The "Swedish Model"

FranticFrummie

Mon, Sep 07 2020, 7:45 am

We've all heard about how Sweden didn't freak out when Corona hit, and "they're just fine".

Yesterday I was catching up with a friend of mine who lives outside Malmo, and asked her about it.

She said that in Sweden, there is very little testing, and deaths are often recorded as the pre-existing condition, and not Corona. Only relatively healthy, young people "die of Corona". Everyone else dies of "heart failure, pneumonia, or a collapsed lung." That alone will skew the statistics that everyone is bringing up.

She said that in Swedish society, most people save up to have a retirement cottage in the country, so elderly people are living in uncrowded conditions with lots of fresh air. Retired people are generally healthy, independent, and lead busy lives. They don't sit around waiting for grandkids to visit every weekend.

Then there's the whole population density. Aside from Stockholm and Malmo, can you name another 5 major cities off the top of your head? (no Googling allowed.) If you're in the suburbs or country, you are not at as much risk. Kids in Sweden are expected to play outdoors in the sun, rain, or snow.

Being "trapped in an apartment" is not a common thing for families. The average Swedish family only has 1 or 2 kids. Three kids is considered a lot. Not as many germs to bring home from school, and not as many germs for kids to take to school.

Overall, Sweden is not New York, or Bnai Barak, or London. Sweden is Sweden, with it's own health reporting rules, it's own culture, and it's own city planning. You just cannot compare the two, and then say "See, it worked for them!"

southernbubby

Mon, Sep 07 2020, 8:17 am

Thanks FF! Very informative. People also forget that Sweden did shut down high schools, colleges, religious services, theatres, and large gatherings. They also warned the public that going to restaurants and other public places could result in illness, even though they left the choice to the people. Because people wanted to be responsible, businesses lost money.

nchr

Mon, Sep 07 2020, 8:31 am

FF that was an informative post. I just want to point out that since Sweden has one of the highest per capita death rates in the world (top ten as of last week) it is unlikely they are heavily underreporting deaths. Every country is underreporting but there is no way only previously healthy idnivudals are being counted in Sweden because their per capita death rate is exceedingly high.

ChanieMommy

Mon, Sep 07 2020, 8:39 am

Sweden has registered more than 5000 Corona deaths for a population around 10 million... They are among the 10 worst countries in deaths per million inhabitants.

They are not coping well with this disease, although they have many factors that work to their advantage:
- many single households
- low population density
- reasonable population who is careful even without lock-downs (travel went down by 90%)

ChanieMommy

Mon, Sep 07 2020, 2:51 pm

nchr wrote:

According to what a swedish friend told me, they avoid doing tests, so they are under-tested, which is also reflected in the deaht/registered cases rate.

People over a certain age did not get appropriate medical care, a few months ago they did not even get oxygen bottles (not talking of ventilation, just oxygen), because of their age.

So it seems perfectly plausible to me that Corona-Deaths are underreported in Sweden, although they have a very hight death count for their population size...

ChanieMommy

Mon, Sep 07 2020, 5:55 pm

chestnut wrote:

If their death rate is among the worse 10 countries, even without underreporying, why are they being touted as an example?

Because they avoided lockdown and had the schools open the whole time.

as matter of fact, they were inspired by what UK did or wanted to do - and it went horribly wrong in UK, as we all know.

I think the professor they listened to in UK was a teacher of Sweden's chief epidemiologist, Anders tegnell...

So Sweden was relatively lucky because the UK approach (let people get the virus, so as to create herd immunity, do nothing) did not lead to the same catastrophy in Sweden as in UK, mainly because Sweden is less densly populated, has more single households, has more home office, and people took some precautions on their own (like not traveling for pleasure).

Also, Tegnell said something that is completely unacceptable to me: he said that UK and Swedish policy was to wait for a few casualties, so that the population will understand that protective measures are really necessary... but of course, in an epidemy, it's all about time, and implementing measures 10 days earlier can divide the death toll by 1000...