PhoenixParker wrote: » What Sweden shows is that you can be fairly open without runaway growth. That's wonderful. It means with our caseload small we can get back to Swedish levels of normal and live somewhat more normal lives until treatments or vaccines emerge. The lower our caseload to start the more wiggle room we'll have. High levels of contact tracing and testing will help too.
biko wrote: » Their neighbours now have zero or a couple deaths a day. Finland stated their infections in Osterbotten area all came from Swedenhttps://svenska.yle.fi/artikel/2020/05/26/senaste-veckornas-coronafall-i-osterbotten-kommer-fran-sverige-infektionslakare
bb1234567 wrote: » Almost 200 deaths reported in the last 48 hours is not normal though. If this becomes the 'normal' then it was absolutely a mistaken policy. I have faith it will not remain this high for that much longer, but it is very much not a normal under control situation currently with that level of deaths daily .
the incredible pudding wrote: » Again, I'm not saying the figures aren't awful - but you have to understand how Sweden report its deaths. Those numbers are added tallies to the total number of fatalities some of which can be from over a month ago. If you go to the page that biko linked - https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/09f821667ce64bf7be6f9f87457ed9aa and sort by Avlinda/dag (deaths per day) - you'll see the reported deaths for the past couple of days are much lower than that (again to reiterate as has been reported so far - you'll likely see additions to these days over the coming week(s)). Sweden's data is accurate but the reporting is very slow and it actually makes it much harder to get a snapshot of how they're currently coping with all of this. The numbers in the ICUs are dropping, albeit far more slowly than other countries that have engaged in lockdowns.
CrabRevolution wrote: » But a month ago people were using those figures to say "See, Sweden is doing it right". Yet now we're told that the figures were actually wrong and they undercounted significantly, but Sweden was still doing it right all along regardless.
the incredible pudding wrote: » Again, I'm not saying the figures aren't awful - but you have to understand how Sweden report its deaths. Some of those numbers are accounting for previous fatalities, some of which can be from over a month ago. If you go to the page that biko linked - https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/09f821667ce64bf7be6f9f87457ed9aa and sort by Avlinda/dag (deaths per day) - you'll see the reported deaths for the past couple of days are much lower than that (again to reiterate as has been reported so far - you'll likely see additions to these days over the coming week(s)). Sweden's data is accurate but the reporting is very slow and it actually makes it much harder to get a snapshot of how they're currently coping with all of this. The numbers in the ICUs are dropping, albeit far more slowly than other countries that have engaged in lockdowns.
CrabRevolution wrote: » Is this the latest spot the goalposts have been relocated to? Simply not having runaway growth is a success, even if your death rate stays higher for far longer than other countries?
PhoenixParker wrote: » We're not going to get to zero, but we have got to a low level.
Kermit.de.frog wrote: » Austria has no new cases today. Compare that to Sweden.
charlie14 wrote: » Sweden are edging ever closer to France in deaths per million, and it looks to be just a matter of time before they exceed that figure. Unfortunately for the people of Sweden this strategy has left them with nowhere else to turn. It is too late to use lockdown to control the number. I wish them well, but, this strategy is increasingly looking like a very tragic mistake.
niallo27 wrote: » Well let's not exaggerate here, there are hardly people dying in the streets. For the vast vast majority of swedish people I doubt a few extra deaths will make any difference to them.
Deleted User wrote: » Their weekly totals are quite stable at 500 a week for around 6 weeks. Usually 4 high days mid week with low total Sat-Mon
charlie14 wrote: » Well let`s not fool ourselves either. When we look at Sweden`s strategy in comparison to its neigbours we can see the folly of a Swedish strategy that has no economic benefit, no immunity benefit and no exit plan. Just more deaths.
niallo27 wrote: » No exit plan, you do realise what sweden are doing now is every countries exit plan in a few months.
charlie14 wrote: » It is a stage in every countries exit plans when deaths and new confirmed cases are low enough. It is a stage where Sweden is stuck because of the numbers for both and looks like being there for some time.
charlie14 wrote: » If we had the equivalent of 250 deaths week on week for 6 weeks, I doubt our authorities terming it as quite stable would cut it publicly.
Charles Babbage wrote: » Excess deaths
tobefrank321 wrote: » I don't think you get that a longterm lockdown is not sustainable for many reasons. A vaccine may come in the next year but it may well be another year before herd immunity is achieved from it, and most people are vaccinated. There is no way people will remain locked down for 2 years. They will want to get on with their lives, visit friends and relatives, go on holiday and go to the pub. Lockdown is just not sustainable. And as soon as you lift lockdown its only a matter of time before numbers rise. Which is why most countries are looking at the Swedish experiment. There's some very obvious lessons to be learned from the care home crisis in every country, but don't expect our government or HSE to learn them.
tobefrank321 wrote: » The Irish excess numbers haven't been officially counted yet. An unofficial count using rip.ie showed an excess of about 1000 deaths for the period. And that map shows no excess for Spain or Italy which stretches credibility.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w5.vanillicon.com/v2/5117ec177439400b1e5944f4d30acdda.svg)
