You have to look at the excess deaths figures. That is, how many usually dies from January to June in a normal year and compare that to how many extra that died in 2020. For Sweden the excess deaths almost exactly matches the number of Covid deaths, give or take 10%.<p>That is not the case for many other countries. For example, the UK had almost twice the number of excess deaths as Covid deaths in a few weeks in April. That indicates that Covid deaths were under reported in the UK. There are also some indications that Covid deaths have been under reported in other countries.<p>In other words, comparing countries by their Covid deaths/capita rates is meaningless. The statistics are likely completely wrong because different countries use different definitions of "Covid deaths" and different reporting procedures.<p><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/ng-interactive/2020/may/29/excess-deaths-uk-has-one-highest-levels-europe" rel="nofollow">https://www.theguardian.com/world/ng-interactive/2020/may/29...</a>
The jury is still out on "economic failure." The evidence cited on the economy is thin at best.<p>The main piece of evidence is that "Sweden’s central bank expects its economy to contract by 4.5 percent this year, a revision from a previously expected gain of 1.3 percent." Economic forecasts are <i>ridiculously</i> unreliable. In the US, economists forecast (on average) that 8 million jobs would be lost in May. Instead there was a 2.5 million gain in jobs. Not a single economist surveyed by Bloomberg though there would be any gain at all (<a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-06-06/may-jobs-report-forecast-miss-could-have-policy-ramifications" rel="nofollow">https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-06-06/may-jo...</a>). The hard data we have on GDP so far: Sweden's GDP grew by 0.1% in Q1 2020 (0.4% annualized), Germany and the UK's GDP fell.<p>The other evidence is that unemployment has risen in Sweden and spending in Denmark has only fallen 4 percentage points more than Sweden. But Denmark has propped up employment by "covering 75 to 90 percent of all worker salaries over the next three months, provided that companies refrain from layoffs."(<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/28/business/nordic-way-economic-rescue-virus.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/28/business/nordic-way-econo...</a>). And from the numbers in the article, Denmark's unemployment rate has still risen proportionally more. Granted, Sweden has very generous unemployment benefits, but I'm not aware of a similar layoff prevention program.
One thing missing from this report is that a large proportion of the deaths were in care homes, and ministers have publicly stated that not entirely locking down care homes from the outset was a big mistake. If they had done this, the figures may well not look nearly as bad.<p>Also, what will count is not the first few months but the entire lifetime of this pandemic. I'll be interested to see where countries are a year or two from now.<p>This isn't to say I support the Swedish government's strategy - I don't feel like I know enough to say what the best strategy is, although I do think that that the worst strategy is to have no strategy, seemingly like the USA and UK.
Deaths per 1M population are significantly higher in Italy(577), Spain(607) and the UK(654) than they are in Sweden(539). And Sweden have been a lot more honest in counting than most countries.<p>There seems to be a drive to discredit the <i>inalienable human rights</i> approach, in this case by implying it was a financial decision; but i have to say i am impressed by the way they have handled this situation, the only response on earth that involved treating their citizens like adults.
Any coherent explanation of this pandemic is going to need to explain why some countries that didn't do very much (e.g. Japan) ended up with far fewer deaths per capita than countries that locked down (e.g. EU countries and the United States).<p>Sweden is somewhere in the middle -- they are being criticized, yet other countries in Europe which locked down have ended up with a higher per capita death rate.<p>Why is it that Cambodia and other nations in southeast Asia have negligible deaths despite doing very little to combat the virus, while countries in the EU which locked down have way more deaths per capita?<p>Somehow the models about the spread and death rate of this virus seem to differ on a geographical basis, and that needs to be explained.<p>At this point, any analysis of the pandemic that does not attempt to tackle this problem is selectively ignorant.
To me this is moving the goalpost.<p>The stated objective of the lockdown was not to overwhelm the ICUs. As far as I know the ICUs in Sweden have not been overwhelmed. So how is that a failure?<p>As for the economic impact, given the amount of life support injections into the economy, I think the real economic impact of the shock is yet to be seen. Defaults are only starting to rise.
I find this article a little disingenuous and here is why: Sweden-5420 deaths out of a population of 10 million while no lock down.
Michigan-6005 deaths out of a population of 10 million and we have been locked down since mid March.<p>To be clear, I was in favor of the lockdown at first and I still am in favor of keeping things like bars and casinos closed but it’s become clear that the virus doesn’t have much affect on younger populations and that the death rate has been dropping. Here in Michigan, while our daily new cases is still creeping up, our 7 day moving average of deaths has continued to plummet.
Edit: I'm letting my original comment stand as it shows how I was subtly misinformed regarding the situation of Sweden. I don't think I'd be the only one.<p>Wait, with all due respect, 5420 deaths on 10 million people? On a country left completely unchecked? That doesn't sound like the impending doom I thought the virus would bring.<p>I thought the novel corona virus had a death rate of about 1% to 2% and a bigger spreading rate that was bigger than 1, if no measures were taken. So, I'd expect between 100,000 to 200,000 to have died. I'm really happy that didn't happen. It also makes me curious as to why. Is it because of Sweden's demographics (people living alone)? Or is it because the virus isn't as deadly as we think it is?<p>How come 0.05% died and not 1% to 2%? Isn't this evidence that the coronavirus isn't as big as a threat as we thought? I mean 0.05% deaths is 40 times smaller than 2% deaths.<p>It's awful what happened, but the highest flu season in The Netherlands, for example, killed an estimated 9444 people [1] on 17,280,000 people, which is slightly higher than what the Swedes had to go through now (also rounded to 0.05%). I know that the novel coronavirus is not a flu, but if this is it, then well, I've seen worse, apparently.<p>I know the virus isn't done, but it had months to roam free in Sweden. One would expect it would double up every 5 days in terms of how many people would be infected.<p>Edit: they did need to maintain social distance apparently. I wouldn't call that "doing nothing". Sure a lot more can be done, but I feel the media are framing the Swedes a bit inaccurately. Belgium seems to be way worse (9774 on 11,460,000 people, ~0.1% is getting truly uncomfortable)<p>[1] In Dutch, unfortunately: <a href="https://www.rivm.nl/monitoring-sterftecijfers-nederland" rel="nofollow">https://www.rivm.nl/monitoring-sterftecijfers-nederland</a>
I feel that so many of these articles on Sweden fail to mention the reason for Sweden's strategy and often say it due to another reason. The reason that the Swedish government has given for the strategy is that they think that people can follow the restrictions long term. It's not to save the economy or to create heard immunity (which I have heard from many people.) I think it's too early to judge Sweden's strategy as presumably the intent is that things will be better down the line.<p>On a more personal note, I live in Sweden and I am not a Swedish citizen and I can say that things aren't "Business as usual here" and plenty is being done to stop the spread of the COVID 19. I can't say I 100% agree with the policy but I also don't think it's the huge mistake people make it out to be.<p>I have linked below an explanation for the strategy by one of Sweden's top epidemiologist and the one that's often credited as the architect of Sweden's strategy.<p><a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-06-28/sweden-s-covid-expert-says-the-world-still-doesn-t-understand" rel="nofollow">https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-06-28/sweden-s-...</a><p><a href="https://www.krisinformation.se/en/hazards-and-risks/disasters-and-incidents/2020/official-information-on-the-new-coronavirus" rel="nofollow">https://www.krisinformation.se/en/hazards-and-risks/disaster...</a>
This is meaningless. There were no economic gains expected, just avoiding a greater disaster. Given that Swedish economy is fairly integrated with its lockdown neighbours, it would be surprising if there were any economic gains; instead, it is probable its neighbours benefitted from Sweden having avoided lockdown.<p>Also, the higher death rate is normal and acceptable, in a tradeoff against deaths caused by confinement and the unnecessary prolongation of the epidemic. Herd immunity will arrive earlier, and lockdown-caused deaths will perhaps make Swedes survive more and better.<p>Now vote me down.
I think it's misleading to phrase things, as the article does, as just "more deaths" vs "the economy". The drawbacks of a large-scale mandatory lockdown (as opposed to asking people to do their own social distancing) also include other things like psychological effects on the population, political consequences (setting a precedent of severely restricting personal freedoms), and, well, enjoyment: making 10 million people more happy for a few months doesn't seem entirely negligible from a utilitarian perspective.<p>This isn't to take position for or against Sweden's policy here, but there are far more variables than simply excess deaths (or DALYs) and economic impact.
It's my first comment on HN. I am not a native english speaking person so I am sorry for some wrong wording in my answer.<p>I am from Portugal. In first 2 months we were considered an example on how to deal with an pandemic.<p>Today, our best business partners, I list UK in this scenario, does not give Portugal a safe destiny badge.<p>People tend to overcome rules. UK people are flying to Spain an then get a bus to Portugal.<p>Today's news was about 2000 students from Netherlands partying in Portugal, Algarve.<p>I am a young and healthy person AFAIK, but my mother is not. Neither my father in law or some of my closest friends.<p>Any death caused by irresponsible behaviour should be treated as an law infringement.<p>I really don't care if I get Corona. Pretty much I do, or in this case, I don't do, is thinking about people that does not have the chance of saying: fuck it.<p>It's the world we have, but I am sure it's not the world I wanted.<p>Bare with me: any death that could be avoided they should be avoided. And we could avoid alot of deaths if we think about others, an not that much about ourselves.<p>60 years ago you didn't have internet, lot's didn't even have light or bathroom in house.<p>Divorces are up with confinement. Are those people really meant to be together?<p>Don't look to much to your belly, and look around. Learn how to respect others without expecting the retribution.<p>You will feel great when you give up something you think it's aquired by right to something you think it's just right.<p>Best
Sweden is much hated because it demonstrates how the scientific epidemiological models, the studies on mask effectiveness, lockdown estimations etc are all junk science. None of their models would have predicted the trajectory for Sweden, not even close.<p>And that is because none are based on sound science but are guesstimates at best yet are paraded around as the product of the best minds in the world.<p>Much is made about the growing anti-science sentiment in the world, the rushed pseudo scientific justification will only strengthen that.<p>Give it a year and most of the justification will be walked back, it will turn out that wearing a mask is actually detrimental to public health. It boggles the mind that people assume there must be no ill effects to breathing through a mucus-laden cotton sheet filled with microorganisms captured from the air, ...
This highly cited April 11th study projected that Sweden would have 96,000 deaths by July 1st if it didn't institute a lockdown:<p><a href="https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.11.20062133v1.full.pdf" rel="nofollow">https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.11.20062133v...</a><p>The actual death toll was 5,400, and now the deaths are declining precipitiously. Of course every death is a tragedy, but the harm done from a national lockdown, which includes youth missing out on a year of school, and thousands of small businesses being destroyed, would have been more of one.<p>Like Michael Levitt, who's the 2013 Chemistry Nobel Laureate for research in complex systems, says, society has forgotten that people die.<p>10,000 people per million die every year in Sweden. That rate increasing by 500 is not that abnormal - it happens in bad influenza seasons. If every one was forced to stop working and shelter at home for months every time an infectious disease temporarily rose the death rate by 10%, it would lead to disaster over the long run.<p>90% of deaths in Sweden have been of those over the age of 70. If the statistics are anything like those in Italy, almost all of these victims had pre-existing conditions.<p>This is not to lessen the tragedy of their death. This is to point out that most of this tragedy predated their coronavirus infection - their life expectancy was already very limited due to other factors.
One interesting thing about Sweden is the high percentage of people who live alone. It's a big deal because in China most deaths came from an infected person spreading it to their family. Makes you think that if Sweden's numbers are as bad as they are without large-scale family spread, it would be absolutely horrific elsewhere.
Sweden are a model of pragmatism, taking a sensible choice to not have an authoritarian lockdown. Freedom of choice, freedom of movement and freedom of commerce are sacred.
What went wrong in Sweden? I genuinely don't understand that.<p>The news keeps showing Swedes walking in parks and down streets, but that's not how people catch the novel coronavirus. Meanwhile, people were working from home and mass gatherings were banned; the public were trusted to figure out the details, but they're not idiots. It could have worked.<p>What was everyone doing in Sweden that people weren't doing in Finland and Australia? Or were there less visible differences, in surveillance and contact tracing maybe, that haven't been so widely reported?
I don’t believe the article has addressed Sweden’s main argument for not shutting down: that herd immunity should be the prime driver. Essentially, that everyone is going to eventually have roughly the same death rate, so might as well get it over with.<p>That remains to be seen; if Sweden’s peers can prevent flare-ups, it looks like Sweden was wrong.
Statistics is just statistics. Many compare Swedens death/capita to other countries figures and conclude it is bad. But this is in fact not a god measure at all because this figure dont account for how far the spread is over the population, Sweden is very different here. Because Sweden have been more open they are also far ahead of other countries and much more people have been exposed and got antibodies. Sweden cant simply be compared to others that are more in the beginning in the pandemic. Sadly media forget this.<p>The virus cant be stopped so sooner or later other couties must open up and then they going to get more death. Just look at Spain that open up now had to lock down a reginon now with 200.000. Saying Swedens way is bad right now is far to early to conclude, when the pandemic is far from over. We have to wait at least a year or two.
Sweden is right to be concerned about their economy. Its not just about skipping a few haircuts -- a shattered economy kills people as sure as coronavirus does. Every shuttered manufacturing plant has a body count associated with it and its own case mortality rate.<p>I don't know how many people died as a direct result of the Great Depression but based on what I've been told by relatives the suffering was considerable with deaths due to lack of food, homelessness and despair. I <i>do</i> know that the Nazi party would never have come to power in Germany without the world economic collapse. They were a minor party on the wane in the late 20s only to get their second wind in the elections following the crash. It's also possible the Japanese militarist would never have come to power without the Great Depression for more complex reasons. WWII was the result at the cost of 45-70 million lives. Economic catastrophes are not just about money -- they have life and death consequences. I wish more people would have taken this into consideration before they carpet bombed the US economy to combat the pandemic. I guess they figured that no matter what, the US was safe from the kind of civil unrest that gripped the Weimar republic. A strong man taking control of the US? Fascist and antifascist battling in the street? That could never happen here.
Sweden recorded its first week of no excess mortality over a month ago: <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-sweden-mortality/sweden-records-first-week-with-no-excess-mortality-since-pandemic-struck-idUSKBN23F1WK" rel="nofollow">https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-sweden...</a><p>The economic gains part of it is not really relevant. Today each country is exposed to the global economy. If everyone else has economies that are broken then that will trickle over to Sweden inevitably. But that doesn’t mean that it is not worth pushing for Sweden’s strategy. If more countries did so, perhaps Sweden would collect economic gains.
As a Swede that did not agree with the strategy at the time (it was hugely risky), given what we know now, I'm starting to think it was the right decisions (for the wrong reasons). The reason the economy is in trouble has more to do with that the rest of the word shut down, it being a highly export dependent economy. Sweden did not shut down, practically nobody wears a mask (still), social distancing is minimal (crammed subways, buses and beaches), schools have remained open, yet there has not been a single death in the worst hit area of Stockholm for the past 5 days. Again, I think given the uncertainty and lack of evidence in March, not shutting down was an extremely stupid risk, and Tegnell and crew have shown to been wrong at practically every turn, but at this point you have to look at the evidence and reassess. It would seem Stockholm has reached the point of significant herd immunity, which is probably true for other hard hit areas like NYC. Less hit areas will probably have second waves, and unless a vaccine is here soon, my guess is most of the world will go through the same thing eventually.
Swedish officials has said over and over again that neither herd immunity nor economics is the basis for the strategy chosen. They tried to strike a balance between the impact of containment measures (isolation, mental health, lack of education etc) and minimizing the spread of the virus. Of course the first point is extremely hard to quantify, and thus the hard numbers are horrifying.<p>Most people in Sweden are taking plenty precautions and isolate on a voluntary level, highly encouraged by all institutions. However, if you are stuck inside with abusive parents or are getting depressed by the isolation, you have the choice to go out.<p>As others have mentioned, the true failure has been in elder care. How the virus was allowed to ravage care centers is completely unacceptable.
I think one aspect missing from the discussion of whether or not Sweden has done the right thing is just how much power a government has over its citizens.<p>In many cases I think the consensus in Sweden is that the government doesn’t have the right to keep people at home or force people to wear masks. The current government had to push to get legislation passed that allowed them to shut down primary schools and preschools, if needed.<p>When this is all said and done a lot of countries are going to have evaluate what all
of this has meant for their democracies.
Economics aside, there may be mental health wins for keeping a different mix as they have. Or losses, too — it’s really too early to say one way or another imho.
The idea of prioritising the economy is a falsehood. You can't have a strong economy with a virus like covid ripping its way through the population. Some people might go on as normal, but a huge portion of the population will be afraid of going outside.<p>The only feasible path to economic recovery is:<p>1. Keep the borders closed. Mandatory & monitored quarantine for anyone entering.<p>2. Lock down, test & contact-trace until the virus is basically eradicated. Mandating mask use outside of abodes or any other measure will help speed this along, too.<p>3. Open up, but keep borders closed except to places applying a similar approach.<p>The swifter the action, the easier it all is.
this was supposed to be about economy? I thought they just wanted to preserve their way of life without draconian measures of countries which took those measures and got Fd anyway in matter of deaths or economy<p>it was pretty clear from beginning it won't have big impact on their economy either way
The opening paragraph of the article shows to me that the journalist in question has done a poor job researching exactly what happened in Sweden.<p>> Sweden has captured international attention by conducting an unorthodox, open-air experiment.<p>Almost every interview available with Anders Tegnell (swedish equivalent of Anthony Fauci) mention that the international community prior to covid had agreed that following a strategy similar to the one sweden are following now is the best choice. Somehow this translates to an "unorthodox" strategy. Never mind that during previous epidemics, like SARS, the current Swedish response was "the normal response".<p>> It has allowed the world to examine what happens in a pandemic when a government allows life to carry on largely unhindered.<p>I am really disturbed by this sentence. While it is technically correct that no lockdown has been <i>imposed</i> on the swedish people by the government, saying that life has "carried on largely unhindered" is straight up dishonest.<p>Ever since February or March there have been regular press conferences with the FHM ("swedish CDC") broadcast over public radio (and obviously you can listen to it on internet and in their app, with push notifications). The hospital system has almost completely shifted to handling covid, nationwide. Most companies have tried to shift their work to peoples homes as much as possible, just like FHM has suggested. Buying groceries online has increased by a large margin. Even the cars at my local supermarket are now practicing social distancing! Swedes, overall, have really taken the gravity of the situation to heart and made changes in their life to protect their community.<p>> but Sweden’s economy has fared little better.<p>This misses the most important points about the swedish strategy and shows a lack of knowledge about swedish economy and EU economy. The goal of the swedish strategy has been to preserve peoples health as good as possible. Locking everyone in their homes for several months is not a strategy that is resillient. It increases cases of domestic violence, people losing their jobs cause negative effects as well. The number of deaths related to covid have to be compared to overall deaths, but most importanlty the overall health. The goal was never to gamble peoples life away for the economy!<p>The article jumps straight into saying that Sweden did not gain anything, economically, from having no lockdown. Well of course not. How could a country with focus on exports and services thrive economically in a pandemic? If the inner market of the EU is as good as closed, who would make the bet that an export focused country would be thriving? Sweden is dependent on other nations, especially in the EU and Scandinavia, so of course the economy wouldn't fare well.<p>> Sweden put stock in the sensibility of its people as it largely avoided imposing government prohibitions.<p>This is factually wrong. From the 27th of March it became a criminal offence to organize events of 50 or more people, down from the 500 that was decided on the 12th of March <a href="https://www.regeringen.se/artiklar/2020/03/forbud-mot-allmanna-sammankomster-eller-offentliga-tillstallningar-med-fler-an-50-deltagare/" rel="nofollow">https://www.regeringen.se/artiklar/2020/03/forbud-mot-allman...</a><p>This article is an example of poor journalism. It misrepresents the situation in Sweden, while containing crucial factual mistakes bordering on misinformation while also trying to steer american policy making in a specific direction.
Disclaimer. I am Swedish.<p>The amount of deaths in Sweden from Covid19 have been very high and many of the deaths has been completely unnecessary. This is nothing else than a cruel state sponsored murder on parts of the elderly population. Its also likely that the actual death toll is significantly higher than reported since many of the elderly dying at institutions was never tested for Covid19 In-fact at many regions of Sweden autopsies has been suspended during parts of the spring. The recommended treatment for these elderly has been injection of morphine (yes to elders with breathing difficulties).<p>There are stories of staff sometimes opening the windows while elderly confined to their rooms grasping for air. Family was not allowed to visit but staff was moving without protection gear between the rooms of sick and healthy ( because in Sweden the government early decided that masks are ineffective ways of protection ). Its still the official stance of Sweden that masks does not help against Covid19. But apparently sneasing in your armpit and washing your hands helps. In the beginning this was applied also at the institutions for the elderly. Some heroes objected and bought gear and significantly lowered the death rate early on. Others followed the advice from the "experts" as a good swede does. And the result sometimes was 50-75% dead in the total population of residents at the care facilities.<p>The Architect behind these state sponsored acts of murder is a man called Anders Tegnell. And you will be surprised to learn that this is the second time this very dangerous narcissist has been causing suffering and deaths in Sweden. Back in 2009 during H1N1 influenza (swine-flue) he was the person responsible for the purchasing and injecting the unsafe Pandemrix vaccine in the Swedish population as head of the vaccine department. Today it has amounted to a total of 600 then children and youths developing narcolepsy. He spent the following years defending the government against the victims who was seeking economic indemnity from the Swedish state medical insurance. When the Swedish newspaper Svenska Dagbladet later acquired emails of this mater he was caught on record emailing that the goverment agency he was working for at the time "was at a point of no return politically".<p>He was then recruited as the State Epidemiologist of the Public Health Agency of Sweden in 2013 as a thank you for his service. Now in 2020 he is directly responsible for the deaths of about 5500 swedes. You could argue that he is also responsible for some of the deaths in neighboring countries where there have been imported cases from Sweden.<p>This person already before the beginning of 2020 had caused 600 direct cases of mistreatment can now add 5500 deaths to his CV. And likely 1000s of people with lung-damages, muscle damaged and other severe trauma damage from intensive care. There are also reports of increased diabetes onset among Covid19 survivors and the ME/CFS that will likely be the result for many who got the disease.<p>If you are interested of the numbers and statistics you can check <a href="https://c19.se/" rel="nofollow">https://c19.se/</a> it has deaths and infected on a regional level. It can be helpful to understand that the city of Stockholm has had 2344 officially dead and 21490 official cases among its population of 975904. Tests results of antibodies have been reported in ranges from about 10% - 17%. But since testing was not allowed for most people until very recently the numbers can be either spot on or very off.
It seems obviously wasteful to keep such businesses open where most the paying customers won't be showing up during a pandemic anyways. Why even pay to have the lights on? You need to mothball the operation ASAP and lobby for government assistance for the duration.<p>I was just poking at rough figures last night out of curiosity regarding when the other end of this arrives in terms of 60% herd immunity for the US. Just pulling numbers out of my ass, like 200,000,000 for 60% and an avg infection rate of 100,000/day. With those figures it's 5.5yrs before 60% gets infected. We're at more like 50,000/day last I checked, but who knows how accurate that is.<p>Either way, it looks like this is going to be a life of masks and social distancing for a long time. Hopefully a vaccine arrives in volume before 5+ years go by.
This is a very misleading article. Compare Japan (no lockdown) with Norway, Finland, and Denmark. Or we can compare some areas of Sweden with Norway. Sweden has high death rate for the same reason that many of the lockdown countries have hight death rate: Elderly care centers in some areas where not properly protected! 20 years of policies for cost reduction of care homes is the reason for the failure).