries by car.

biko

Deleted User wrote: »

Sweden should only really be compared to Norway/Denmark/Finland, given the geographical distance between those and the epicentres of covid-19 in Europe

Geographical distance means less than you think these days.
It's not like people get to these countries by car.

Thankfully Sweden stopped flights from Iran early March. Iran was then developing to a full-blown outbreak.
Iran reported 1,501 cases, including 66 deaths in total when flights were still open.
Some with the infection had flown directly to Sweden and been found there to have the contagion.

growleaves

Epidemics don't spread based on air pollution.

I didn't say they do. Air pollution is a risk factor for victims of respiratory diseases hence it affects how many people will end up in ICU, and it differs between countries.

It's a bit scary that you think they do. Are you out there burning 5g masts right now?

Pointless abuse.

[Deleted User]

growleaves wrote: »

I've lost count of how many times I was told that Ireland would be 'like Italy'
without a lockdown and even now I'm still being told that as a justification, despite for instance that the air pollution around Clare and Mayo is hardly comparable to that of Northern Italy.

So if we are separating out different environmental factors for Nordic countries vis-a-vis others then we should be doing that for all countries.

Epidemics don't spread based on air pollution. It's a bit scary that you think they do. Are you out there burning 5g masts right now?

There is no evidence that air pollution is linked with increased spread of covid-19, only mortality. The flu virus needs to spread to become an epidemic and then pandemic. Mortality rates are irrelevant to stopping a pandemic beyond that viruses with high mortality rates and short incubation periods tend to burn themselves out.

Researchers absolutely do look at factors such as %age urban population & %age underlying conditions (both of which capture air pollution), but that's something that will happen in the years to come and irrelevant to stopping a pandemic spreading.

growleaves

Deleted User wrote: »

Sweden should only really be compared to Norway/Denmark/Finland, given the geographical distance between those and the epicentres of covid-19 in Europe + the different trends in travel between the likes of France <-> Italy vs Sweden <-> Italy.

Sweden's death count is also very restrictive, many countries are counting anyone who was displaying covid-19 symptoms and died of a respiratory ailment as being a covid-19 death, without conducting postmortem testing. Sweden doesn't appear to be doing post-mortem testing, and is objectively doing very little testing. Given that in other countries, up to 33% of deaths are in carehomes without presenting at hospital - arguing that Sweden's numbers are more representative is ludicrous.

It's what happens when you approach an argument with a pre-existing bias of 'wanting an approach to be right'.

I've lost count of how many times I was told that Ireland would be 'like Italy' without a lockdown and even now I'm still being told that as a justification, despite for instance that the air pollution around Clare and Mayo is hardly comparable to that of Northern Italy.

So if we are separating out different environmental factors for Nordic countries vis-a-vis others then we should be doing that for all countries.

sydthebeat

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

https://www.rte.ie/news/2020/0414/1130498-sweden-approach-coronavirus/

Link to video half way down which pretty much says what I say and it’s from Irish person living there

i watched that earlier today.... thanks.

their economy is going to take some kind of hit due to this... it will be interesting if they can get back to 100% in a significant time period ahead of everyone else

[Deleted User]

growleaves wrote: »

See Sweden in the middle:

Sweden should only really be compared to Norway/Denmark/Finland, given the geographical distance between those and the epicentres of covid-19 in Europe + the different trends in travel between the likes of France <-> Italy vs Sweden <-> Italy.

Sweden's death count is also very restrictive, many countries are counting anyone who was displaying covid-19 symptoms and died of a respiratory ailment as being a covid-19 death, without conducting postmortem testing. Sweden doesn't appear to be doing post-mortem testing, and is objectively doing very little testing. Given that in other countries, up to 33% of deaths are in carehomes without presenting at hospital - arguing that Sweden's numbers are more representative is ludicrous.

It's what happens when you approach an argument with a pre-existing bias of 'wanting an approach to be right'.