Sweden seeing much smaller increase in cases compared to rest of Europe

[SussexDeb]

www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/sweden/

No massive surge like in France, Spain, UK and Netherlands.

More and more it looks like Sweden has taken the right approach with limited restrictions. Avoiding fatigue among the public around the measures and making sure good hygiene is practiced.

That’s an excellent point @SussexDeb. Lockdown fanatics keep claiming that Sweden’s population density is vastly different from the U.K. but the vast majority of the Swedish population live in the big cities.

87% of Swedes live in just 1.5% of the land mass.

Yes more single occupancy households mostly driven by young adults being able to leave home at 18/19 whereas in the UK this is obviously not financially viable due to our broken housing system.

Nevertheless the single occupancy households do not necessarily explain Sweden’s success.

NYC also has a high proportion of single occupants.

I think Sweden is successful because it allowed its healthy population to achieve herd immunity. Schools are unlikely to be a significant source of transmission if most of the kids have had the virus.

Your Machester figure is wrong - it should be 4735, and Birmingham is 4262.

And you've skipped down, ignoring many other places more densely populated than Malmo - Luton, Leicester, Portsmouth, Southampton, Slough, Watford, Nottingham, Liverpool, Southend on Sea, Bristol

So I think the point about UK being much more densely populated is the more accurate

An important factor for the spread of disease is something called lived density. This basically means how likely are you to live close to someone else. In Sweden this number is very low and in Spain it is very high, for example. So we would expect the numbers to be low in Sweden but high in Spain ignoring anything about govt policies.

Look at the recent death rate for Sweden. Among the lowest.

It's weird. There seems to be a concerted effort denigrate the efforts of Sweden by people on here. From what I can see, the country - like all countries - got some things wrong early on but overall has managed the balance between protecting its population while not crushing the economy better than most.

As @notevenat20 says it's more complex than just lots of people live in Swedish cities. In Sweden it's common for young people to move out at 18/19 vs the EU average of 26. They don't just move into flat shares either, plenty live alone. More than half of households are single person which is the highest % in the EU.

I doubt it's a concerted effort.

Though the promotion of the Swedish model is definitely coordinated (small group of readily identifiable proponents) Those who point out why it's a poor comparison are a much more disparate group (I'm talking across SM not just MN)

I am a bit confused though as I thought Sweden were now looking at local lockdowns & their deaths per capita was much higher than their neighbours.

I’m in Sweden and we’re doing ok, that can obviously change any minute though. But nothing is closed down, we’re just being more careful with keeping distance, hygiene and only seeing our elderly outside etc. It’s not something we have to do, but it’s common sense and so we just do it. This can go on for years, and we found a way to live with it without lockdown, masks and ruining the economy too much. We’re all in it together though, it’s a pity countries have started to make it into some sort of competition.

Their case numbers and deaths per capita have been higher then Germany, Norway and Finland for some weeks

@toxtethOgradyUSA I agree with you.

Are the over 70s still shielding in Sweden?

From the beginning of October the advice has been that the elderly and high risk can meet up indoors providing social distancing is maintained.

In my experience the measures which have protected us most from covid are measures that were already in place. For example the way schools and childcare operate normally mean that I can drop and pick up my child without coming into contact with any other parents. Also as someone else said parents get paid time off when their kids are sick, there is no stigma for parents phoning in with sick kids, so the rule is they stay home with any symptoms including just snuffles or a minor cough.

We did mess up with care homes. It got in in some areas before they were made covid secure. But some municipalities did lock them down earlier. In my municipality we've had 124 cases since it bagan.

I don't know if it's correct but I heard that the high death rate we hate relates to the unusually low flu death rate last winter. Apparently there is very little difference between our excess death rates from this year and previous years.

Their case numbers and deaths per capita have been higher then Germany, Norway and Finland for some weeks
And? Death rates cannot and should not be the sole factor we use to judge how successful countries have been in managing this. That way madness lies.

@FatCatThinCat that is correct, due to an unusual low death rate from flu last year there would have been a much higher death rate this year even without covid.

@toxtethOgradyUSA

It's weird. There seems to be a concerted effort denigrate the efforts of Sweden by people on here. From what I can see, the country - like all countries - got some things wrong early on but overall has managed the balance between protecting its population while not crushing the economy better than most.

Not sure how you can claim that when this is the case:

"The cumulative death rate – since the start at the pandemic – in European countries.

The 5 countries where most lives were lost are: Belgium, Spain, the UK, Italy, and Sweden.

The countries that did well – those at the bottom – suffered a death rate that was 10-times lower."
mobile.twitter.com/MaxCRoser/status/1317770978143932416

In terms of economic impact, neighbouring countries like Denmark, Norway and Finland had a similar impact, but their per capita deaths are significantly lower, ten times lower in Norway and Finland.
(See chart attached to tweet in link above).

And? Death rates cannot and should not be the sole factor we use to judge how successful countries have been in managing this

And I was responding to @baobun

My apologies for not making that clearer

I don't know if it's correct but I heard that the high death rate we hate relates to the unusually low flu death rate last winter. Apparently there is very little difference between our excess death rates from this year and previous years.

You seem to be mixing two different things.
One is the excess deaths, which is calculated for all deaths. During the pandemic it is used to estimate the effect on other causes of death, as well as of undeclared covid deaths. It's difficult to ascertain which.
Excess deaths are not only calculated in relation to the previous year, but more. It depends on the study. There are different methods that can yield very different results.

Then there is the death rate for covid. It can be the number of deaths from covid in relation to the population. It was high in Sweden, compared with neighbouring countries, and not only. It seems low now, but a rise in deaths follows a rise in cases by 2-3 weeks. So, we need to wait to see how it evolves in Sweden.
Just to point out that many people usually refer to death rates to actually mean case fatality rate, which is basically the number of deaths divided by the number of cases. A high death rate may mean that health care is unsatisfactory, or that mild or asymptomatic cases aren't being picked up, with consequences for transmission control.

[quote hitchhikingghost]@FatCatThinCat that is correct, due to an unusual low death rate from flu last year there would have been a much higher death rate this year even without covid.[/quote]
So much wrong with this sentence.

They seem to give more of a range of symptoms for testing than we go. Ours mean 85% of cases are missed apparently. Maybe that helps a bit

www.folkhalsomyndigheten.se/the-public-health-agency-of-sweden/communicable-disease-control/covid-19/#

"I think Sweden is successful because it allowed its healthy population to achieve herd immunity."

There is no evidence for that claim. Serological studies showed that by late June 7.1% of Swedes had antibodies, 11.4% for Stockholm and 6.3% for Gothenburg.

Late June is 4 months ago @CoffeeandCroissant.

There seems to be a consistent effort from the lockdown fanatics to disparage and attack Sweden’s success as their doom-mongering has been proved wrong.

@toxtethOgradyUSA

It's weird. There seems to be a concerted effort denigrate the efforts of Sweden by people on here. From what I can see, the country - like all countries - got some things wrong early on but overall has managed the balance between protecting its population while not crushing the economy better than most.

I don't like to bash other countries, but when people use Sweden as a good example for other European countries with different characteristics and as a paradigm of success, I will have to explain why they shouldn't.

I hope every country does well, but we can certainly look at what different countries do better or worse, and different strategies can work better or worse in different settings.

Plus, at the peak of the Summer we had people here saying how the UK had almost no cases and deaths. Not saying Sweden will start rising fast soon, but cases are rising now. So, I'd rather wait to draw any conclusions about their strategy in the longer term.

@Ecosse

Late June is 4 months ago *@CoffeeandCroissant*.

There seems to be a consistent effort from the lockdown fanatics to disparage and attack Sweden’s success as their doom-mongering has been proved wrong.

Define success.

I think it may be helpful psychologically to ask people rather than tell them (the WHO commented on that as well) however I guess with some people they won't engage with that hence the 'having to' in the UK, perhaps.