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

Boggles

tobefrank321 wrote: »

The point is Swedens numbers are tailing off, while many other country's including our own are rising sharply.

That isn't true.

Averages have been staying steady and marginally falling.

tobefrank321

biko wrote: »

Call it what you want. A new spike, a new wave, whatever.

The point is Swedens numbers are tailing off, while many other country's including our own are rising sharply.

patnor1011

tobefrank321 wrote: »

No sign of a second wave in Sweden as is happening in many other countries. Their daily new case numbers are back where they were in mid March despite significantly more testing now.

There is no second wave. What is being portrayed as "second wave" is in fact just a virus coming to states where population was not yet exposed to the virus. Even Ireland exposure was delayed by lockdown which in fact only prolonged inevitable.

Better explained here:
At the end of May there was a significant breakthrough in understanding of COVID antibodies which was not widely reported: a Swiss study from Zurich led by Professor Onur Boyman demonstrated that a large proportion of the population had a natural immunity through existing antibodies on the mucous membrane (IgA) or cellular immunity (T cells), likely to have been acquired through previous exposure to coronaviruses such as influenza or the common cold (the absence of exposure to previous coronavirus is now thought to explain the opposite effect in 1918).

The study found that that the presence of (IgG and IgM) antibodies generated on infection which tests had previously focused on, were NOT in fact required to defeat the virus and that existing (IgA and T cell) antibodies that gave a natural immunity. Moreover, the population with this natural immunity was demonstrated to be five times greater than those with the IgG and IgM antibodies on which tests had hitherto focused. If this could be substantiated, then the population already exposed to COVID would also be five times greater than previously assumed. In other words, if a population sample showed 10% had IgG and IgM antibodies (which might be subject to decay) then it was likely that at least half of the population had already been exposed to COVID.

It followed that antibody studies that measured only IgG and IgM that were now predicting population-based mortality risk of 0.1% to 0.5% (lower than the 1% in the elderly population aboard the Diamond Princess) could be even further reduced by a factor of five to 0.02% to 0.1% and the level of symptomatic exposure from 20% to below 5% (consistent with the flu season ironically predicted by Fauci in March). Not only would this mean a further similar reduction in the estimated true mortality rate but it meant that there were far fewer people in the population who had never had exposure to the virus, so a far lower number who could potentially catch the virus in the future.

In short, the infamous herd immunity was much closer than previously realised.

This explained why, by July, the virus had all but disappeared in populations like Sweden, New York (Fig. 7) and Wuhan (which reportedly tested its entire population of 11 million and found only 300 cases, all of which were asymptomatic) which were significantly affected by a “first wave”: if the ratio of those with IgA and T cell antibodies to IgG and IgM antibodies across population was confirmed at a factor of five then if 20% of the population had traditional IgG and IgM antibodies (such as New York with 21% and London with 17%) then the virus died out because there was simply no one left for it to infect. It followed that the virus could only survive in population samples where testing showed the presence of IgG and IgM antibodies was below 20% (and allowing for their decay probably well below).

Nobel Prize winning biological scientist Michael Levitt had already come to the same conclusion based on a different approach: he predicted that the virus would “burn out” when it had infected 15-20% of the population though based on a pattern predicted by the “Gompertz curve” which indicated that the number of deaths after the peak is roughly double those from before resulting in Levitt accurately predicting the number of Chinese and Swedish deaths, months in advance. Levitt has recently bravely predicted that US COVID will “be done in 4 weeks [25 Aug] with a total reported death below 170,000”, compared to 149,000 today.

Boyman’s theory on “IgA and T Cell immunity” explained the accuracy of Levitt’s “Gompertz curve” predictions and this was now being backed up by the empirical evidence which showed that the populations which were hit hardest with high initial rates of infection and mortality, were the ones where the virus had almost disappeared.

Almost none of this was reported by a media which choose instead to attach the misnomer “second wave” to outbreaks of COVID infection in populations which had not yet experienced any meaningful “first wave”: the Sunbelt states in the US, Australia, Hong Kong, Japan. The irony was that the vulnerability of populations which had not yet seen meaningful infection outbreaks and therefore the fallacy of lockdown had already been predicted by Levitt and Giesecke. It was also logical that population groups where IgG and IgM antibodies were still significantly below 20% would continue to see infections.

biko

tobefrank321 wrote: »

No sign of a second wave in Sweden as is happening in many other countries. Their daily new case numbers are back where they were in mid March despite significantly more testing now.

biko

Mr Tegnell doesn't want Sweden to be compared to neighbour Norway and instead he prefers to be compared to Belgium, UK, and Netherlands.

I understand since Norway is doing much better than Sweden, and UK/Belgium/NL also have high numbers.

It's like Ireland not comparing itself with neighbours NI and UK, but instead with Italy and Spain.

tobefrank321

No sign of a second wave in Sweden as is happening in many other countries. Their daily new case numbers are back where they were in mid March despite significantly more testing now.

biko

mcsean2163 wrote: »

Discuss....

Bit cynical

mcsean2163 wrote: »

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/sweden/

Wordometer shows 7 day moving average of daily deaths for Sweden as 1 on July 29. On same date, 7 day moving average of daily deaths in Ireland is also 1

Discuss....

Looks like they are using the wrong dataset. According to WHO, Sweden reported 63 deaths over the last 7 days giving an average of 9. Download data here.

mcsean2163

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/sweden/

Wordometer shows 7 day moving average of daily deaths for Sweden as 1 on July 29. On same date, 7 day moving average of daily deaths in Ireland is also 1

Discuss....

Bit cynical

greyday wrote: »

Tegnel said they had plateaued at a low level........

I think daily deaths will continue to fall in Sweden for the next couple of weeks at least and, sadly, we'll also see some rises in those countries that are currently suffering a resurgence. Hopefully though treatments will have improved since the earlier outbreak and fatalities can be minimised.

greyday

Bit cynical wrote: »

Though rapidly falling, daily deaths for Sweden are still quite high even though daily case numbers are now about at the EU average. Only Bulgaria is higher at present. This is due to the lag between infections and daily deaths. We can expect therefore that daily fatalities will continue to fall for Sweden.

Tegnel said they had plateaued at a low level........

Bit cynical

sydthebeat wrote: »

These days??

They haven't been honest since the start of this whole pandemic.

Though rapidly falling, daily deaths for Sweden are still quite high even though daily case numbers are now about at the EU average. Only Bulgaria is higher at present. This is due to the lag between infections and daily deaths. We can expect therefore that daily fatalities will continue to fall for Sweden.

bb1234567

biko wrote: »

At least Sweden isn't on the 100K table now

All the European countries which are in the top 10 deaths per capita have been removed in that list above.Wonder what they're attempting to do , trying to make it look like the UK is doing no better than countries of the developing world maybe?

Spain , Italy , Sweden and France still place within the top 10 highest number of deaths per capita

Bit cynical

The rising green line on the top left of the chart is Luxembourg.

sydthebeat

JimmyVik wrote: »

Call me cynical, but i think Sweden are being less than honest these days.

These days??

They haven't been honest since the start of this whole pandemic.

JimmyVik

Bit cynical wrote: »

Their R number is the lowest in the EU based on the rate at which daily cases are falling and their daily case numbers are very close to the average for the whole of the EU per capita, whose daily cases are now rising.

Call me cynical, but i think Sweden are being less than honest these days.

Bit cynical

AdamD wrote: »

Kinda shows the limitations of the R rate

You could have thousands of cases a day and have a lower R rate than a country with 20 cases a day

That's right. You need to use the two in combination. The R rate doesn't tell you where you are right now but rather the direction in which you are going.

[Deleted User]

Kinda shows the limitations of the R rate

You could have thousands of cases a day and have a lower R rate than a country with 20 cases a day

Bit cynical

timmy_mallet wrote: »

Well, Sweden is theoretically vaccinating people now, and their R number is lower than ours.

(PS. 'mass vaccination' is a disturbing dystopian term. Christ!)

Their R number is the lowest in the EU based on the rate at which daily cases are falling and their daily case numbers are very close to the average for the whole of the EU per capita, whose daily cases are now rising.

timmy_mallet

Donald Trump wrote: »

Well it would definitely be over in Sweden soon if they all catch it and die from it.

CFR is 0.6% max. So that would never happen. But carry on.

timmy_mallet

tobefrank321 wrote: »

Whether Sweden got it right or not all depends when mass vaccination is completed. If everyone could be vaccinated next week and this thing was over, Sweden would have got it badly wrong. But if there is still no mass vaccination this time next year and Sweden maintain their current trend of declining deaths, they will likely have got it right. Other countries will be continually fighting outbreaks. It seems inevitable that deaths will start to rise in other countries in the coming weeks.

Ireland for example based on current trends will have a choice to make in about a month - another mass lockdown or follow the Swedish model of leaving everything open.

Well, Sweden is theoretically vaccinating people now, and their R number is lower than ours.

(PS. 'mass vaccination' is a disturbing dystopian term. Christ!)

JimmyVik

Bit cynical wrote: »

There were reports of people thronging the streets of Spanish cities after their very strict lockdown. This may be partly to blame for their recent spike in infections.

I saw pictures of Barcelona the day they were told to lock down.
The beach was jammed and the streets were packed.
The only thing the police were able to do was close the squares off with barricades. Other than that it was like a protest march everywhere. They all came out

Bit cynical

tobefrank321 wrote: »

There was talk about lockdown fatigue in some countries and when best to implement a lockdown. It may have played a part in delays in the UK and possibly Ireland to a lesser extent. However we definitely saw at the end of lockdowns in Ireland, UK and US and other countries significant fatigue and a desire to get back to normality. There were protests in countries like France against it as well as the US. You only have to look back on this forum at the fatigue towards the end and the unwillingness ever to go into lockdown again.

Its always better to get people's buy in and co-operation than force them to do something as they will rebel against the latter.

There were reports of people thronging the streets of Spanish cities after their very strict lockdown. This may be partly to blame for their recent spike in infections.

tobefrank321

charlie14 wrote: »

There is nothing to suggest the majority of European countries did not have their peak around the same time as Sweden.The only difference is that the majority of those reduced their numbers faster, and thus having few deaths than Sweden, by using lockdown.
The big question will be is if there is a second wave, will Sweden go with the same strategy where their own projections are for a further 5,800 deaths

The Swedes at least have been transparent about a worst case scenario. No other country seems to have produced a worst case scenario for a second wave, unless you can find it for me?

The point of outlining a worst case scenario is to implement measures and advice to ensure it doesn't happen.

Its a myth as you well know that the Swedes have no restrictions, although generally they rely on advice and guidance than strict rules.

Here is that advice:

https://www.thelocal.se/20200228/coronavirus-the-everyday-precautions-to-take-if-youre-in-sweden

There was talk about lockdown fatigue in some countries and when best to implement a lockdown. It may have played a part in delays in the UK and possibly Ireland to a lesser extent. However we definitely saw at the end of lockdowns in Ireland, UK and US and other countries significant fatigue and a desire to get back to normality. There were protests in countries like France against it as well as the US. You only have to look back on this forum at the fatigue towards the end and the unwillingness ever to go into lockdown again.

Its always better to get people's buy in and co-operation than force them to do something as they will rebel against the latter.

Ozark707

charlie14 wrote: »

Why do you have a problem with that
From the article you posted the worst case scenario is where Covid-19 is expected "to follow a traditional pandemic trajectory" where over 5,800 more deaths could follow.
Do you believe this pandemic has not been following a traditional trajectory ?

I have no problem with it, it was just I had heard initially about the separate projections and I didn't know which one you were referring to. I was only looking for clarification.

charlie14

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Yes. If a vaccine really does become available this year then they didnt need to let the virus run through the population. but if it doesn't then they are in a good position. They have already experienced their peak, while the countries who suppressed it will still have to go through it because locking down again really isn't an option.

There is nothing to suggest the majority of European countries did not have their peak around the same time as Sweden.The only difference is that the majority of those reduced their numbers faster, and thus having few deaths than Sweden, by using lockdown.
The big question will be is if there is a second wave, will Sweden go with the same strategy where their own projections are for a further 5,800 deaths

charlie14

Ozark707 wrote: »

I found this. You are citing the worst case scenario of the 3 that they came up with.

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2020-07-covid-deaths-sweden-health-agency.html

Why do you have a problem with that

From the article you posted the worst case scenario is where Covid-19 is expected "to follow a traditional pandemic trajectory" where over 5,800 more deaths could follow.
Do you believe this pandemic has not been following a traditional trajectory ?

greyday

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Well their cases and deaths are dropping significantly every week, while most of the rest of Europe is seeing increases on reopening and facing the "2nd wave". I'd wager that Sweden will be over and done with this thing much sooner than those places who tried and failed to avoid it, much like how the NE states of the US and the hard hit areas of Spain and Italy are now.

Why is that happening?

Donald Trump

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Well their cases and deaths are dropping significantly every week, while most of the rest of Europe is seeing increases on reopening and facing the "2nd wave". I'd wager that Sweden will be over and done with this thing much sooner than those places who tried and failed to avoid it, much like how the NE states of the US and the hard hit areas of Spain and Italy are now.

Well it would definitely be over in Sweden soon if they all catch it and die from it.

Ozark707

charlie14 wrote: »

A second wave hitting the country resulting in, by their own estimates a further 5,800 deaths.

I found this. You are citing the worst case scenario of the 3 that they came up with.

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2020-07-covid-deaths-sweden-health-agency.html