Sweden has tried a radically different approach to the coronavirus. It didn’t close down its economy, life went on as usual, with people still going to bars and restaurants but encouraged to practice social distancing, which some people honor and others don’t. The theory was that the people of Sweden would develop “herd immunity” and escape the ravages of the disease.
But now the chief epidemiologist, who designed the strategy, is horrified by the number of deaths, according to Newsweek. The death rate in Sweden is higher than the death rate in the United States, and considerably higher than in Denmark, Finland, or Norway.
Cases of the novel coronavirus in Sweden have reached at least 23,918, with its death count at 2,941, as of Thursday, according to the latest figures from the country’s health ministry.
“We are starting to near 3,000 deceased, a horrifyingly large number,” noted the chief epidemiologist at Sweden’s public health agency, Anders Tegnell, at a press conference on Wednesday.
Tegnell, who has been leading the country’s COVID-19 response and previously defended the nation’s decision not to impose a lockdown, this week admitted he was “not convinced” the unconventional anti-lockdown strategy was the best option to take….
Tegnell told Aftonbladet the virus posed a minimal risk to children. He reportedly claimed there are nearly no cases among children globally, claiming that those who died following infection had severe underlying health conditions.
Contrary to Tegnell’s claim, while there are fewer confirmed cases among under-18s, there have been several cases among children, including in Sweden. At least 118 confirmed infections among those aged 9 or younger and at least 282 confirmed cases among those aged between 10 and 19 have been reported in Sweden, as of Thursday…
Sweden has, by far, the largest number of cases and fatalities in Scandinavia, compared with its neighbors Denmark, Norway and Finland, which each have 10,281, 7,996 and 5,573 confirmed cases, respectively, according to the latest figures from Johns Hopkins University.
The daily death toll for Sweden is projected to reach potentially as high as nearly 150 by May 11, while up to 1,060 deaths have been projected for this week, according to the latest projection model by the Imperial College COVID-19 Response Team. The team consists of Imperial College London, the WHO (World Health Organization) Collaborating Centre for Infectious Disease Modelling within the MRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis and J-IDEA (Abdul Latif Jameel Institute for Disease and Emergency Analytics).
Yet Sweden is the only infected European country to not issue a strict lockdown, a strategy which aimed to develop “herd immunity” by increasing the number of people exposed to the virus in a bid to avoid a second wave of cases.
But the move has come under criticism by other countries as well as within the nation.
Speaking to Newsweek, a 33-year-old mother based in the city of Lund in southern Sweden, Allyson Plumberg, said: “I don’t think the Swedish response has been adequate. No recommendations for face mask usage in elder care homes (where the bulk of deaths have occurred),” in an email interview.
She added: “Even children with pre-existing medical conditions are not officially considered at-risk for COVID19. It is now well-known that children can become very ill (and even die in rare circumstances) from COVID-19, even without pre-existing conditions. There is still a mandatory school attendance (ages 6-15) for healthy children in Sweden.
“This means healthy teachers are also pressured to continue showing up in the classroom. We now see that teachers have died, and households with in-risk members are more desperate than ever to protect the health of their families.
“Overall, it seems like Sweden avoids adherence to the precautionary principle whenever possible,” she said.
“The daily death toll for Sweden is projected to reach potentially as high as nearly 150 by May 11,”
Actually, if you look at the Wordometer for Sweden ( https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/sweden/ ) Sweden’s daily death toll has only been above 150 on three different days, all three of which were in mid-April. The daily death toll appears to be going down since then, albeit it has admittedly been spiking pretty erratically.
In any case, if the point was to avoid later waves of the disease, we simply won’t know how effective this experiment has been until much later. With uncontrolled exposure, you would expect high initial death rates. The question is, is herd immunity actually being achieved and will Sweden therefore avoid future waves? If that’s the case, their death rate may ultimately be significantly lower than ours if we do experience future waves.
I’m not claiming expertise here, I’m simply saying it’s too early to judge. Maybe Sweden has unnecessarily exposed their citizens to danger and maybe they will still face future deadly waves. But it’s equally possible that Sweden will have gotten the worst of it out of the way and will not be badly effected by future waves. We simply don’t know yet and won’t know until we see the results as we and other quarantined countries begin to open up again.
Sweden has had 3,313 deaths as of today.
That’s 328 per million.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
Finland has had 275 deaths.
50 per million.
Norway, 228 deaths.
42 per million.
Denmark, 527 deaths.
91 per million.
Sweden’s experiment is not working.
Whose lives were sacrificed?
We won’t know how many or whose lives were “sacrificed” (I prefer the more neutral, simply “lost”) to this virus or to the attendant complications such as economic and mental health factors until it’s all over. I fully admit it’s possible that Sweden has foolishly endangered lives at this stage and that they will continue to suffer waves of further exposure and death, especially if immunity proves to be as elusive as it now seems. But it’s also possible that by exposing their population now, they may increase herd immunity and decrease the number of future deaths such that it will balance out.
It’s also possible (but by no means guaranteed, of course) that by not shutting down their economy and quarantining, they may have prevented some deaths due to poverty, homelessness, mental health issues and other side effects of the shut down/quarantine.
It’s far too early to say who chose the right course. It’s like calling the lead runner at mile 4 the winner of the marathon. We’ve got a long way to go and none of us know how this will play out.
The only reason I would be inclined to judge Sweden harshly at this point is the same reason I judge our own country – if they failed to provide protections to those who did not feel comfortable engaging in the experiment. If there were Swedes who wanted to stay home and quarantine, did the government provide paid leave/paycheck protections to those people? Or were they, as were many people in this country, forced to chose between their health and their livelihoods?
So, anyone with particular health conditions and those who are in their “senior” years if you die, you die. The herd will be stronger for it.
That’s called “thinning the herd” or “culling the herd.”
Whose parents should go first?
So…….the U. of Washington projections a couple of days ago were 130k deaths by August. Today they increased the estimate by 10k because of “increased mobility.” Acceptable to some as long as they can go to work and live with the delusion that “they” won’t get infected. Why are we not having discussions about how to compensate people while working from home? Why are we not having discussions about cutting military spending, which takes between 63-68 cents of every federal discretionary dollar spent? Why are we not having discussions about using federal/military resources to deliver food to communities instead of having farmers destroy crops, milk, and meat? Why indeed? Could it be because we have no national leadership? Could it be because the “most innovative” nation can think itself out of a wet paper bag? Enquiring minds want to know. Land of the free, home of the craven. Oh, and I really, really want the opportunity to punch Rand Paul in the face and knock him out. His neighbor deserves a medal.
I saw a report tonight about a bunch of college kids who have organized to collect semis of farm products directly from farmers to distribute to food pantries. I got the impression that the organization is much larger than a local operation.
The answer to all your “whys” is two men and the 2nd one is Donald Trump and the loyalist minions in his White House administration. To build that corrupt, lying, loyalist house of cards, Trump kept firing people until he got what he wanted. Trump has now fired more people from his administration than any president in US history. He’s also plays more golf.
Then there is #1, Moscow Mitch who controls the GOP majority in the Senate and protected Trump from impeachment.
The United States is a Constitutional Republic and Moscow Mitch and the Republican Party is allowing the Constitutional structure that supports the rule of law to disintegrate as the great wrecking ball called Donald Trump spreads chaos, death, and destruction everywhere he tweets.
But, Moscow Mitch started long before Trump threw his MAGA hat into the 2016 election ring. Moscow Mitch blocked President Obama and the Democrats every chance he got, even a Supreme Court nomination nine months before the 2016 election.
“…can’t think…”
Right on GregB. That’s what national leadership would look like.
I know I sound like a cranky broken record in my adulation of Willy Brandt, but his legacy keeps teaching me lessons. The example citied by speduktr provides a hopeful, realistic road map for our future. When Brandt was vice chancellor and foreign minister in Germany from 1966-69, he “govern[ed] from the opposition.” That’s where we are folks. And to do so, the Democratic Party elites are the targets. If they won’t, we have to call them out. I’m doing my best—unsuccessfully so far—with Sherrod Brown. But I’m not stopping. I have time since I can’t travel for business anymore. Let’s hold them accountable. In NY, we need you to make life hard on Schumer, Cuomo, DeBlasio, and the others you know far better than me. We need to do so in every state and rely on those of you who live there. If we don’t, fascism and Gleichschaltung awaits after election day in November.
One more before I turn in for the night: whether you care about sports or not, whether you know anything about professional soccer or not, Danny Rose should be one of your favorite people in the world:
https://www.standard.co.uk/sport/football/danny-rose-premier-league-restart-nations-morale-football-a4437646.html
“No recommendations for face mask usage in elder care homes (where the bulk of deaths have occurred)” says a citizen interviewed for the article.
“The bulk” means the majority. That is just plain freaking out&out criminal negligence in my book. I heard a healthcare analyst on CSPAN today say that 40% of US covid-19 deaths have occurred in assisted-living & nursing home facilities. That’s bad enough. Clearly, inadequate social-distancing in common areas, & a fair number of PT caregivers unequipped w/proper PPE spreading the virus among institutions.
In Sweden, not even a recommendation for face masks in elder care homes! What has “herd immunity” got to do w/ protecting the most vulnerable in their final years? Just throw them under the bus is what it sounds like to me.
There is another great crisis brewing that no one seems to be paying attention to. Routine diagnostic testing is “plummeting” according to a report I read today. That translates into late diagnoses of cancers, respiratory diseases, neurological diseases, etc. Late diagnosis means people will progress more quickly and will be more difficult to treat once they are diagnosed. That translates into more death, worse outcomes, and what should be unnecessary treatments (unnecessary in the sense that it would have been much more beneficial to treat earlier and now those patients will face more severe—i.e., more expensive and less effective—consequences. Another study from the Netherlands of which I became aware today confirms that people are being diagnosed later, if at all. According to National Cancer Institute projections, more than 1.8 million Americans will be diagnosed with some form of cancer in 2020, which translates into 150,000-plus per month. That means since early March, more than 300,000 Americans should have been diagnosed with some form of cancer. How many don’t know? How many will die or have complications that could have been prevented or alleviated if diagnosed and treated in a timely way? This increase in suffering and death is one more thing to add to the indictment of genocide this administration should face in the future. But “executive privilege” will shield them. As a Richard III of today might say, “My kingdom for a bunker and some cans of gasoline.”
GregB…many won’t get testing or help at all and just die because those who lost employment also lost health insurance. The cost of any kind of medical testing is astronomical and unaffordable by most. COBRA benefits are extremely expensive to maintain and are very limited in coverage. We need Medicare For All….will our wealthy politicians (who are able to afford decent health care) find this a policy worth pursuing?….doubt it.
I agree with everything you wrote, Lisa. But the Netherlands study is particularly disturbing because they have one of the best healthcare systems in the world and they are overwhelmed. The pressures of COVID-19 are exposing new, (previously) unimaginable things every day.
Drats, don’t know what happened there. You can find it by Googling: Lancet Fewer cancer diagnoses during the COVID-19 epidemic in the Netherlands
“The question is, is herd immunity actually being achieved and will Sweden therefore avoid future waves?”
Does anybody know to what degree there is herd immunity with this virus, if there is any? Would you be willing to conduct a national experiment to find out if you were the leader of a country?
What Sweden’s leaders did was that they sped up the deaths of thousands to test a theory. In what sense is this acceptable?
Even during WWII, decisions of this sort “for the greater good” by Churchill were questionable at best, but during peace time?
We do not conduct deadly experiments with our population. Scientists are prohibited from doing so, but politicians are strangely exempt from such limitations on what they can do.
It’s all the more troubling that “experts” and “scientists”, who are otherwise behave responsibly in theirt own labs, are willing to suggest and even lead such experiments.
“Cases of the novel coronavirus in Sweden have reached at least 23,918, with its death count at 2,941”
That means the current death rate in Sweden is 12.3%
With a population of 10.23 million, the total number of deaths might reach 1,258,290 deaths to reach herd immunity.
Herd immunity may also be achieved through inoculations once the world has a vaccine. While developing the vaccine, the world should continue to practice stay-at-home, wearing masks, keeping crowd-creating businesses closed like sporting events, bars, and restaurants, and keeping a six foot or longer distance from each other to avoid being exposed by anyone carrying this sneaky virus. Oh, and wash our hands and any exposed skin … a lot.
Risking more than 12 percent of your population dying to achieve herd immunity is also very bad for the economy.
For the United States, that could be more than 39 million dead in less than a year.
Three of the many lessons to learn from Trump’s response to this:
Ideology blinds people. In his little pea-sized lizard brain, almost entirely consumed by self-regard, there is a tiny compartment devoted to whatever ideology he thinks will serve him to keep his base base and the oligarchs and the Repugnican leadership on his side. The ideology of convenience he has chosen is the “free” market. He delayed and delayed using the Defense Production Act to order companies to create contact tracing software and teams and to manufacture tests and reagents and testing machinery and PPE and ventilators, and he still has done almost none of this. And, of course, without these things in place, reopening means that a lot of people will die who didn’t have to.
Trump and the Repugnicans simply don’t care if lots of people die, as long as it’s not them. They have testing and contact tracing for themselves. End of concern.
Ignorance is deadly, and we really have to do a much better job of vetting people for high political office. Knowledge matters. Compassion matters. Humility matters. Heedfulness matters. We do a better job of vetting the person who is going to run the local gas station than we do of vetting our highest public officials. Big mistake. The journalists who ask questions at debates really need to stop being so nice nice. They need to ask questions that will reveal lack of GENERAL knowledge and education, and they need to stop accepting platitudes. (If politicians were Walt Whitman, they might say, “I contain platitudes.”) Here, a few of the kinds of questions they need to start asking: Name two economic theorists, one you agree with and one you don’t, and tell us one main idea that each espoused. Name two books you’ve read in the last year and give us a brief synopsis of each. Among the fundamental laws of our land are posse comitatus and habeas corpus. What are these, and how does each relate to civil liberties? Explain what the OECD is and why per capita health care costs are twice in the United States what they are in the OECD generally. The journalists need to STOP avoiding embarrassing questions.
The primary characteristic you want in a cardiologist is not that he or she be a regular person you might want to have a beer with. You expect your airplane pilot to know how to fly. We do not hold our politicians to even the most minimal standards of expertise, of possession of knowledge. Trump is Exhibit 1 in the case for this sad truth about our politics.
I can imagine Dick Cavett sitting down with a candidate and working some of this material into a conversation. Otherwise, I am much more interested in policy questions covering a wide range of topics. I want to know how they would operationalize their thinking. I suppose it’s a bit like the student just out of high school or college. Both can probably recite a bunch of stuff they have learned, but applying it… Of course, that is why the previous experience of a presidential candidate is so important. Someone we all know had absolutely no qualifications that would make him a good President.
I am brainstorming on the fly here. Feel free to help me out.
Journalists ask these policy questions all the time, and the candidates rehearse canned answers to them, generally platitudinous, feel-good answers. My point is that questions need to be asked to determine if the candidate is an ignorant, uneducated oaf. We can’t afford to have any more Trumps in office. When I interviewed candidates to work on ELA textbook materials, I would ask them questions like “Who wrote the Aeneid?” “What is terza rima?” “How does a fable differ from a parable?” “Name two contemporary poets you read and the titles of a poem or two by each.” “What’s a correlative conjunction?” “Name four poems by William Butler Yeats.” “Name a great Japanese novelist.” “Who wrote Hedda Gabler?” “What’s the difference between Realism and Naturalism?” “What are the basic tenets of the New Criticism?” “Tell me about a couple novels you’ve read recently.” That kind of thing. I wanted to know that they were VERY knowledgeable about the English language arts.
If journalists ask a question in a way that lends itself to a canned answer, that is the fault of the journalist. Asking questions that lend themselves to broad, vague answers will get you broad, vague answers. I agree that such an approach adds little to nothing to anyone’s understanding. I think we are really in agreement on this point. It could be quite entertaining to brainstorm questions for candidates. It could be equally entertaining to fashion the exact wording of the questions as well.
Yes!!!!
People who voted for Trump were under the foolish impression that a wealthy businessman could lead the govt better than someone w/govt experience.
Plenty of them have the idea that someone unschooled with common sense– like themselves– could do a better job of running the govt [evidence: decades of declining QOL for regular folks under politicians of any stripe]. For them, ignorance is a plus, vetting N/A.
Many voted for him simply because he promised to bring manufacturing jobs back stateside. As though someone with zero govt experience could somehow stop globalism in its tracks, by what, waving a wand? As though a businessman whose wealth derives from foreign interests would even be inclined to do so. These voters, like Trump, have ignorant ideas about how we lost our labor prowess, e.g. illegals stealing our jobs, foreign aid & pacts w/countries that don’t favor our trade, welfare undermining motivation to work, etc, so they applaud the useless expensive wall, punitive ICE clampdown, cutting ties with allies, cutting snap benefits, putting an extra $2000 in their pocket via tax cut, etc. As far as they’re concerned, he’s a roaring success.
Alas, yes
And some “wealthy businessman.” He inherited three quarters of a billion from Daddy. If he had simply invested this in stock index funds, he would be worth far more than he is today. Instead, he ran a string of businesses into bankruptcy, created other businesses (Trump University) that were complete scams, and had to turn to money laundering for Russian kleptarchs to save himself. Trump’s not a businessman, but he played one on TV.
Herd immunity? Is there herd immunity with the regular flu? One can catch the flu over and over again each year unless you get the flu shot which can mitigate the worst effects of the flu. Unless I am mistaken, I don’t think that we can assume that there is herd immunity for the corona virus. The scientists are not even sure that getting it once gives you immunity to the virus.
From The Guardian, 3-17-20: One of the most concerning issues since the emergence of the Covid-19 virus has been whether those who have had it can get it a second time – and what that means for immunity.
On Monday, both Sir Patrick Vallance, the government’s chief scientific adviser, and Prof Chris Whitty, Boris Johnson’s chief medical adviser, sought to reassure the public. Those who have had the virus once will develop some immunity, they said – and it is rare to get an infectious disease again.
The questions first arose last month, after Japanese authorities said a woman who had had the virus, and been declared virus-free, had tested positive again. Scientists were left confused by the news and and also uneasy. [snip] Prof Jon Cohen, emeritus professor of infectious diseases at Brighton and Sussex Medical School, said: “The answer is that we simply don’t know [about reinfection] yet because we don’t have an antibody test for the infection, although we will have soon.
“However, it is very likely, based on other viral infections, that yes, once a person has had the infection they will generally be immune and won’t get it again. There will always be the odd exception, but that is certainly a reasonable expectation.”
Incidentally, the theory was never that Sweden would “escape the ravages of the disease”. It was simply an acceptance that a pandemic comes with a certain amount of death and the hope was that Sweden could get it over with without destroying its economy and thereby prevent additional death and suffering due to economic and mental health complications. Again, whether or not that hope will be successful remains to be seen.
Yeah, I suppose the elderly who die don’t have any mental health issues although apparently there can be severe mental and physical issues for those who survive a bad bout. This discussion calls to mind that quote from Mark Twain I have used before (courtesy of KrazyTA): “By trying we can easily endure adversity. Another man’s, I mean.”
How sad! Now it will be harder for them to bring the virus under control. Fortunately they are a small country with a robust economy and a good social safety net. Their leaders will admit defeat and forge ahead with a coherent plan for the good of their citizens. Can’t say the same for here.
I fear we will be seeing an uptick in cases soon as the economy reopens. While many will take necessary precautions, others will refuse to wear a mask or abide by the rules of social distancing.
I posted this in response to another post this past weekend. I still stand by every word:
Sweden’s official adopted theory was that the virus would not mutate and it was homogeneous, therefore it was predictable. The most recent experience and research (as a domestic example, see the new manifestations of the disease in children) suggests—suggest means, we think, but we’re not sure—that it may mutate and is more unpredictable, heterogeneous ways than was assumed two weeks ago. It may prove, as the anonymous quote in the NYT article says about the rosy economic scenarios developed by White House “economists,” “a catastrophic miss” of a false assumption. This is yet another example of the one consistent experience about COVID—the best state of knowledge today upon which we base our assumptions may prove to be completely wrong in two weeks.
The most knowledgeable scientists I know, have spoken to or corresponded with, or have read about, all agree on this. The reason for caution, or as has been most succinctly conveyed to me is: “social distancing is working!” That’s why I get so upset with anyone who speaks with certainty or uses uncertainty as a reason to ignore it. It will be interesting what the experiences in Sweden will be in two weeks. I’m betting the opinions that exist today will seem like ancient history.
GregB…..This was sent to me by my father in law (a retired dentist living in FL trying to stay alive in a wild-wild west state). This is a good scientific explantation for social distancing and mask wearing written so that the general public can understand. I found it helpful because I am the one having to go out to do the grocery shopping and other essential tasks because my husband is diabetic and has a “lupus type” syndrome. Maybe worth passing along to your scientist connections?….the general public has trouble understanding medical lingo and tunes out on all the statistics. https://www.erinbromage.com/post/the-risks-know-them-avoid-them
I’ve just perused it, but my first impression is that this is excellent and worthy of more distribution. I’m working on a big deadline tonight, but will read it closely tomorrow.
Heard Immunity: “We heard there was immunity to coronavirus.”
Yup. I am going to refuse the next Nobel Prize from a country that was willing to conduct such unethical experiment to test a theory. It’s one of the criteria of the Nobel Prize that no unverified theories will be awarded. This is why Einstein didn’t get the Nobel Prize for the relativity theory and this is why Hawking went Nobel Prizeless.
Thus, so-called experts are often wrong, but seldom in doubt, that they can
assign finite values to infinity. The “rubbing shoulders” expertise by osmosis,
works as well…
The difference this time is that the experts who understand the uncertainty of COVID-19 know very well that they will likely be proven wrong or mistaken with the assumptions they make today. The people to fear are those who speak with certainty or throw up their hands and use economics to justify medical decisions.
Maybe Sweden will invite Donald Trump to become their “Dear Leader” since their current government seems to think as he does.