COVID-19: Herd immunity in Sweden fails to materialize https://medicalxpress.com/news/2020-08-covid-herd-immunity-sweden-materialize.html Sweden's policy of allowing the controlled spread of COVID-19 viral infection among the population has so far failed to deliver the country's previously stated goal of herd immunity. Commenting on recent antibody testing clinical and research findings, authors of a paper published by the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, write that Sweden's higher rates of viral infection, hospitalization and mortality compared with neighboring countries may have serious implications for Scandinavia and beyond. Rather than imposing a hard lockdown in March as most European and Scandinavian countries did, Sweden's strategy in dealing with the pandemic has been to rely on people's individual responsibility to curtail the spread of the disease. This follows the Swedish sociocultural concept of 'folkvett'; the common sense of the people as a collective. The health authorities predicted that 40% of the Stockholm population would have had the disease and acquired antibodies by May 2020. However, the actual prevalence figure was around 15%. While clinical and research findings suggest that severely infected COVID-19 patients do acquire antibodies in the immediate and early recovery phase of their illness, antibodies are much less commonly found in only mildly ill or asymptomatic patients. This means they are very likely not to be immune, and so cannot act as a bulwark against further spread of infection amongst the community. Lead author Professor David Goldsmith said: "It is clear that not only are the rates of viral infection, hospitalization and mortality (per million population) much higher than those seen in neighboring Scandinavian countries, but also that the time-course of the epidemic in Sweden is different, with continued persistence of higher infection and mortality well beyond the few critical weeks period seen in Denmark, Finland and Norway." He added that in these countries, rapid lock-down measures brought in from early March seem to have been initially more successful in curtailing the infection surge and thus the malign consequences of COVID-19 on the country as a whole. Prof Goldsmith said: "We in the UK would do well to remember we nearly trod the same path as Sweden, as herd immunity was often discussed here in early March. Right now, despite strict (but tardy) lock-down in the UK, and the more measured Swedish response, both countries have seen high seven-day averaged COVID-19 death rates compared to other Scandinavian and European countries." The authors do say, however, that only once the pandemic and impact of measures taken are fully understood, after one or two years at least, can we begin fairly then to judge what was done correctly.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...-true-cost-arrogant-failed-establishment/amp/ Sweden’s success shows the true cost of our arrogant, failed establishment So now we know: Sweden got it largely right, and the British establishment catastrophically wrong. Anders Tegnell, Stockholm’s epidemiologist-king, has pulled off a remarkable triple whammy: far fewer deaths per capita than Britain, a maintenance of basic freedoms and opportunities, including schooling, and, most strikingly, a recession less than half as severe as our own. Our arrogant quangocrats and state “experts” should hang their heads in shame: their reaction to coronavirus was one of the greatest public policy blunders in modern history, more severe even than Iraq, Afghanistan, the financial crisis, Suez or the ERM fiasco. Millions will lose their jobs when furlough ends; tens of thousands of small businesses are failing; schooling is in chaos, with A-level grades all over the place; vast numbers are likely to die from untreated or undetected illnesses; and we have seen the first exodus of foreigners in years, with the labour market survey suggesting a decline in non-UK born adults. Pandemics always come with large economic and social costs, for reasons of altruism as well as of self-interest. The only way to contain the spread of a deadly, contagious disease, in the absence of a cure or vaccine, is to social distance; fear and panic inevitably kick in, as the public desperately seeks to avoid catching the virus. A “voluntary” recession is almost guaranteed. But if a drop in GDP is unavoidable, governments can influence its size and scale. Politicians can react in one of three ways to a pandemic. They can do nothing, and allow the disease to rip until herd immunity is reached. Quite rightly, no government has pursued this policy, out of fear of mass deaths and total social and economic collapse. The second approach involves imposing proportionate restrictions to facilitate social distancing, banning certain sorts of gatherings while encouraging and informing the public. The Swedes pursued a version of this centrist strategy: there was a fair bit of compulsion, but also a focus on retaining normal life and keeping schools open. The virus was taken very seriously, but there was no formal lockdown. Tegnell is one of the few genuine heroes of this crisis: he identified the correct trade-offs. The third option is the full-on statist approach, which imposes a legally binding lockdown and shuts down society. Such a blunderbuss approach may be right under certain circumstances – if a vaccine is imminent – or for some viruses – for example, if we are ever hit with one that targets children and comes with a much higher fatality rate – but the latest economic and mortality statistics suggest this wasn’t so for Covid-19. Almost all economists thought that Sweden’s economy would suffer hugely from its idiosyncratic strategy. They were wrong. Sweden’s GDP fell by just 8.6 per cent in the first half of the year, all in the second quarter, and its excess deaths jumped 24 per cent. A big part of Sweden’s recession was caused by a slump in demand for its exports from its fully locked-down neighbours. One could speculate that had all countries pursued a Swedish-style strategy, the economic hit could have been worth no more than 3-4 per cent of GDP. That could be seen as the core cost of the virus under a sensible policy reaction. By contrast, Britain’s economy slumped by 22.2 per cent in the first half of the year, a performance almost three times as bad as Sweden’s, and its excess deaths shot up by 45 per cent. Spain’s national income slumped even more (22.7 per cent), and France’s (down 18.9 per cent) and Italy’s (down 17.1 per cent) slightly less, but all three also suffered far greater per capita excess deaths than Sweden. The Swedes allowed the virus to spread in care homes, so if that major failure had been fixed, their death rate could have been a lot lower still. My guess is that only half of our first-half collapse in GDP would have happened under a variant of the Swedish model. This means that the other half – some £250 billion – was an unnecessary cost caused directly by the lockdown itself. The decision to shut everything down, rather than to impose and promulgate extensive social distancing, hygiene measures, ubiquitous PPE and testing, means that we have wasted a quarter of a trillion pounds worth of GDP, as well as needlessly ruined the education of millions of children and cancelled the health care of hundreds of thousands of adults. I suspect that this immense, unbearable additional cost saved very few additional lives, and that almost all of the gains came from social distancing, not the lockdown. Some of the lost GDP will be recovered; the intangible costs of lockdown – the cancelled weddings and sporting events, the failed IVF cycles, the time not spent with family – will remain with us forever. This is a catastrophically high price tag for the British state’s systemic incompetence, the uselessness of Public Health England, the deep, structural failings of the NHS, the influence of modelers rather than proper scientists, the complacency, the delusion, the refusal to acknowledge that the quality of the British state and bureaucracy are abysmally poor. Even more depressingly, a Swedish approach was always unrealistic in Britain. Panic and hysteria were the only possible outcome when the failure of the system became apparent. I’m not seeking to absolve Boris Johnson of blame, but he would have found himself in an impossible situation had he sought to ignore the official advice, and he inherited few, if any, working levers to pull. So what now? How should Rishi Sunak, the Chancellor, reboot the economy? Sweden, once again, is a role model. After decades of socialist decline from the early Seventies, the Swedes slashed the size of their state (though it remains too big), liberalised their economy, reformed their schools along market principles and scrapped their counter-productive wealth tax. They learnt that the state cannot drive prosperity: only the private sector can do that. The Tories used to understand this: Sunak needs to take inspiration from Tegnell, and push for a Swedish, liberal approach to saving our economy, trusting individual initiative, not resorting to a top down, Whitehall-knows-best attitude. HS2 and green projects are not the answer. The Conservatives will only survive their handling of Covid if they don’t also botch the recovery.
Killed more people AND tanked their economy worse than their neighbors .... Sweden scores a two-fer. Pretty much a complete disaster. Sweden's GDP slumped 8.6% in Q2, more sharply than its neighbors despite its no-lockdown policy https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-sweden-gdp-falls-8pc-in-q2-worse-nordic-neighbors-2020-8 Sweden's GDP fell 8.6% during the second quarter of the year, according to its statistics body. The fall is sharper than its neighbors — Denmark registered a 7.4% fall, and Finland a 3.2% fall. Statistics suggest Norway also fared better than Sweden. Sweden decided not to pursue a nationwide lockdown, unlike most European nation. The statistics show this did not help its economy. Sweden has also seen much more widespread death from COVID-19 than nearby nations — though much of Europe is again registering an increase in cases. Sweden's GDP fell more than its Nordic neighbours in the second quarter of 2020, dealing another blow to its lockdown-free coronavirus strategy. Sweden's official statistics agency said that Sweden's GDP fell by 8.6% in Q2. In comparison, Finland's statistics body said that its Q2 GDP was down 3.2%, and Denmark's said GDP there was down 7.4%. Norway's GDP also appears to have fallen less than Sweden's, though its measurements are out of sync with other nations. Its GDP fell 7.1% from March to May, a timeframe one month earlier. Finland, Norway, and Denmark implemented lockdowns more in line with other nations, severely restricting the movement of people while closing schools and businesses. Experts say that the outcome of Sweden's strategy is best compared to these countries, given their similar demographics, culture, and political systems. Earlier in the year, some commentators and protest groups in the US suggested that Sweden's example should be followed to protect jobs and the economy. However, authorities in Sweden have said consistently that this was not their rationale. Anders Tegnell, Sweden's chief epidemiologist and the architect of Sweden's plan, said that economic considerations were not a factor in avoiding a lockdown. Instead, Tegnell said Sweden hoped to create a long-lasting approach that could be sustained far longer than a total lockdown. Mikael Bask, an economist at Uppsala University told Business Insider last month that Sweden's economy was hurt by shorter store opening hours and reduced footfall, even though they stayed open. Income from tourism and exports also fell. Beyond economic damage, the human cost in Sweden has also been worse than its neighbors. Sweden's deaths are high Sweden has now seen 5,776 deaths among its population of just over 10 million. Its death rate was once one of the world's highest, and is now still significantly higher than its neighbours: more than five times Denmark's, more than 11 times Norway's, and around 10 times Finland's. Those three countries have now, like the rest of Europe, eased some restrictions, while Sweden has kept its same rules in place. The effect that is in many respects Sweden's rules are now stricter than those of other nations. The daily rate of new COVID-19 infections in Sweden has fallen dramatically from its peak, though per-capita it is still higher than in many other European countries. Norway, Finland Denmark are now starting to see a rise in cases, though they have been past their peak for much longer than Sweden now has been. Tegnell told the UK's Observer newspaper on Sunday that he was still not sure what strategy is best, though he has defended Sweden's decision to stay on its path. "It will be very difficult to to achieve any kind of really clear-cut answer as to what was right and what was wrong," he said. "I think we're talking years into the future before we can get any kind of consensus on how to deal with this in the best possible way."
Pay attention to the one that falls off the wall repeatedly. I'm not sure you were aware you were being filmed.
Welcome to Sweden - kill the old people... Sweden's Covid-19 strategist under fire over herd immunity emails Anders Tegnell appears to have asked if higher death rate for older people might be acceptable https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...rategist-under-fire-over-herd-immunity-emails Sweden’s light-touch approach to Covid-19 has come under renewed criticism after emails show the country’s chief epidemiologist appearing to ask whether a higher death rate among older people might be acceptable if it led to faster herd immunity. Speculation about the views of Sweden’s leading public health officials was further fanned after it also emerged that Anders Tegnell, the architect of the country’s no-lockdown strategy, had deleted some of his emails. Tegnell has repeatedly insisted the government’s objective was not aimed at achieving rapid herd immunity but rather at slowing the spread of the coronavirus enough for health services to be able to cope. However, email exchanges obtained by Swedish journalists under freedom of information laws show Tegnell discussing herd immunity as an objective in mid-March, days after the World Health Organization declared Covid-19 a pandemic. In one exchange, Tegnell forwarded to his Finnish counterpart, Mika Salminen, and the head of the Swedish national health agency, FHM, an email from a retired doctor suggesting one way of tackling the epidemic would be to allow healthy people to become infected voluntarily in controlled settings. “One point would be to keep schools open to reach herd immunity faster,” Tegnell commented. Salminen replied that the Finnish health agency had considered this but rejected it because “over time, the children are still going to spread the infection” to other age groups. Finland’s modelling suggested closing schools would reduce the spread of Covid-19 among elderly people by about 10%, Salminen said in the email. Tegnell replied: “10% might be worth it?” Tegnell, who has repeatedly argued that children generally suffer only mild symptoms of the virus and do not spread it to any great extent, has denied authorities decided to keep most schools open in a quest for herd immunity. “My comment was on a possible effect, not on an expected one, that was part of the assessment of the appropriateness of the measure,” he told Emanuel Karlsten, the journalist who obtained the emails. “Keeping schools open to gain immunity was therefore never relevant.” Sweden subsequently closed its schools for over-16s, but kept those for younger pupils open and insisted on full attendance. Families, including those in high-risk groups, have been reported to social services and faced fines for keeping children at home. (More at above url)
This is one way that you can tell that things are working in Sweden. Leftists now feel the need to attack the architect of the Swedish policy. It must be looking real good up Nawth.
Actually it is the press and politicians in Sweden are attacking Tegnell for deleting his emails and deliberately implementing a policy with the intent to kill old people. Funny that those in the U.S. complaining about those highlighting these problems in Sweden are the same clowns who whined about "Hillary's emails" and healthcare "death panels".