Sweden

[paindonthurt_]

Total cases per 1M - rank 17
Deaths per 1M - rank 7 daily deaths declining

I would assume they would be much higher in cases per 1 million.

 

[Jeffreauxdawg]

Total cases per 1M - rank 17
Deaths per 1M - rank 7 daily deaths declining

I would assume they would be much higher in cases per 1 million.

They are not testing enough.

Deaths 7th
Cases per million 17th
Tests per million 50th

They test at less than half the rate per million people as the US.

That's like a right handed DH who is close to the league lead in strikeouts, has a good batting average, but when you scroll down... You see he only has half the plate appearances of league leaders because he only hits against lefties.

 

[L4Dawg]

The Swedish government official who actually set their policy now says it was a mistake. Go argue with him.

 

[msstate7]

They are not testing enough.

Deaths 7th
Cases per million 17th
Tests per million 50th

They test at less than half the rate per million people as the US.

That's like a right handed DH who is close to the league lead in strikeouts, has a good batting average, but when you scroll down... You see he only has half the plate appearances of league leaders because he only hits against lefties.

Their strategy was to get herd immunity, so they aren't trying to limit cases.

I don't know where to find hospitalization rate there, but death rate continues to plummet...



Yesterday's 7-day avg is 6. That's down 33 per day (84.6% down) from June 1st, while cases are up 33.3% (June 1st 7-day avg was 637 and July 1st was 849).

They could be farther along the road to herd immunity if this study is correct... we all could be.

https://news.ki.se/immunity-to-covi...861.677108381.1593454468-436267287.1454932504

 

[Jeffreauxdawg]

Their strategy was to get herd immunity, so they aren't trying to limit cases.

They could be farther along the road to herd immunity if this study is correct... we all could be.

https://news.ki.se/immunity-to-covi...861.677108381.1593454468-436267287.1454932504

I think we are all in the dark until the fall with Sweden. Nobody can say they have done better or worse at this point. Right now they look bad compared to neighboring countries, but could be better off the back end. The herd immunity play won't be verified until cold and flu season comes back around. Nobody is testing enough to truly know how many people have had it and the antibody stuff is all over the place. There is conflicting data all around the world and nobody knows.

https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-hopes-fade-for-swedens-herd-immunity-experiment-2020-6

As for death counts... They will go down in the summer everywhere. Just like any other respiratory virus, the virus is weaker (if you get it, it's going to be a much lower dose or viral load) in the summer and your immune system is much stronger to fight it off if you do get it. (Think flu season... It doesn't go away every summer, it just gets so weak that nobody bothers tracking it.)

My biggest knock on everyone pointing to Sweden is that they saved the economy with their approach, but they didn't. The IMF projects them to have a slightly deeper drop in GDP than the other Scandinavian countries. Plus now that the EU us back open for travel, other countries are putting restrictions on Sweden. If you want to point to a country that did it right, South Korea is by far the big winner. In terms of infections, deaths, and economy... It's a blowout.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/sweden-didnt-impose-a-lockdown-its-economy-is-just-as-bad-as-its-neighbors-who-did-2020-06-25


This is projected 2020 GDP decline by OECD countries. The US, Sweden, and S. Korea are highlighted.

View attachment 16693

I'm not saying that Sweden was wrong yet, but it will all depend on a second wave. If they have a much flatter go than everyone else, it could prove they were right. If it's similar or worse than their neighbors, they screwed up.

 

[BlueRidgeMtns]

That's like a right handed DH who is close to the league lead in strikeouts, has a good batting average, but when you scroll down... You see he only has half the plate appearances of league leaders because he only hits against lefties.

excellent analogy

 

[TheStateUofMS]

Their mortality rate is almost twice ours at 7.7% going by confirmed cases and confirmed deaths. I doubt they are testing enough so it's likely lower, but still pretty high compared to ours.

I don't think they're THAT crazy though. The obesity rate in the US is about double Sweden too.

 

[patdog]

As for death counts... They will go down in the summer everywhere. Just like any other respiratory virus, the virus is weaker (if you get it, it's going to be a much lower dose or viral load) in the summer and your immune system is much stronger to fight it off if you do get it. (Think flu season... It doesn't go away every summer, it just gets so weak that nobody bothers tracking it.)

If this is true, and it does make some sense, then we should be wide open this summer with no restrictions at all and partially shut down again on October 1.

 

[Go Budaw]

Their strategy was to get herd immunity, so they aren't trying to limit cases.

I don't know where to find hospitalization rate there, but death rate continues to plummet...



Yesterday's 7-day avg is 6. That's down 33 per day (84.6% down) from June 1st, while cases are up 33.3% (June 1st 7-day avg was 637 and July 1st was 849).

They could be farther along the road to herd immunity if this study is correct... we all could be.

https://news.ki.se/immunity-to-covi...861.677108381.1593454468-436267287.1454932504

I fail to see how death rates plummeting means anything about herd immunity. If cases are still on the rise but deaths are dropping, they are either accelerating their testing, or it’s just that more younger / lower risk people are getting it than before. Based on JLS comment about their testing rate still being very low, I’d say that’s not the cause. Either way, folks are continuing to get COVID at an increasing rate. Same thing is going on in US, with death rate plummeting and cases increasing, and probably for the same reason.

 

[msstate7]

I fail to see how death rates plummeting means anything about herd immunity. If cases are still on the rise but deaths are dropping, they are either accelerating their testing, or it’s just that more younger / lower risk people are getting it than before. Either way, folks are continuing to get COVID at an increasing rate. Same thing is going on in US, with death rate plummeting and cases increasing.

If the goal is herd immunity, cases rising with deaths falling is exactly what you want, right?

 

[Captain Ron]

Just some other numbers. Their ICU bed usage is at its lowest point since early March at around 111 down from a peak of over 500. Care sessions for Corona are also plummeting.

https://www.icuregswe.org/en/data--results/covid-19-in-swedish-intensive-care/

 

[Go Budaw]

If the goal is herd immunity, cases rising with deaths falling is exactly what you want, right?

I think the best indication of eventual herd immunity is that cases start falling with no restrictions in place. Deaths are simply a function of what specific risk groups are getting it, has nothing to do with whether or not herd immunity is imminent. Right now, we have no idea if herd immunity is real or a pipe dream, but if it is real I think that is what you’d see.

 

[engie]

The Swedish government official who actually set their policy now says it was a mistake. Go argue with him.

Link?

Because that’s not what he actually said, is it? Just your twisted up version of a muchhhh milder statement. Which was that with hindsight he would have brought about half the amount of restrictions of the rest of us instead of staying wide open.

 

[paindonthurt_]

Correct but it’s hard to find consistency and logic in this irrational world.

 

[paindonthurt_]

The only way to get to herd immunity is for cases to rise.

If cases keep rising and deaths stay down or keep falling and hospitalizations stay down or keep falling, we should almost want positive cases to go up.

There is zero need to shut down anything if the health care system isn’t overwhelmed.

 

[fishwater99]

The only way to get to herd immunity is for cases to rise.

If cases keep rising and deaths stay down or keep falling and hospitalizations stay down or keep falling, we should almost want positive cases to go up.

There is zero need to shut down anything if the health care system isn’t overwhelmed.

^^^ THIS

 

[TheStateUofMS]

Pretty sure the epidemiologist did admit they should have taken some more precautions and did phrase it "we should have done some things differently."

 

[Jeffreauxdawg]

Pretty sure the epidemiologist did admit they should have taken some more precautions and did phrase it "we should have done some things differently."

That's what I read. His big regret was that they wished they had done more to protect the elderly. Also said herd immunity was never the goal which I found interesting.

ETA: The article I read the other day. Lays everything out fairly.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-06-30/anders-tegnell-architect-of-the-swedish-model-coronavirus/12384966

 

[johnson86-1]

Pretty sure the epidemiologist did admit they should have taken some more precautions and did phrase it "we should have done some things differently."

He did, but he wasn't really admitting his approach was a mistake. He explicitly said he would not have done what other countries did, but maybe done something in between Sweden's approach and other countries. To my knowledge, the only specific measure he said should ahve been different was protecting the elderly population. Their rate looks much worse b/c they performed about like Pennsylvania and New York as far as elderly population.

 

[horshack.sixpack]

I'd say one thing is for sure true in Sweden. They are thinning the heard. I don't mean that to be harsh, but it looks like the virus has taken out a lot of those that were vulnerable to dying from it. Most of the arguments that I see are between people who think that enough pre-cautions can stop this thing, and folks that believe that it is inevitable and we just need to be certain that we don't unnecessarily lose lives (unnecessarily = can't provide healthcare to all who need it). It seems that flatten the curve approach was put in place to address the latter and to a large extent has worked. I think that is the right approach and that our guidance on allowed activities should support our critical care capacity.

i.e. Sweden second wave might look "better" because they have already gone through the whole population for the most part and the most vulnerable have already taken the brunt. I'm not sure that is technically herd immunity.

 

[CochiseCowbell]

I thought this thread was going to be about Eurovision.

Jaja Ding Dong!*

 

[codeDawg]

He did, but he wasn't really admitting his approach was a mistake. He explicitly said he would not have done what other countries did, but maybe done something in between Sweden's approach and other countries. To my knowledge, the only specific measure he said should ahve been different was protecting the elderly population. Their rate looks much worse b/c they performed about like Pennsylvania and New York as far as elderly population.

I think this is the point about slowing the spread though. It's about protecting the vulnerable populations by not flooding the environment with disease. It's a matter of public health. Sweden's numbers are bad because they just let things roll, didn't protect people, and a lot of people have died that didn't have to.

We're on our way here too. Nashville just rolled back to Phase 2 because people couldn't stay out of the bars. You can say, well, let the younger people get it and get towards herd immunity, but those people walk around in society. They live in buildings with vulnerable people, go to the grocery store with them, work with them, and generally spread the disease into environments where people who need to be protected maybe can't protect themselves. This is especially an issue for minority communities where there is a larger percentage of poverty and fewer healthy people who can assist.

This uptick in younger populations getting the virus will lead to upticks in older populations getting sick and an increase in mortality in 4-6 weeks.

I think things do need to be open to a certain degree. It needs to be regional based on current conditions (e.g. Phoenix and Boseman, Montana should be treated differently), but to say we should just let everybody get it and the geezers need to stay home ignores the reality of vulnerable people.

 

[Misfit]

Please give us a link to anything where any Swedish government official says their strategy was to reach herd immunity. In every article I saw early on everybody in Sweden denied that was their goal.

 

[johnson86-1]

I think this is the point about slowing the spread though. It's about protecting the vulnerable populations by not flooding the environment with disease. It's a matter of public health. Sweden's numbers are bad because they just let things roll, didn't protect people, and a lot of people have died that didn't have to.

We're on our way here too. Nashville just rolled back to Phase 2 because people couldn't stay out of the bars. You can say, well, let the younger people get it and get towards herd immunity, but those people walk around in society. They live in buildings with vulnerable people, go to the grocery store with them, work with them, and generally spread the disease into environments where people who need to be protected maybe can't protect themselves. This is especially an issue for minority communities where there is a larger percentage of poverty and fewer healthy people who can assist.

This uptick in younger populations getting the virus will lead to upticks in older populations getting sick and an increase in mortality in 4-6 weeks.

I think things do need to be open to a certain degree. It needs to be regional based on current conditions (e.g. Phoenix and Boseman, Montana should be treated differently), but to say we should just let everybody get it and the geezers need to stay home ignores the reality of vulnerable people.

And to say everybody should just stay home ignores the reality of vulnerable people too. Again, there needs to be an end game. If they now think the flatten the curve narrative was wrong and that we can actually get rid of the disease by locking down, they need to come out and argue for that. If they think they are locking down until there is a vaccine, they need to give a time frame and point to which vaccines they think are viable options for that time frame. If they just want to continue the flatten the curve narrative, they need to point to where ICU capacity is limited and also come up with some estimates as to how many months/years before it will have worked its way through the population based on their projections.

You can't move from "flatten the curve, raise the line", to just "put life on hold indefinitely" and get compliance. They need a plan and to communicate the plan.

 

[msstate7]

Please give us a link to anything where any Swedish government official says their strategy was to reach herd immunity. In every article I saw early on everybody in Sweden denied that was their goal.

I don't know if it was the goal, but here's an article where infectious chief claimed herd immunity was close...

"Parts of Sweden are on track to achieve so-called herd immunity from the novel coronavirus-caused COVID-19 disease within weeks, according to the man who devised the country's unusual strategy for dealing with the outbreak.

Anders Tegnell said the Swedish capital, Stockholm, will be among the first places to develop such immunity. He told local media infection rates in the city of 2.4 million people have already started to slow, because locals have developed resistance to the disease.

"According to our modelers, we are starting to see so many immune people in the population in Stockholm that it is starting to have an effect on the spread of the infection," he said.

He predicted herd immunity, the stage when enough people have immunity to a disease to make it difficult for the virus to infect new victims, will be achieved "some time in May"...."


https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/sweden-says-herd-immunity-very-close/ar-BB12WUj1
...
Maybe it wasn't the goal, but weird he predicted they'd hit it in May

 

[paindonthurt_]

Are you asking me? Bc I never said that was their goal.

I’m simply saying their numbers and trends don’t look terrible considering they didn’t do a ton of “shutting down”.

 

[paindonthurt_]

But you can’t get to that point without cases rising first.

 

[codeDawg]

And to say everybody should just stay home ignores the reality of vulnerable people too. Again, there needs to be an end game. If they now think the flatten the curve narrative was wrong and that we can actually get rid of the disease by locking down, they need to come out and argue for that. If they think they are locking down until there is a vaccine, they need to give a time frame and point to which vaccines they think are viable options for that time frame. If they just want to continue the flatten the curve narrative, they need to point to where ICU capacity is limited and also come up with some estimates as to how many months/years before it will have worked its way through the population based on their projections.

You can't move from "flatten the curve, raise the line", to just "put life on hold indefinitely" and get compliance. They need a plan and to communicate the plan.

Who is "they"? I think, like I said, there is a middle ground that isn't wide open or completely closed up. It's data driven, and regional. I do agree the federal government should be releasing guidelines and being more vocal, but that doesn't look likely.

 

[Go Budaw]

But you can’t get to that point without cases rising first.

Of course not. But cases rising tells you nothing by itself. Alabama and MS cases are rising too. Doesn’t mean we are any closer to herd immunity. The big question is whether herd immunity can be achieved (even in a partial sense where it just becomes another version of the common cold), and if so, then the secondary question becomes how many people have to get it for that to happen? We won’t see confirmation of that until somebody goes full open kimono (even with the high risk population), and you still see declining cases. Sweden isn’t even doing that.

 

[paindonthurt_]

If herd immunity exists, every single case gets you closer to herd immunity. That’s just math.

 

[horshack.sixpack]

The virus is not stopping. Restrictions on things opening/closing should be based on local critical care capacity and near-term projections (which should be getting more accurate). The best you can hope for is the original "flatten the curve" mantra of keeping our best healthcare resources available for those that need them. Nobody wants to see anyone denied the best possible care because the healthcare system is overwhelmed. Nobody wants to incur all the negatives of a complete shutdown any longer based on a false assertion that it will stop a virus. The virus is going to move through the US population. So long as healthcare options are available for those most in need, we've done our part. If I get it and the best healthcare we have available won't save me then it is my time to go. I don't want the vast percentage of the nation to suffer forever in the likely false hope that it will somehow not find me eventually.

I suppose the thing that stands out to me is that if a vaccine and effective treatment were found tomorrow, neither would offer 100% efficacy. Therefore some people would STILL die from this virus, as they do from many others and countless other threats to human health and safety. On the one hand it is unique/novel, on the other hand, it presents many of the same challenges infectious diseases of all ilk present.

 

[Go Budaw]

If herd immunity exists, every single case gets you closer to herd immunity. That’s just math.

In basic theory, yeah. But herd immunity as a whole as a wide variety of possibilities. It could be that contracting the virus gets you immunity forever, could be that you get it for a year (kinda like the flu), could be just a couple of months, and it could not exist at all. And everything in between. If its anything other than “forever”, it all depends on the mutation rate of the virus and how fast people get it.

For example, with a 2-month immunity, you could probably achieve herd immunity as a country if you can get a sufficiently large percentage of the population to get it in 2 months. If its only 2 weeks though, its probably impossible to ever get immunity no matter how fast it spreads. Then you have added variability in Europe where even if a country achieves herd immunity, intercontinental travel between nations may threaten it or allow for return of the virus from influx of incoming and outgoing travelers. There are quite a few variables.