Sweden avoiding lockdown

LOL.I`m not the poster jumping all around the world attempting to ignore the data that clearly shows that when compared on a like for like basis, even monthly, between neighbouring countries that share the same geographical are, have a shared history and the same percentage of their population in the highly vulnerable age group category, Sweden`s herd immunity strategy was a complete and utter failure.

It would if you are talking about countries that neighbour each other, have more or less the same age profile for those most at risk, and where one had practically the complete opposite in policy to its neighbours. Otherwise it would be completely illogical.

Lets get real here Fintan, you were one of the posters that believed Sweden`s Covid deaths would be no higher than any of it`s neighbours. Even as late as Oct/Nov. 2020 your were supporting posts that Sweden was likely to have less deaths for 2020 than 2019 when the stats now clearly show they were 9,368 higher.

Even for you Fintan after all your incorrect predictions and misrepresenting attempts at data since, that is a piss poor effort.

From your figures.

Denmark had +1.27% excess deaths.

Finland had +2.85% excess deaths.

Norway had -0.18% excess deaths.

Sweden had +10.55% excess deaths.

Trust me here Fintan, small numbers good, big number bad when you are attempting to compare one strategy with another on excess deaths while Sweden were following their herd immunity strategy during 2020. 2021 they, like everywhere else, put their faith in vaccines .

Worth noting that when making comparisons on a like for like basis, Norway and Sweden were the one country until 1905.

You should have paid attention until the end Fintan. My post states that from early 2021 Sweden started putting their faith in vaccines like everywhere else so when comparing the two different strategies you can only make comparisons for 2020 when Sweden`s faith was in achieving naturally acquired herd immunity and the other three were doing all the could to prevent their population from becoming infected.

You do realise don`t you Fintan that chasing herd immunity is based on as many becoming infected as quickly as possible to reach the estimated percentage level required ?

I posted the stats on those aged 65 years and over just recently. They are not difficult to find. If you do not believe them then go find the stats yourself. You do not seem short on time from the amount of irrelevant data you keep posting here.

Practically every country other than Sweden went with lockdown to mitigate against the spread of the virus and had faith, or at least hope, that a vaccine could be developed to counter it. Sweden threw the scientific approach out the window and went for naturally acquired herd immunity.

Early 2021 Sweden like everywhere else began administering vaccines. At that point the parameters to equate one strategy against the other went out the window as well. This has resulted in when comparing like for like on two such different strategies, the only data that is applicable is that between the start of the pandemic in 2020 and January 2021 before vaccines kick in. It`s really not that difficult to understand.

That is a completely different arguement where you are now attempting to throw in an imponderable to the mix that was not there for the first two waves when Sweden was solely chasing herd immunity and their neighbours were using lockdown to mitigate the spread hoping vaccines would be the answer rather than naturally acquired immunity. The data for that period,highlighted by the excess deaths during the height of the two waves in that period shows that Sweden`s strategy did not work.

Sweden`s strategy was all based on get infected once and you are immune. That has been clearly shown to be incorrect. The statistics from those occupying hospital and ICU beds show clearly that from the disproportionate numbers of unvaccinated occupying those beds the best protection from serious illness or death is vaccination. To now attempt to convolute a narrative when Sweden were using vaccines like everywhere else, as a defense of their attempt at naturally acquired herd immunity as opposed to lockdown, really does have no validity when we know the stats when they were using just their herd immunity strategy.

You are ignoring a few very important fact in that.

1. Sweden was talking back in 2020 of herd immunity being imminent any day now for Stockholm based on their numbers infected. Even their Ambassador to the U.S. got in on the act. When the antibody test results were revealed they were nowhere even close. In fact Spain who were using lockdown, antibody test results were higher for Madrid. The whole concept was flawed from the outset basing herd immunity on the perceived numbers infected. Amazonas,one of the worst hit areas, from test results of a much larger number actually infected from their first wave, believed at the start of their second wave they had achieved herd immunity. Two days after publishing this belief in medRxiv they went back into lockdown due to rising numbers.
2. What Amazonas and many others found was that acquired immunity was short term, and not what the Swedish strategy was based on, become infected, survive, and you are immune for life. What has been proven effective is getting vaccinated and as the vaccines effect grows weak, get boosters. Your attempting to link acquired immunity to be some major benefit to antibody levels alongside vaccines, gets blown out of the water on that basis alone. We know that acquired immunity levels also drop, so for your theory to carry any weight would necessitate playing continuous Russian roulette with the virus hoping to survive and reboot your antibody levels each time.

Is this what you are down to now Fintan, that legally Sweden could not use lockdown ? As the yanks say Fintan your a dollar and 2 years 5 months short on that arguement.

The Swedes could have imposed lockdown using The Public Order Act (1993) or the Contagious Disease Act (2004). To further back up their powers to impose lockdown their parliament passed the Temporary Covid-19 Act January 8th 2020, but rather foolishly imo did not use it and let it laps, but then ended up scrambling around to get it re-introduced, end of 2020 as far as I recall.

Very few now have a problem explaining how things went badly in Sweden while they were following their herd immunity strategy in 2020, but there are still a limited few in denial refusing to see that the statistics clearly show and are now also in denial of the findings of Sweden`s Coronavirus Commission.

From Sweden`s Coronavirus Commission "The government should have assumed leadership of all aspects of crisis management from the outset" the commission said in the report, adding that the government had too one-sided dependence on assessments made by the Public Health Authority. "In February-March 2020 Sweden should have opted for more rigorous and intrusive disease and prevention control measures." adding that "Earlier and additional steps should have been taken to try as far as possible to slow the spread of the virus in the community" The Commission also found that shopping centers, restaurants, public indoor swimming pools, as well as indoor cultural and sporting events should have been cancelled already in March 2020. However this was not possible due to legislation that was not amended until mid April 2021. (see recent reply to Fintan on that) "This was, as we stated in our second interim report, to late" The Commission said in their final report.

Sweden`s Public Health Agency also did an about face on mask wearing on public transport in December 2020 due to pressure from local authorities, but made it it so convoluted it only added to the confusion. The Commission finding on mask was "The Public Health Agency should not have dismissed the use of masks as a disease prevention and control measure in indoor settings and on public transport"

At this stage I`m afraid all your arguements in defense of Sweden`s strategy have not just ran out of road, they have crashed into the wall at the end of that road.

Other than a generalisation of "fundamentally correct" there really is nothing specific to back up when you consider their finding on the restrictions the believe should have been imposed and when. restriction for a few that anywhere else other than this thread would aquate to lockdown, and their findings on mask wearing make a pig`s ear of Sweden`s mask wearing policy.

I would disagree on public health having no right or wrong absolutes. For me public health policy should be based on ethics and science. Sweden`s herd immunity strategy was based on neither. Even Tegnell one of the main architects of their herd immunity strategy was eventually forced to concede that chasing herd immunity was unethical, and the data proved, not just in Sweden, but in anywhere else it was initially attempted or anywhere that believed they had achieved it, that in the words of Tegnell`s predecessor Annika Linde "like a dream with very little basis in reality"