Swedes are demanding that state epidemiologist Anders Tegnell be terminated. As Covid death toll soars ever higher, Sweden wonders who to blame Champions of herd immunity once lauded the Nordic refuseniks. All that has changed now https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...soars-ever-higher-sweden-wonders-who-to-blame “Thanks for reminding me,” Sweden’s state epidemiologist Anders Tegnell replied deadpan when the Observer asked in late March how he handled the knowledge that he would be to blame if Sweden’s decision to forego a lockdown were to go badly wrong. “But seriously,” he continued, “I might look like a figurehead but agencies in Sweden are very much working as a whole. This isn’t something I decide alone in my office every morning.” The message was clear. He didn’t think he would be held responsible if the light-touch Covid-19 regime associated with his name failed. On Friday, as Sweden recorded 9,654 new cases and 100 deaths, the country’s prime minister, Stefan Löfven, suggested he might be right. “This number of casualties – of course we wanted to avoid that. It’s nothing that you want to see,” he said, announcing the end to Sweden’s long hold-out against recommending face masks. “But … the responsibility here is not so easy, to point at exactly one person [and say] ‘you are responsible’.” When Tegnell briefed Boris Johnson at the end of September, it still seemed possible that the high spread of infection in Sweden in the spring might grant enough immunity to make a second wave easier to control. Now those hopes have been dashed, with the level of new daily cases, hospitalisations and deaths once again far above that seen in the country’s Nordic neighbours, Dr Tegnell and his former boss Johan Giesecke are no longer granted near daily interviews from herd immunity advocates in the British and US media. But the shift in opinion within Sweden is even more marked. This is partly due to the failure of Tegnell’s Public Health Agency to anticipate the severity of the second wave, partly due to damning reports from the country’s health watchdog and coronavirus commission, and partly due to a more critical media. Even the country’s king, Carl XVI Gustaf, described the country’s handling of the pandemic as “a failure” in the royals’ Christmas review of the year. “Opinion in Sweden has really changed: there’s a broad criticism of the strategy and [a sense] that we have really failed,” said Jenny Madestam, an associate professor in politics at Stockholm’s Södertorn University. In March and April, the media tended to defend rather than criticise the authorities, with dissident researchers who raised the alarm at the start of April branded “corona scandal-mongers” and “a shame for Sweden”, in the debate pages. Eva Burman, chief editor for the regional Eskilstuna-Kuriren newspaper, remembers how its shocking revelations in May about how elderly people in care homes were being denied hospital treatment were ignored. “That story never got published in the other papers: I think that maybe it was such a big story that they couldn’t take it in. They thought it might not be true,” she said. “I don’t know why the Swedish media have been so slow in asking critical questions.” But, according to Marina Ghersetti, an associate professor of journalism at Gothenburg University, this is typical of how the Swedish media operates in a crisis. “This is a pattern we’ve seen before. In the beginning, when everything is uncertain and chaotic, the focus is … on transmitting the information that public authorities give to media, without really questioning that information very much,” she said. “A possible explanation for this is that even those in the media share the big confidence we have in public authorities.” It is only once the situation becomes more stable that the Swedish media – almost as one – becomes critical and begins to investigate. “We have this expression, ‘herd behaviour’, a sort of consensus: when one person really starts to scrutinise and investigate, the others also do so,” said Ghersetti. “Every large newspaper, the radio, and television, has really started to dig into this, and not only on the conditions in elderly homes, but also into the strategy.” This month, Sweden’s health and social care inspectorate reported “serious shortcomings” in the treatment of the elderly, confirming Burman’s paper’s story. As few as one in 20 suspected coronavirus patients had physically seen a doctor. Several regions had issued guidelines ordering that no care home residents should receive hospital treatment for any illness or injury at all. Some doctors had recommended palliative care without even looking at patient records. Then first report from the country’s coronavirus commission, released on Tuesday, levelled scathing criticism both at the government and the Public Health Agency, saying they had “failed” to shield the elderly. Despite a very narrow remit, limiting it to investigating deaths in care homes, the commission criticised the strategy, arguing that “the single most important factor behind ... the high number of deaths in residential care is the overall spread of the virus in the society”. Public confidence in Tegnell has now fallen to 59%, the lowest level since the pandemic began, according to an Ipsos poll last week. In October he enjoyed the support of 72% of respondents. Asked whether she or anyone else should resign, health minister Lena Hallengren pointed to how fragmented Sweden’s health system is. Responsibility for day-to-day healthcare rests with the 21 regions, for elderly care with the municipalities. The opposition parties, she added, had supported the strategy during the spring and summer. “It would be easy to say, ‘it’s me, or it’s him or it’s her’, but we’re in the middle of a pandemic, and to try to make this extremely easy solution [demanding resignations], which is not a solution and doesn’t give us a better elderly care sector, I don’t know.” But both Burman and Madestam, said resignations would come eventually, with Madestam predicting that Tegnell’s boss, Johan Carlson, who is due to retire in October, might step down. “We haven’t seen the end of this,” Burman agreed. “I think Christmas is going to bring an even steeper curve, and we’re going to have even more deaths. I think someone will have to resign. Otherwise, we’re sending a very strong signal out to our society that no one takes responsibility.”
That chart is bullshit because it obviously mixes and matches data sets. Its not close to new highs on Sweden's official website right now and we will have to wait 7 to 10 days to know. a. That first half of the chart... records the deaths the way Sweden's official website does it. They reconcile the deaths to the actual date of death... you can see every day has deaths... and it matches the official Swedish website... https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/09f821667ce64bf7be6f9f87457ed9aa/page/page_0/ b. the most recent half of that chart ... takes the batched data and does not reconcile the deaths to the date of death... for the data to be legit we should be comparing the 4x weekly batched data from both waves... You can see of the official site deaths per day are still significantly below... the all time highs. We will not know if it stays below... using the officially recorded data for a few more weeks.
It's amusing that you push this nonsense once again. Sweden's own health ministry states very clearly the chart is not up-to-date for recent weeks. This has been pointed out numerous times before. Data sourced from John Hopkins is more quickly reconciliating the reported data to date-of-death. This is why ourworldindata and other sources have been switching over to using the John Hopkins data from Sweden recently.
Prove that statement. If you have anything new. This, which we have both referenced in the past,... does not say that Sweden's data is delayed relative to other countries... it states that that Sweden reconciles the deaths to the date of death. Other countries... report deaths but do not reconcile them back So 30 people could die on the 1st... but there deaths could be reported on the 2nd 5th and 7th. Whereas Sweden would reconcile the death back to the 1st regardless of the report date. If you were not a moron of the highest order you would comprehend that. https://ourworldindata.org/covid-sweden-death-reporting Other countries still have lag in their reports... They do not report deaths real time all over the world... what happens is the deaths are just batched but not reconciled. How confirmed deaths are presented for other countries For other countries, the European CDC does not build its dataset based on the date of death, but rather based on the date of report. More precisely, every morning the European CDC collects each country’s cumulative total number of deaths since the start of the pandemic, and subtracts the previous day’s total from it. This results in a daily figure that corresponds to the number of deaths reported in the last 24 hours—regardless of when those deaths actually happened. This means that if the death toll for a country was 20 for a given day, it will remain 20 indefinitely.1 There is nothing wrong with how Sweden or other countries are reporting deaths. But it is important to know these differences when studying the data from Sweden, and even more when comparing it with other countries.
Could you be a more stupid fucking liar about the Johns Hopkins data. a. Look at the second wave on your chart 2 posts ago. b. Do you think Swedes only die every other day and not on weekends. How in the world could you be so stupid as to say the Johns Hopkins people are reconciling the date of death faster? You just made that shit up. Clearly they are not reconciling the data to the date of death. Do you realize what a lying douchebag that chart shows you to be? ---- its inexcusable and stupid beyond belief. and dangerous to anyone who reads the lies you write and takes them seriously.
Once again.... Sweden states that it takes up to two weeks for them to reconcile the data. John Hopkins does it generally within 48 hours of Sweden releasing the data.... recognizing Sweden only releases data on Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday. How many times do we need to explain this to you and point you to the sources? Maybe it is time for you to be civilized and stop calling everyone a liar who provides you with the facts.... and then go read and understand the information.
you fucking moron.... if johns hopkins is reconciling the data to the date of death.. how come there are so many days without deaths on the chart you posted? Do Swedes not die on Saturday Sunday and Monday? I do this... to you because you are so dense ... you do not adjust your arguments to the facts... you just keep lying your ass off. It seems there is no other way to get through to you. I do not enjoy calling you a moron. But... you are lying and making shit up about important facts.
OK... let's see you have been continually pushing all sorts of absurd false COVID assertions that have no basis in science including (but not limited to): Countries should pursue a "natural herd immunity" strategy. REALITY: "natural herd immunity" does not exist for COVID-19. Masks do not stop the transmission of COVD-19. REALITY: Masks have been scientifically proven to stop the transmission of COVID-19. We should only quarantine the high risk. REALITY: This is the most stupid assertion of all when it comes to proper science-based public health policy. You have pushed complete nonsense for months that has no basis in science and reality. Maybe you should learn the facts and stop pushing COVID-denier nonsense.
You.. have just stated your opinion as if it is fact. That is the problem with how you think. How do I know its your opinion... 1. herd immunity is possible if we build up antibodies. Its the level of a population with antibodies that is the issue. Many experts state that it would take to many infections too justify... true But that does not mean it does not exist. 2. Masks have not been scientifically proven to stop the transmission in our society. In a lab they may block the forward transmission... but surgical and cloth masks do not block the expulsion of air out the sides (for most if not all people) and/ or the transmission via touching dirty masks. 3. We have tried your way in Germany and other places... it has not worked. Why not try what I have been stating. If lockdowns work for all of society when we are in crisis why would the lockdown of the high risk not work?
Swedes are demanding the heads of the idiots who pushed a "natural herd immunity strategy"... Will There Be a Reckoning Over Sweden’s Disastrous ‘Herd Immunity’ Strategy? https://www.worldpoliticsreview.com...s-failed-tragically-will-there-be-a-reckoning This past spring, as the coronavirus pandemic was tightening its grip across the globe, I wrote about Sweden’s controversially relaxed response to COVID-19, describing it as more of a failure than a panacea. Still, I conceded, “the final judgement on Sweden’s unorthodox approach cannot be rendered until the crisis moves into the history books,” even if the actions of Swedish authorities “may ultimately be viewed by future generations of Swedes as a shameful chapter in the country’s history.” I was wrong. We won’t have to wait until the end of the pandemic to know that Sweden’s strategy was a preventable disaster. And I suspect it won’t take generations for Swedes to demand a reckoning over what went so horrifically wrong. Today, Swedish health care workers are battling a catastrophic surge of coronavirus infections and deaths. Intensive care units in the Stockholm region, which authorities predicted would be the best protected by their lax approach, now exceed 100 percent of capacity. Hundreds of Swedes are dying every week, adding to the more than 7,800 COVID-19 deaths since the start of the pandemic. Meanwhile, across the border in Norway, the coronavirus has been kept well under control using accepted public health methods like lockdowns and other restrictions. While 1,400 people died in Sweden in the past month, Norway counted 100 deaths. Norway’s total pandemic death toll is 383 people. The death rate in Norway from COVID-19 is 74 people per million; it is more than 10 times higher in Sweden, at 770. As Swedish hospitals struggle with patients, Bjorn Eriksson, Stockholm’s regional health care director, pleaded last week: “We need help.” Now Finland and Norway have announced they are on standby to offer assistance if Sweden requests it. That would mark a dramatic collapse from Sweden’s defiant self-assurance in the early days of the pandemic. As the architect of Sweden’s hands-off approach, chief epidemiologist Anders Tegnell, said back in April, “Once you get into a lockdown, it’s difficult to get out of it. How do you reopen? When?” Other countries have grappled with that problem. Sweden has not. There was reason for alarm in the earliest days of the pandemic, when Sweden already had thousands more dead than its Scandinavian neighbors but refused to impose any measures to slow the spread of the coronavirus. As country after country imposed lockdowns, required facemasks and restricted all manner of gatherings, Sweden opted to go its own way. Instead of what Tegnell called “draconian measures,” he recommended a light touch that he said was better suited to the country’s culture. Authorities advised the public to maintain social distance and practice hygiene, but bars, restaurants and schools remained open—in contrast to much of Europe—and there was no recommendation to wear masks. The idea was to protect the elderly and allow younger people, less likely to fall gravely ill from COVID-19, to become infected and acquire immunity—the so-called herd immunity strategy later pushed by President Donald Trump, his discredited adviser, Scott Atlas, and even a top Trump appointee at the Department of Health and Human Services. But herd immunity is a concept used by epidemiologists to describe the point at which enough people have been vaccinated to essentially snuff out the virus. Allowing people to become ill, without even understanding what immunity that confers, struck experts as a deadly and dangerous plan. Tegnell confidently predicted that when the pandemic’s second wave hit Europe in the fall, infecting large numbers of people beyond Sweden’s borders, his country would be protected by high levels of immunity. He also insisted the strategy was about saving lives, not about the economy. But businesses loved it, and so did the Swedes. Prime Minister Stefan Lofven wholeheartedly backed the strategy, and his popularity soared. Tegnell became a superstar at home, and something of a global celebrity. The “Swedish model” received much favorable news coverage, and rightist politicians across the globe leveraged Sweden’s reputation to advocate and enact similar strategies. “Sweden got it right,” Florida’s Republican governor, Trump ally Ron DeSantis, declared as he reopened his state. As Swedish hospitals struggle with patients, Stockholm’s regional health care director pleaded last week: “We need help.” Tegnell and his fans insisted that the high number of deaths was the sad result of the virus striking elder care homes, claiming that the early numbers gave a misleading impression of the effectiveness of Sweden’s plan. After my column in May, I received messages from some anxious Swedes telling me they felt the government was allowing people to die. But my Swedish friends told me I got it all wrong. The plan was working, they said. Just wait. Signs that it was failing became visible fairly soon. A government study found coronavirus antibodies only in 7.3 percent of Stockholm’s population, far below the 60 to 70 percent required for herd immunity. By September, when the number of cases in Sweden started ticking up again, Lofven called it “worrying.” Swedish authorities eventually recommended wearing masks, but the public health agency insisted it was not backpedaling. They seemed wedded to their idea and, I’m told, behavior didn’t change much among many Swedes. By October, the country had entered a second wave, one far deadlier than that of its Scandinavian neighbors. The economy, incidentally, hadn’t fared any better than any of its neighbors before the urgent need for new measures became apparent. In November, the prime minister made a dramatic announcement, banning gatherings of more than eight people, closing high schools for the rest of the term, and banning the sale of alcohol after 10 p.m. Unlike the laissez-faire suggestions of the spring, this was a mandate. Lawbreakers faced fines and prison. Lofven gave unequivocal instructions: “Don’t go to the gym. Don’t go to the library. Don’t have dinner. Don’t have parties. Cancel!” Unfortunately, the government’s initial attitude seems to have stuck with Swedes, who appeared to take the orders as a light suggestion. As hospitals fill up and authorities try to do what their neighbors did eight months ago, Lofven’s popularity, which had soared early on, has been falling. A September poll already showed only one-in-three Swedes thought he was doing a good job handling the pandemic. Not surprisingly, the failure has tainted Lofven’s Social Democratic party, whose support recently dropped to 29.4 percent. After strongly supporting the herd immunity plan, Swedes have since reversed their views. A November poll found that 82 percent of Swedes worry about whether the country’s health care system can cope with the crisis. A month later, it appears their concerns are well placed. Long before this pandemic ends, there’s no question that the Swedish model has failed. That’s a tragedy for its people, but also for all those around the world, in countries like the U.S. and the U.K., who suffered after their leaders opted to imitate the Swedish government, even if only partially in many cases. An independent commission has already concluded that the Swedish government failed to protect the elderly, but the scrutiny won’t end there. Whenever the public health crisis is over, one question remains. How long will it take Swedes to demand a reckoning from their leaders and a fearless examination of a misguided policy that cost thousands of lives, the country’s deadliest disaster since the Spanish flu pandemic a century ago?