GreeBo wrote: » Any numbers for Sweden on patients who survived but have not made a complete recovery? If we just look at deaths I think we risk missing real impacts to people's lives.
Bit cynical wrote: » Just on the topic of deaths, if we look at a graph of cumulative deaths per 100,000 of Sweden and the EU as a whole the picture is quite interesting. For a large portion of last year, Sweden was indeed worse for deaths than the EU generally, but as we came into winter things started to change. Deaths did indeed rise in Sweden but they rose at a faster rate for the EU as a whole and now they are pretty much neck and neck. Of course this is only deaths directly connected with covid-19. Other problems due to lockdowns will be lower in Sweden than the EU generally as for most of the period they have had fewer restrictions. The really successful countries succeeded not because of lockdowns but because or border controls. I think one of the reasons people might think Sweden is way ahead in cumulative deaths is that they did indeed spend a lot of time ahead of most other European countries therefore they still have a reputation built up which, though no longer valid, is hard to shift. The other thing is that since they only report numbers certain days of the week, the numbers they do report on those days will on average be higher. It does not make any difference in the long run but it allows critics wishing to besmirch Sweden to pick a particular day (often a Tuesday, the first day of reporting in the week) and compare that artificially high figure with one from a country that reports every day of the week. Obviously it is going to seem very unfair that the EU, with its widespread restrictions and lockdowns (and associated longterm resulting problems), is no better proportionately speaking than Sweden, but perceived unfairness is not an excuse for distorting the facts as I think critics of Sweden have been doing.
j@utis wrote: » Great posts here. What are irish numbers like? Or it's probably on the other thread. Good luck finding it now but I'll try.
bocaman wrote: » Sweden's Coivd policy has failed utterly. The went for herd immunity and it has been a disaster.
niallo27 wrote: » Not by the graph just posted, they are in line with the European average without having shut down most of the year.
Drumpot wrote: » How are they in comparison to their Nordic Neigbours? That’s their benchmark as those countries have far more in common with Sweden. Swedens death ratio has been just about 10 times that of Norway and Finland. That suggests that there are variables in this Scandinavian area that has allowed these countries to protect their populations far better then the rest of Europe. Ireland has just under half the deaths per million in comparison to the UK. Imagine the Uk had 10 times our death ratio but they had done more consistantly a Swedish open up approach and have even less restrictions then they had. Nobody in Ireland would be looking at them positively.
tobefrank321 wrote: » Ireland, Finland and Norway have obvious geographical and population advantages over other countries. All 3 are small countries on the periphery of Europe with only one land border of note. Norways borders with Russia and Finland are in the artic circle. Norway closed its land border with Sweden and now demands travellers stay in hotels for two weeks. I'm fairly sure the Finnish border with Russia for historical reasons is tightly controlled with few crossings. In reality Sweden and Ireland should also have quarantined visitors in hotels and if they did, they'd be in a far better place today. But it would be deeply unpopular. Based on current trends, Ireland's deaths will take a dramatic upswing starting from next Tuesday onwards and we are bound to see days with 30 or 40+ deaths on a regular basis.
FintanMcluskey wrote: » I think at this stage to say the UK have 10 times Ireland’s death rate is totally inaccurate and its something I see the media continue to use despite the fact it’s misleading. 95% of deaths occur in the over 65 age groups. Population demographics is a huge factor in the number of vulnerable citizens a country has at risk. The Uk has about twice Ireland’s death rate per 100 in the over 65 category but the fact Ireland has Europe’s youngest population is a massive natural advantage when accounting for Covid deaths
Drumpot wrote: » Swedens approach in scandanavia led to 10 times the amount of deaths their neighbours either side of them. There is no way of getting around this fact. Might aswell say Europe is great cause it’s average is less then USA who had a mish mash load of bollox way of handling this. Its reasonable to hypothesise that If the rest of Europe had the Swedish approach the death numbers we are seeing wouid be a multiple of what we have had. I don’t understand how people can think having a more open society the last year would of somehow equated to less deaths. There is no logic to this thinking. When we reopened back in August why weren’t people able to be responsible after being locked down for 5 months? If people didn’t get the message that we need to be more responsible after a 5 month lockdown in what planet do people think that then being asked to be more careful would of worked? There’s a real belligerence mindset that asking people to be responsible (and we will keep pubs open etc) would of worked. The evidence in December categorically proved it would of been a disaster. There is literally no evidence that we can get from the last 8 months that Irish people would of been more responsible with less restrictions and more the honor system.
Drumpot wrote: » Pick any country in Europe in the top 20 deaths and none of them are 10 times off another. Again, Sweden have 10 times the death of their neighbours, what’s explains this difference? Is it not primarily how they managed the spread of the virus ?
tobefrank321 wrote: » We're back to the "because they're in the same region they must be the same" argument. Canada and the US are in the same region. Did they end up with the same death rate? And if not why not? Ireland and UK are in the same region. You pointed out yourself they are doing worse than us. Their current lockdowns have been in place even longer than ours. I note also you don't use Denmark as a comparison. Why is that? Because their deaths have also started to rise?
FintanMcluskey wrote: » You haven’t understood my point at all
Seweryn wrote: » It should. And here are the numbers: It is an average year for Sweden in terms of deaths and you could find worse years in the past, i.e. 2015, 2016, 2017, etc. The 2019 brings the calculated five year average down a good bit though.
tobefrank321 wrote: » Its got little to do with lockdowns in any case. If lockdowns were a great success, you wouldn't see 24 countries ahead of Sweden in deaths per million. The countries who did best in the spring wave were those who kept their borders tightly controlled, eg Czechia, NZ, Taiwan, Austailia. The countries who did worst in the Autumn/Winter wave were those who had open borders, and Norway, NZ, Austrailia weren't those. Czechia opened their borders in the summer and once expats and tourists visited their numbers shot up. Same for most of the eastern, central and southern countries now doing badly. There is no reason why a small country like Slovenia should have the 3rd worst deaths in the world, despite having regular lockdowns.
Drumpot wrote: » Of course it was restrictions. How else do you explain the 10 fold difference in deaths between Finland, Norway and Sweden? And if you are wondering why I keep repeating myself it’s because you can’t or won’t answer the question. If it wasn’t restrictions, what explains the difference in deaths between these 3? Oh and explain to me how not having restrictions would of resulted in the same or better numbers? I hear you say it but I don’t see any rational explanation on how this would of worked. So again, Ireland was closed and opened back up on September, how come numbers rose? Why didn’t we learn to manage our behavior after the lockdown? How do you believe had we not brought in the lockdown measures that things would of been better? Our CMO was asking us for months to reduce our contacts. We had our chance to adapt to this and we failed. There is nothing you can say that proves Irish people would of been more responsible had they been offered an alternative because we had that chance between sept and October and it didn’t work.
Drumpot wrote: » Why is it ok to benchmark Sweden to Ireland who have a lot less in common with them then their scandanvian counterparts? Again, Finland and Norway took an approach closer to the rest of Europe then that of Sweden.
tobefrank321 wrote: » Your arguments are all over the place. So Norway and Finland took the approach closer to the rest of Europe. Well then Norway and Finland should have ended up with sh1t results because that's exactly what happened in the rest of Europe. Except they didn't. Because Norway and Finland have obvious geographical advantages as well as a low population density. Norway has some of the tighest restrictions around travel in Europe. So that is different to the rest of Europe. Do you accept most lockdown countries in Europe are doing terribly?
Drumpot wrote: » Exactly, Norway and Finland had geographical advantages that Sweden Shared and yet Sweden's deaths have been deplorable in comparison. Iceland, Norway, Finland and Sweden have the lowest population density in Europe and sweden has come out the worst in terms of deaths. Interestingly you mentioned Denmarks numbers earlier, they have one of the highest population densitys in Europe. So Sweden had that advantage and made a balls of it. I think Europe has handled this very poorly, but I think Sweden handled it even worse proportionate to the advantages they shared with their neighbours.
Bit cynical wrote: » I think Sweden did quite well given that they neither closed their borders nor did they have extreme restrictions. I think the reason they are doing better than the likes of France, Spain, Italy etc. is that they went for measures that could be sustained for as long as needed rather than more severe restrictions that must be lifted after a certain period of time. When these more extreme measures are inevitably lifted there's an inevitable public overreaction leading to higher cases and deaths. In addition in these countries there's very little chance for immunity to develop in the otherwise healthy population thus compounding the problems when people are allowed back onto the streets.
tobefrank321 wrote: » Sweden has a border with Norway and a bridge connection to Denmark and they are much closer to the European mainland than either Finland or Norway. They have a higher population density than both, bigger population, bigger immigrant community, Stockholm has 4 times the density of Oslo, they have a higher age profile than Norway, and there are several other differences too. Over 60% of Norway's exports are oil and gas for example, whereas Sweden exports services and manufactured goods. They are not the "twins" some would have us believe or even in many regards that similar. As I said just because two countries share a region doesnt mean all that much, eg Ireland and UK, Canada and US, north Korea and south korea.
charlie14 wrote: » Here you go. January 3rd. Covid-19 deaths per 100,000 of population. Sweden 87.83. Ireland 46.06. The other three Nordic countries. Finland 10.24. Denmark 23.66. Norway 8.43.
