- Sep 23, 2005
- 32,697
- 6,113
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
Can You Beat COVID-19 Without a Lockdown? Sweden Is Trying
To start with, it’s a myth that Sweden is doing nothing about the virus. Most Swedes have changed their habits a lot. Schools for older kids are closed, as are universities. People are working from home, when they can, and the elderly are being urged to keep to themselves. Gatherings of over 50 people are prohibited, and ski resorts are closed. Restaurants and bars are allowing table service only, and grocery stores are installing glass dividers between customers and cashiers. People who go to Stockholm may be stunned to see bars and cafés with customers, but they’re seeing only the Swedes who choose to run higher risks. They’re not seeing all the Swedes who are staying home.
Second, contrary to the claims of John Fund and Joel Hay and many others, Sweden isn’t trying to develop “herd immunity,” meaning a state of affairs in which so many people get the virus that the virus runs out of kindling. (At least, Swedish officials claim they aren’t doing this, and they would have a lot to lose by lying about it.) Instead, Sweden intends to take as loose an approach as possible that still keeps case growth down to nonexponential numbers. “We are not in the containment phase,” said Sweden’s chief state epidemiologist, Anders Tegnell, last month. “We are in the mitigation phase.”
What Tegnell means is that the coronavirus is all over the world now, and, without a vaccine or a massive outbreak that brings about herd immunity, you won’t get rid of it. Even if you do what China did and lock down so hard that you eradicate the virus within your borders, it will return as soon as you allow any travel in and out of your country to resume. So Sweden has based its policies on two premises: (1) The coronavirus can only be managed, not suppressed. Short of going full Wuhan on the entire planet, we’ll have to live with it. (2) People won’t tolerate severe lockdown for more than a month or two, since boredom, isolation, and economic desperation will get overwhelming. With these premises in mind, Sweden has pumped the brakes instead of slamming on them.
For comparison, here is the deaths per million population for Sweden and some other nations in the general region.
Belgium 419
Spain 413
Italy 367
France 275
UK 202
Netherlands 193
Switzerland 148
Sweden 132
Ireland 98
Portugal 62
Denmark 55
Germany 48
Norway 28
There is quite a range in the various nations listed. It seems there are various factors at play, from testing, population density, timing of the arrival of the virus, to of course lockdown measures, and timing of starting the lockdown.
However, if slowing to flatten the curve is the goal, are the economy crippling measures other nations are employing helping enough compared to the results Sweden has obtained? The article notes their health system has been strained, but not overwhelmed.
To start with, it’s a myth that Sweden is doing nothing about the virus. Most Swedes have changed their habits a lot. Schools for older kids are closed, as are universities. People are working from home, when they can, and the elderly are being urged to keep to themselves. Gatherings of over 50 people are prohibited, and ski resorts are closed. Restaurants and bars are allowing table service only, and grocery stores are installing glass dividers between customers and cashiers. People who go to Stockholm may be stunned to see bars and cafés with customers, but they’re seeing only the Swedes who choose to run higher risks. They’re not seeing all the Swedes who are staying home.
Second, contrary to the claims of John Fund and Joel Hay and many others, Sweden isn’t trying to develop “herd immunity,” meaning a state of affairs in which so many people get the virus that the virus runs out of kindling. (At least, Swedish officials claim they aren’t doing this, and they would have a lot to lose by lying about it.) Instead, Sweden intends to take as loose an approach as possible that still keeps case growth down to nonexponential numbers. “We are not in the containment phase,” said Sweden’s chief state epidemiologist, Anders Tegnell, last month. “We are in the mitigation phase.”
What Tegnell means is that the coronavirus is all over the world now, and, without a vaccine or a massive outbreak that brings about herd immunity, you won’t get rid of it. Even if you do what China did and lock down so hard that you eradicate the virus within your borders, it will return as soon as you allow any travel in and out of your country to resume. So Sweden has based its policies on two premises: (1) The coronavirus can only be managed, not suppressed. Short of going full Wuhan on the entire planet, we’ll have to live with it. (2) People won’t tolerate severe lockdown for more than a month or two, since boredom, isolation, and economic desperation will get overwhelming. With these premises in mind, Sweden has pumped the brakes instead of slamming on them.
For comparison, here is the deaths per million population for Sweden and some other nations in the general region.
Belgium 419
Spain 413
Italy 367
France 275
UK 202
Netherlands 193
Switzerland 148
Sweden 132
Ireland 98
Portugal 62
Denmark 55
Germany 48
Norway 28
There is quite a range in the various nations listed. It seems there are various factors at play, from testing, population density, timing of the arrival of the virus, to of course lockdown measures, and timing of starting the lockdown.
However, if slowing to flatten the curve is the goal, are the economy crippling measures other nations are employing helping enough compared to the results Sweden has obtained? The article notes their health system has been strained, but not overwhelmed.
