teuchter
je suis teuchter
Not sure you can say this for definite? What's your control group?
Sweden and coronavirus
- Thread starter editor
- Start date
Not sure you can say this for definite? What's your control group?
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
There's no correlation between mask mandates and spread of omicron. France is a decent example - widespread mask mandate and just about the biggest surge of any country.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Is anywhere going to avoid a big omicron wave? I suspect not, so it's just a case of where you are in your curve. Sweden did very well in the delta wave. I think we can say that now. It was bottom of the European list throughout autumn for cases and deaths. Will it avoid a big omicron wave? I see no reason why it would. See no reason why anywhere will.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
As for this bit, why are they not valid? It's arbitrary only to compare Sweden to certain of its neighbours and nobody else. In fact, Tegnell argued early in the pandemic that, in terms of throughput of people from around the world, Sweden is more like The Netherlands than it is Norway.
Got to be really careful about cherry-picking stats here. For instance, there were plenty of people arguing that a comparison between Sweden and Germany showed how Sweden had got it badly wrong back when Germany's stats were better than Sweden's.
editor
hiraethified
It was already discussed at some length some time ago so you'll have to go back through this thread.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Ok so you don't know.
editor
hiraethified
Boris Sprinkler
Dont be scared
Also, i caught it in Sweden, so im basing opinion on feelings born from this been the 7th day of isolation. Sweden as a concept can fuck off.
MrCurry
right after this urgent rest
Excess death rates aren’t a bad measure of how countries are weathering the pandemic, but neither can they be used to judge the success or otherwise of any country’s Covid strategy, IMHO.
The reason being that excess death rates, by definition, are counting deaths from all causes, and that’s influenced by many other factors than just how successfully a country has mitigated COVID deaths. One of the biggest influences is going to be how resilient / well resourced the healthcare system is and to what extent other, non-COVID related health appointments have been able to proceed as normal.
I know, having been living in Sweden during this period and having had a regrettably huge number of doctor and hospital appointments in the past year that the healthcare system has held up fantastically well and at times I’ve been able to get urgent consultant appointments within three days. The tales of woe I read on these boards about the difficulty accessing overloaded NHS services are probably occurring in very many countries to even greater degrees and having a compounding effect on overall death rates.
Ps it’s going to sound like nitpicking but FYI Finland is not a Scandinavian country. The right term is Nordic countries
elbows
Well-Known Member
Nowhere looks likely to avoid a big wave, but they still take steps to reduce the ultimate size and impact of the wave.
These days Sweden seems less keen on Swedens original approach than you do! Why do you think they have felt the need to impose a range of measures on several occasions in the last month or so? Their current measures go further than the UKs in a number of areas, including limits to the size of private gatherings.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
You can't isolate out the mask mandate from all the other variables though. So I don't see how anyone can say there is or isn't a correlation.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
I believe they gained a new prime minister at the end of last year. Not sure if this is relevant to the change in approach.
elbows
Well-Known Member
We can also look at comments in recent months from Tegnell, the face of their original approach, who often continued to defend that approach.
Mid November:
www.politico.eu
Mid December:
www.thenationalnews.com
There are also various reports that we could look into. Some are mentioned in the following article:
www.bmj.com
littlebabyjesus has complained that I mischaracterise his pandemic stance, but his recent comments demonstrate quite how far out on a limb he remains, having not seized any opportunities to modify his stance. Even Tegnell moved further than him. Especially his ridiculous attitude towards masks which persists to this day despite being a disgraceful embarrassment that goes far beyond any false accusations I could possibly manage to invent. Perhaps I can be partially blamed for now allowing him sufficient room to 'save face', but on recent evidence I doubt thats the story really.
Mid November:
Sweden’s public health chief: Latest coronavirus curbs may not be enough
Proof of vaccination now required to attend large public events.
Mid December:
Denmark closes cinemas and theatres as Covid spreads quickly
Restrictions were announced alongside a record of more than 11,000 new cases in the previous 24 hours
www.thenationalnews.com
There are also various reports that we could look into. Some are mentioned in the following article:
What now for Sweden and covid-19?
Sweden has been both praised and vilified for its “light touch” stance during the pandemic, but with a second covid winter approaching, how do its experts rate the country’s pandemic control now, asks Marta Paterlini “Swedish statistics do not differ from other European countries,” Anders...
littlebabyjesus has complained that I mischaracterise his pandemic stance, but his recent comments demonstrate quite how far out on a limb he remains, having not seized any opportunities to modify his stance. Even Tegnell moved further than him. Especially his ridiculous attitude towards masks which persists to this day despite being a disgraceful embarrassment that goes far beyond any false accusations I could possibly manage to invent. Perhaps I can be partially blamed for now allowing him sufficient room to 'save face', but on recent evidence I doubt thats the story really.
elbows
Well-Known Member
In a nutshell, initial stupid establishment attitudes towards masks in various countries were heavily sponsored by concerns about the supply of masks, and desperate attempts to save them for some narrow purposes rather than encourage widespread public use of masks. The tune changed when denials about airborne transmission could not possibly hold, and when supplies were less constrained. Even then the switch was often somewhat gradual, with the term 'face coverings' preferred to start with. Those who still stick to the original attitude are cranks, people with strange cultural and ideological objections which make them a disgraceful threat to public health.
Of course none of that means that masks are enough on their own, they are only one of a large range of non-pharmaceutical measures that have been required in this pandemic in order to hope to cope.
Of course none of that means that masks are enough on their own, they are only one of a large range of non-pharmaceutical measures that have been required in this pandemic in order to hope to cope.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
A view that I see stated amongst those who complain about mask mandates, is that the UK recommendation to wear a "face covering" is stupid and pointless, because according to them, cloth masks or even basic surgical masks are entirely useless, and it's only properly fitted FFP2 or better masks that are going to make any difference.
Those same people don't seem to be in a hurry to go out and wear FFP2 masks themselves. Instead their view seems to be that if you want to protect yourself, wear a high grade mask, don't expect them to wear one for the protection of others.
It's a bit hard to argue about masks, partly because some people have become absolutely adament that they are a waste of time, and partly because it's true that there's not a lot of very definitive evidence of their efficacy at a population type level (although I'd like to see some if I'm wrong about that).
Those same people don't seem to be in a hurry to go out and wear FFP2 masks themselves. Instead their view seems to be that if you want to protect yourself, wear a high grade mask, don't expect them to wear one for the protection of others.
It's a bit hard to argue about masks, partly because some people have become absolutely adament that they are a waste of time, and partly because it's true that there's not a lot of very definitive evidence of their efficacy at a population type level (although I'd like to see some if I'm wrong about that).
elbows
Well-Known Member
Its the usual problem, the really strong population level evidence would be enabled by having a parallel universe where we could see the same population with the same variant, same levels of vaccination, demographics, other behaviours etc etc, with and without people wearing masks. We dont get to see that, so the evidence on that level ends up much weaker. We have to resort to theory and small scale experiments instead, or comparisons that can be picked apart due to other differences between the different groups being studied.
Common sense and the repetition of simple public health messages have been enough to convince plenty that there is merit to these things. That obviously isnt going to satisfy those who have other reasons to oppose masks, and so here we find ourselves. I do find Tegnell and Sweden somewhat useful in this regard these days though, they offer a glimpse into how authorities which had a bad track record have tried to adjust their stance to bring themselves closer to the updated orthodox approach and obvious reality. People that continue to oppose both strong restrictions and all the other, easier stuff that can make a difference in combination are infuriating because they compound the failures that their approach brings, they end up unwittingly inviting even stronger restrictions because they undermine the simpler stuff. And they seem to want to deal in absolutes, are not so interested in the idea that you reduce risk a bit here and there, chip away at infection opportunities and that these things add up.
Common sense and the repetition of simple public health messages have been enough to convince plenty that there is merit to these things. That obviously isnt going to satisfy those who have other reasons to oppose masks, and so here we find ourselves. I do find Tegnell and Sweden somewhat useful in this regard these days though, they offer a glimpse into how authorities which had a bad track record have tried to adjust their stance to bring themselves closer to the updated orthodox approach and obvious reality. People that continue to oppose both strong restrictions and all the other, easier stuff that can make a difference in combination are infuriating because they compound the failures that their approach brings, they end up unwittingly inviting even stronger restrictions because they undermine the simpler stuff. And they seem to want to deal in absolutes, are not so interested in the idea that you reduce risk a bit here and there, chip away at infection opportunities and that these things add up.
wemakeyousoundb
hopefully not gimboid
sounds like a trump quoteIt’s not the covid spreaders going to work who are the problem, it’s that they tested themselves to know they had it
View attachment 310003
View attachment 310004
MrCurry
right after this urgent rest
Yes, it’s delusional madness. And folkhälsomyndigheten is the public health agency of Sweden, the people who are meant to prevent the spread of infectious diseases. For them to say it’s fine for infected people to go mix with others but not ok for them to be tested is so fucked up, it makes it clear the only strategy in play now is herd immunity. I wonder how many people will die.
Yossarian
⏭️
A new study paints a damning picture of Sweden's COVID response:
"The Swedish response to this pandemic,” the researchers report, “was unique and characterized by a morally, ethically, and scientifically questionable laissez-faire approach.”
The details of Swedish policies as described by Brusselaers and her co-authors are horrifying. The Swedish government, they report, deliberately tried to use children to spread COVID-19 and denied care to seniors and those suffering from other conditions.
“Many elderly people were administered morphine instead of oxygen despite available supplies, effectively ending their lives,” the researchers wrote. “Potentially life-saving treatment was withheld without medical examination, and without informing the patient or his/her family or asking permission.”
In densely populated Stockholm, triage rules stated that patients with co-morbidities were not to be admitted to intensive care units, on grounds that they were “unlikely to recover,” the researchers wrote, citing Swedish health strategy documents and statistics from research studies indicating that ICU admissions were biased against older patients.
www.latimes.com
www.nature.com
"The Swedish response to this pandemic,” the researchers report, “was unique and characterized by a morally, ethically, and scientifically questionable laissez-faire approach.”
The details of Swedish policies as described by Brusselaers and her co-authors are horrifying. The Swedish government, they report, deliberately tried to use children to spread COVID-19 and denied care to seniors and those suffering from other conditions.
“Many elderly people were administered morphine instead of oxygen despite available supplies, effectively ending their lives,” the researchers wrote. “Potentially life-saving treatment was withheld without medical examination, and without informing the patient or his/her family or asking permission.”
In densely populated Stockholm, triage rules stated that patients with co-morbidities were not to be admitted to intensive care units, on grounds that they were “unlikely to recover,” the researchers wrote, citing Swedish health strategy documents and statistics from research studies indicating that ICU admissions were biased against older patients.
Column: Did Sweden beat the pandemic by refusing to lock down? No, its record is disastrous
A new study shows just how badly Sweden fared in the pandemic.
www.latimes.com
Evaluation of science advice during the COVID-19 pandemic in Sweden - Humanities and Social Sciences Communications
Sweden was well equipped to prevent the pandemic of COVID-19 from becoming serious. Over 280 years of collaboration between political bodies, authorities, and the scientific community had yielded many successes in preventive medicine. Sweden’s population is literate and has a high level of trust...
www.nature.com
elbows
Well-Known Member
There will have been a UK version of that too but I dont know how much of it will get a proper airing. The really obvious stuff like certain attempts to misuse do not resuscitate orders will come up in the inquiry, but theres plenty of other stuff too and they might keep the angles really narrow in order to avoid even beginning to explore uncomfortable truths properly.
platinumsage
HaveMyPassword123
A new study paints a damning picture of Sweden's COVID response:
"The Swedish response to this pandemic,” the researchers report, “was unique and characterized by a morally, ethically, and scientifically questionable laissez-faire approach.”
The details of Swedish policies as described by Brusselaers and her co-authors are horrifying. The Swedish government, they report, deliberately tried to use children to spread COVID-19 and denied care to seniors and those suffering from other conditions.
“Many elderly people were administered morphine instead of oxygen despite available supplies, effectively ending their lives,” the researchers wrote. “Potentially life-saving treatment was withheld without medical examination, and without informing the patient or his/her family or asking permission.”
In densely populated Stockholm, triage rules stated that patients with co-morbidities were not to be admitted to intensive care units, on grounds that they were “unlikely to recover,” the researchers wrote, citing Swedish health strategy documents and statistics from research studies indicating that ICU admissions were biased against older patients.
Column: Did Sweden beat the pandemic by refusing to lock down? No, its record is disastrous
A new study shows just how badly Sweden fared in the pandemic.
Evaluation of science advice during the COVID-19 pandemic in Sweden - Humanities and Social Sciences Communications
Sweden was well equipped to prevent the pandemic of COVID-19 from becoming serious. Over 280 years of collaboration between political bodies, authorities, and the scientific community had yielded many successes in preventive medicine. Sweden’s population is literate and has a high level of trust...
I don't think a damning picture can be painted by simply looking at COVID outcomes. Without factoring in e.g. mental health, healthcare for non-COVID conditions, or any of the other factors that might have been beneficial in the Swedish response, that article just reads like a diatribe befitting of a newspaper editorial. I'd be interested to read some actual research on the pandemic in that country.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Excess death numbers are probably the best way to factor in both direct and indirect effects of the pandemic. By that measure, Sweden's a bit worse than Finland, about twice as bad as Denmark and about three times as bad as Norway. If you class Estonia as a Nordic country, Sweden is way better than Estonia. Economist does a tracker:
Tracking covid-19 excess deaths across countries
Sweden's still well under the European average, mind you, and nowhere near the catastrophic numbers of Eastern Europe.
The dangers of, and justifications for, cherrypicking comparisons come into play here. During the first wave, Sweden compares pretty badly with many places. Since the first wave, Sweden compares well with the rest of Europe, and doesn't compare badly with other Nordic countries. Since the second wave, Sweden compares very well with anywhere in the world. I would argue that the above article is doing a fair bit of cherrypicking when it picks out the stat saying that Sweden was 10 times worse than Norway in the first wave. True, but not the whole story.
Speaking to a few Swedes recently, I was slightly surprised to hear how much activity did actually stop. A fair few Swedes effectively placed themselves into a voluntary lockdown, closing clubs, ending socialising, etc.
Tracking covid-19 excess deaths across countries
Sweden's still well under the European average, mind you, and nowhere near the catastrophic numbers of Eastern Europe.
The dangers of, and justifications for, cherrypicking comparisons come into play here. During the first wave, Sweden compares pretty badly with many places. Since the first wave, Sweden compares well with the rest of Europe, and doesn't compare badly with other Nordic countries. Since the second wave, Sweden compares very well with anywhere in the world. I would argue that the above article is doing a fair bit of cherrypicking when it picks out the stat saying that Sweden was 10 times worse than Norway in the first wave. True, but not the whole story.
Speaking to a few Swedes recently, I was slightly surprised to hear how much activity did actually stop. A fair few Swedes effectively placed themselves into a voluntary lockdown, closing clubs, ending socialising, etc.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Yes. An example of that would be my mum's cataracts. Should have been operated on two years ago and she's still waiting. Not life-threatening but certainly life-affecting.
Another example I've spoken about before is the way that many social services in the UK, such as moving people out of (and so into) emergency housing, came to a complete standstill for about five months in 2020. A hell of a lot of people suffered due to that.
I don't know how Sweden compares by those measures, but I agree that it's relevant to the discussion.
Another example I've spoken about before is the way that many social services in the UK, such as moving people out of (and so into) emergency housing, came to a complete standstill for about five months in 2020. A hell of a lot of people suffered due to that.
I don't know how Sweden compares by those measures, but I agree that it's relevant to the discussion.
MrCurry
right after this urgent rest
Excess death rates are strongly influenced by other factors, so won’t simply be a reflection of the success or otherwise of the covid strategy. For example the amount of excess capacity and overall fitness for purpose of the healthcare system has a very direct bearing on how many excess deaths from non-covid causes occur when covid cases put high loads on the system.
When comparing a country with a well organised and well funded healthcare system which adopted a shitty covid strategy with one whose healthcare system is thinly spread at the best of times but did a better job of their covid response, one might see a similar or even higher excess death rate in the second country, but it‘s not safe to use that as a metric solely of the covid strategy.
When comparing a country with a well organised and well funded healthcare system which adopted a shitty covid strategy with one whose healthcare system is thinly spread at the best of times but did a better job of their covid response, one might see a similar or even higher excess death rate in the second country, but it‘s not safe to use that as a metric solely of the covid strategy.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
There are no infallible metrics, but if you have to choose just one by which to make comparisons across countries, excess deaths is the one to go for.
elbows
Well-Known Member
Heres a few thoughts on it not being all that surprising when we think about it:
We should have expected to see even greater divergence in Covid wave data between countries that in non-pandemic times had roughly comparable patterns of life and age population pyramids, if these behavioural changes had not been a meaningful part of the picture at any stage at all. Shit would have kept getting worse, with even later and higher peaks, if informal brakes had not been applied at all. As I was probably discussing with you a few weeks ago, Swedens wave 1 shape wasnt all that dissimilar to 'late lockdown' countries such as the UK, and that offers some clues about behavioural changes there over time.
Nor should we be surprised that concerns about a new virus, gloomy mood music and concern about hospital capacity being used up led to behavioural changes, even in the absence of certain formal rules being imposed. The phenomenon still exists even in the vaccine era, but obviously to a much lesser extent unless fresh concerns cause worsening mood music and the impression that some of the gains in protection from severe disease have been lost.
This sort of stuff is also relevant when considering a couple of different versions of 'against lockdowns and other measures' political stances. There are several versions of that too:
There is an extreme version which tries to get everyone to carry on as if nothing is happening, and sees various things in binary terms, with all behavioural changes and reductions in economic activity being attributed to the imposition of formal rules. Including the idea that there was actually a viable option to expect people to completely ignore the virus and carry on as normal, an idea I consider absurd and divorced from reality, something thats never going to happen, something that at most would just have delayed the inevitable for some additional deadly weeks.
There is a version where its proponents are allergic to the imposition of formal rules, but do recognise the role of behavioural changes in influencing the scale and timing of a wave.
I ranted about them both. But I have more sympathy with the second one because its at least possible to imagine it being compatible with how humans will actually end up behaving when faced with a threatening virus. I still could not back it in the first waves in the pre-vaccine era, because it still amounted to leaving too much uncertainty in peoples minds, and too many people doing too little, too late, sticking to the standard pressures in terms of what people think is expected of them socially and economically, and I thought time was of the essence. Plus as we saw if the timing and strength of braking was all messed up, then it made it more likely that the system would be pushed to the point that we'd still end up with heavy formal rules in the end, and that they would end up being imposed for longer. The way the UK establishment flip-flopped on the formal rules and messed up their timing, then feeling the need to slam the brakes on real hard, made us a text book example of that. Whereas Swedens situation was somewhat more nuanced and leaves us still unpicking and decoding what happened there. I think I already mentioned in a previous post my impression that this may be because Sweden had a number of initial systemic advantages compared to the UK, stuff that affected the initial seeding of disease and the pace and scale of the exponential explosion of cases, but then used up those advantages by not u-turning and formally braking as hard as we did.
Last edited:
