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

biko

PhoenixParker wrote: »

Their rate of ICU admission is roughly constant.

This is because they don't admit all the people that should be there.

If you're over 70 it's unlikely you get admitted. src
Same if you have BMI over 40, a pacemaker, or a history of substance abuse.

It's like boasting that "our prisons aren't full". "But you're not arresting anyone!"

Before the contagion took hold Sweden had 526 ICU beds. Today they have about 900.
For a population of 10 million.
Of course they're not going to bring in your granny to take up a bed, and may take weeks to recover.

PhoenixParker

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

They don't have a "flat rate of infection", they are not testing in the community - hence why it's around 500 new cases officially every single day.

Ireland has tested nearly 100,000 more people than Sweden despite having half the population.

Their rate of ICU admission is roughly constant. The numbers in ICU are constant or falling. The number of deaths is roughly constant. Their health system is not being overwhelmed by exponential growth. Their R value is hovering close to 1.

Their rate is flat.

I do worry that they may get a batch of clusters at the same time which will suddenly change the situation but for now and for over a month, their curve has been flat.

Charles Babbage

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.

The map is not cumulative deaths, it is deaths in one week. Of course Italy and Spain had excess deaths in earlier weeks, but they no longer have, while Sweden does.

Kermit.de.frog

PhoenixParker wrote: »

Sweden is showing the opposite is true. Right now it seems a country can have a flat rate of infection without a lockdown.

They don't have a "flat rate of infection", they are not testing in the community - hence why it's around 500 new cases officially every single day.

Ireland has tested nearly 100,000 more people than Sweden despite having half the population.

bb1234567

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.

It is just for the week 20 of the year 2020. Spain and Italy had high excess deaths in weeks prior

PhoenixParker

tobefrank321 wrote: »

Lockdown is just not sustainable. And as soon as you lift lockdown its only a matter of time before numbers rise.

Sweden is showing the opposite is true. Right now it seems a country can have a flat rate of infection without a lockdown.

Sweden's problem is that they've got a flat rate of 5-7 deaths per million per day.

Post lockdown we'll hopefully be at a much lower rate and if we're cautious we can have schools open, socially distant restaurants, the odd day in the office etc. without getting a big second wave.

charlie14

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.

Has Sweden excess deaths for that period and if they have, have they been officially counted ?

PhoenixParker

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.

The map is from the official European Mortality counting organisation which has been tracking deaths since before covid. The source is credible with caution regarding the last 3 weeks data.

There is a caveat regarding Ireland on the front page. Its week 20 so Spain and Italy's mortality have returned close to normal levels, which is what the map shows. That is subject to final numbers in two more weeks, but euromomo been at this a while

The individual mortality graphs they give for each country are very interesting. More informative then s map snapshot.

charlie14

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.

Where did you get the idea from that post that I believe a lockdown should last for anything like two years

Nobody is looking at the Swedish experiment now other than being grateful they did not go down that road.

We have a timetable for five step easing of restrictions. If Sweden have any plans for moving from where they are I haven`t heard them.

Numbers may or may not rise, but at least we have a method of attempting to minimise them if they do. Testing, quick result reading, contact tracing and quarantine. With our numbers low due to lockdown we will have, as one poster said, wriggle room. I have heard no such plan from Sweden. Nor where they will have wriggle room if or when their numbers increase.

tobefrank321

Charles Babbage wrote: »

Excess deaths

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.

tobefrank321

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.

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.

biko

The Italians aren't happy with some claims made by the State Epidemiologist Anders Tegnell
Italy Embassy statement:
https://ambstoccolma.esteri.it/ambasciata_stoccolma/en/ambasciata/news/dall_ambasciata/2020/05/comunicato-stampa-dell-ambasciatore_0.html

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fambstoccolma.esteri.it%2Fambasciata_stoccolma%2Fen%2Fambasciata%2Fnews%2Fdall_ambasciata%2F2020%2F05%2Fcomunicato-stampa-dell-ambasciatore_0.html

niallo27

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.

Until these countries have exited the restrictions for a few months will we know if the Swedish numbers are bad in comparison. Its impossible to know yet.

charlie14

niallo27 wrote: »

No exit plan, you do realise what sweden are doing now is every countries exit plan in a few months.

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.

niallo27

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.

No exit plan, you do realise what sweden are doing now is every countries exit plan in a few months.

Charles Babbage

Excess deaths

charlie14

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

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.

bb1234567

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.

It's not a few, it will be a lot if it continues in this trend. And I don't know what that is supposed to mean, at what point does the number of deaths start to make a difference to people?

charlie14

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.

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.

[Deleted User]

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 .

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

[Deleted User]

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?

He is right though. The Swedish experiment has shown that you can maintain a stable level of cases without a lockdown. All us countries that now are coming out / out of lockdown can reap the benefits of this, while Sweden are on a knife edge knowing that any easing from their current methods may put them into crisis

niallo27

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.

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.

PhoenixParker

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Austria has no new cases today.

Compare that to Sweden.

Again, I'm not supporting the Swedish approach. My post does not suggest that I do. You're leaping to conclusions based on your own perceptions.

Kermit.de.frog

PhoenixParker wrote: »

We're not going to get to zero, but we have got to a low level.

Austria has no new cases today.

Compare that to Sweden.

PhoenixParker

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?

I don't think Swedem has taken a good path,not sure where you got that from my posts.

But yes, not having runaway growth is a success. We're not going to get to zero, but we have got to a low level. Swedens flat curve suggests that if we reopen a certain amount it will stay there. That's fantastic news as far as I'm concerned.

charlie14

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.

Some posters on here claimed that the spikes in deaths 3rd week of April were due to all the historical cases being included up to then.
If that was the case then any deaths now being added will only have gone back a month and would they not be very close to the numbers who passed in that time?

Even a bit low as others may be subsequently added.

the incredible pudding

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.

Those people obviously didn't understand how the reporting is done either and they were wrong to state that they are doing it right when it was still far too early to tell (and still is imho).

Here's some examples showing the tallies retrospectively changing between reporting days.
https://twitter.com/DavidSteadson/status/1263053842641453057

CrabRevolution

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.

That could well be the case, 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

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 .

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.

bb1234567

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.

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 .