The Truth About Sweden's COVID Policy
Join Reason on YouTube on Thursday at 1 p.m. Eastern for a discussion with Johan Norberg about his recent policy analysis of Sweden's decision to forgo lockdowns during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The Swedish government's decision to forgo lockdowns as most of Europe, Asia, and North America's political leaders forcibly closed businesses and schools in the early days of the pandemic became one of the most controversial COVID policies of 2020.
The New York Times in April 2020 designated Sweden "the world's cautionary tale," and President Donald Trump proclaimed that "Sweden is paying heavily for its decision not to lockdown" as an early wave of COVID deaths hit Sweden harder than its Nordic neighbors.
But to Swedish officials, "it looked like it was other countries that were engaging in a dangerous experiment," writes Cato Institute senior fellow Johan Norberg in a policy paper entitled "Sweden during the pandemic: Pariah or paragon?"
The attacks on Sweden's laissez-faire approach were short-sighted, says Norberg. Today, Sweden's COVID-19 death rate is not an outlier, and its excess death rate from 2020 to the present is the lowest in Europe.
In a retrospective report on the country's pandemic response, Sweden's public health officials say that they should have more aggressively protected senior citizens and tested and quarantined travelers from COVID hotspots in those early days, but consider the focus on public health recommendations that people can "follow voluntarily" over coercive lockdowns was "fundamentally correct."
Norberg also points out that Sweden avoided the economic contraction that its neighboring countries suffered, as well as the learning loss experienced in countries that closed schools for months or even years.
Join Reason's Zach Weissmueller and Liz Wolfe for an in-depth discussion with Norberg about the lessons to draw from Sweden's pandemic policies this Thursday at 1 p.m. Eastern on Reason's YouTube channel.
- Producer: Adam Sullivan
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
I was just there. Everyone in Sweden was dead.
Did you see the løveli lakes and the wøndërful telephøne system?
The place is infested with rabid moose!
The squirrel was a bit mad as well.
I’m making $90 an hour working from home. I never imagined that it was honest to goodness yet my closest companion is earning 16,000 US dollars a month by working on the connection, that was truly astounding for me, she prescribed for me to attempt it simply. Everybody must try this job now by just using this website… http://Www.Easywork7.com
"but consider the focus on public health recommendations that people can "follow voluntarily" over coercive lockdowns was "fundamentally correct.""
this is where almost every other government screwed up. it is much easier for people to trust you when you are not holding a gun to their head. you were seeing everyone react and begin to take precautions in the first several weeks. the second the first elected official said "i'm going to force you," that is what started the do nothing movement.
Also, after the first several weeks there was enough information available for people paying attention to know that it wasn't a super deadly disease for healthy people and much of it was overblown. But the authoritarianism didn't help either.
"Also, after the first several weeks there was enough information available for people paying attention to know that it wasn’t a super deadly disease for healthy people and much of it was overblown."
that was the second problem. when it started as avoiding large crowds, wash your hands, work from home if you can, and maybe wear a mask indoors (before Faucci fucked that one up).... people were kinda ok with it. then the government went way past the line of reasonable. complete business shutdowns, wear masks outdoors, closing beaches and parks and other outdoor places.... it got ridiculous, and people naturally lumped it all together and said "fuck you" to all of it.
Sweden avoided that mistake because they didn't make the first. everything was always voluntary and people were able to decide for themselves what was reasonable. I'm not sure if there is any data, but i would wager that more of them saw simple things like wearing a mask indoors as reasonable because it was not attached to all the other garbage.
Wearing a mask for protection against an airborne virus is just as useful as a St. Christopher medal in your car to protect you from accidents.
a seat-belt is a better analogy.
but seriously, if you don't think masks do ANYTHING at this point...... you are just too stupid to understand the explanation. (the only real question is how deliberate your stupidity is.) you can talk about it not being 100% effective. you can squabble about the effectiveness of different materials or styles. you could definitely talk about those who push masks exaggerating the difference they make. but asserting that no mask does anything is just retarded.
masks reduce your chance of getting covid by maybe 10 percent
They reduce your chance of spreading covid by more than 50 percent
so you are correct in that regard, not wearing masks at the height of covid just proved you don't care about anyone else
i told you there were areas where we would probably agree. it is too bad you are so committed to the extremist position of one of the tribes to admit where you have things wrong.
and that is my problem with you. every time i try to explain reality to one of these people who have deluded themselves into thinking masks are actually bad, i run into resistance based on the false assertion that the lock-dawns saved lives, along with all the other partisan talking points that inevitably get pulled in from the periphery. people like you are the reason it is so easy for them to ignore rational arguments for why they are wrong.
Also, after the first several weeks there was enough information available for people paying attention to know that it wasn’t a super deadly disease for healthy people and much of it was overblown.
The data was pretty clear that the illness absolutely reaped old, fat people, and those who already had some pretty deblilitating diseases. The message that should have come out of COVID was, "Change your lifestyle by eating healthy and getting daily exercise" after 4 decades of the nation's obesity rate climbing ever-upward, not "we need to bring fat liberation from the margins to the center."
Yeah, screw the old and the fat.
hint, don't look in the mirror
I think most old people will agree that the lives and futures of the young are more important than theirs.
I am old. I agree.
What was most amazing was that Sweden's approach was considered controversial and the approach most countries took was not. Sweden pretty much did what everyone had said you should do in a pandemic before the covid freakout.
It was controversial because it failed
Covid deaths per million
Sweden 2429
Norway 1024
Denmark 1511
Finland 973
FAIL
Whose sock puppet is this?
Doesn't matter, Obvious troll to be muted, but seriously guys. Just stick to the 122 current sock puppets please, I've got them all muted already.
Oh, how very on point and full of information
The author is a liar, period
Or just some flyby asshole.
By all means mute any actual information
The voices in your head are much more accurate
Well, thanks for demonstrating that you are indeed just an asshole. If you think that the only reason people disagree with you is that they are ignorant idiots, you are not worth any more of my time.
keep swearing
makes you look smarter
finding a fact might be nice
Good job arguing a tenth of 1%.
60 percent higher death rate than closest neighbor Your 5th grade math teacher must be proud
he is not wrong. the pandemic guidelines that the WHO has spent decades working on never said anything about lock downs. issuing guidelines for voluntary actions is the only policy that was ever on the books before covid hit.
also, while Sweden is the standout for how they reacted. they are nowhere near the worst hit country...... which you would expect if it was really that bad of a thing to do. you have to leave out a whole lot of countries that fared far worse with far more ambitious restrictions in place to make your claim here.
i have a lot of disagreements with those who wanted to do nothing during the pandemic.... but the use of gov guns to force the economy to close down is not one of them.
Remove (already dying, sad as it is) nursing home patients and then give the numbers.
Or compare Sweden to the rest of Western Europe.
FAIL (that's your weak argument)
No one is arguing that the elderly were not hit hard, but one can still compare the results from various countries unless you are saying that one country lost a lot of half dead people in nursing homes and another did not
Is that your contention?
Or are you just doing the Fascist 'these people don't matter' thing?
So many things wrong with this. Why did you pick those countries to compare to Sweden? Just because they are Nordic? Sweden has a completely different demographic then for instance Norway. Way more immigrants and way more urban. Sweden should be compared to Belgium or Holland or Portugal,.all who had worse Covid outcomes than Sweden.
The success that dare not speak its name.
It was a lie the first time reason printed it ,and it is still a lie
Sweden had a much higher death rate than its neighbors
worse than many other industrialized countries
And also better than many other industrialized countries who used harsh measures. There is no reason to think that the differences are because of the differing restrictive policies. You can see the same thing with US states. Florida and California had similar outcomes despite very different policies. There is really very little reason to believe that locking down or not was a significant factor in outcomes for different countries or states.
FLorida 4200 deaths per million
California 2652
Very similar outcomes?
60 percent more deaths per million
Florida FAIL
It's been a while since I looked at the stats. Florida did better than Michigan or New Jersey, about the same as New York. They all supposedly did it "right" according to assholes like you.
The point is, you don't have any evidence to support the assertion that the lockdowns and other harsh, coercive measures account for the difference in outcomes for different countries. You also need to consider all outcomes, not just deaths with a positive covid test. The lockdowns, school closures, etc. caused enormous harm.
Lots of dead people cause enormous harm also
top10 deaths per million
Arizona
W Virginia
Mississippi
N Mexico
Arkansas
Tennessee
Michigan
Alabama
Kentucky
Florida
In that order
When you look at it after the vaccines came out, it gets worse, red states with low vaccine rates people died needlessly
Assholes like you are too busy making things up to ponder facts
what is your context? it almost seems like you are throwing out word salad and trying to make it stick to covid. I'm sorry for you, but it will be ok once you learn to control your anger.
Word salad?
they are statistics
your inability to read English or count is noted
half of the states that were worse than Florida.... on your list..... were under lock-down for longer. and, while i don't know the exact breakdown for all the states, i know New Mexico held on to many of the other mandates well past the point where most other states removed them. you might not look like such an idiot if you had not tried to start with Florida.
you and i would probably find common ground on things that people should have voluntarily done... get vaccinated, wear mask, etc...... but on the question of lock downs and government mandates, you are dead wrong.
there is no evidence the lock-downs made any difference because they never were supposed to make a difference. nobody ever seems to grasp what "flatten the curve" was all about. there were always going to be the same number of people that got sick, some people just wanted to make it take longer for them to all get sick. (limit the load on healthcare.) you can agree with that argument or not, but don't pretend the argument for the lock downs was ever anything but that.
When you look at it after the vaccines came out, it gets worse, red states with low vaccine rates people died needlessly
Totally true. And that is damning for how the vaccine was politicized.
OTOH - it is also poetic/partisan justice not injustice.
At least in Florida and Ohio (where a detailed mortality and voter registration study was conducted) - it is registered Republicans in those low-vax areas who died. Not Dems or people in those areas who vaxxed. Anti-vaxxers killed the people who listened to them. Not the people who didn't. Even if they don't accept that that was the reality - it WAS the reality. Those who politicized the vaccine killed their own side. They didn't kill their opponents.
Stupid? Yes. Darwinian? Yes. But it is certainly not a partisan object lesson for the future.
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Excess_mortality_-_statistics
Sweden has the lowest overall excess deaths of all Europe.
As was done repeatedly throughout the pandemic, he's cherry picking, curating, and "guilt by implication" his data.
Peru has the worst per capita death rate on the planet. If you'll recall, they also had one of the most stringent lockdown procedures, even going so far as to sex-segregate quarantine by day (as if the virus cared). As I indicate below N. Korea had one of the lowest per capita death rates on the planet. If your result varies between both extremes independent of your controlled variable, that's pretty definitive of a lack of any sort of association. Certainly significantly ameliorating if not entirely voiding asserted causality.
Cherry picking?
this article is a perfect example of cherry picking
support your contention
you cannot
because it is a lie
More people died in Sweden due to their policies
One can defend that as it is, but to pretend it didn't happen is foolishness
One can defend that as it is, but to pretend it didn’t happen is foolishness
Nobody's on this side is pretending anything. Quite the opposite, cherry picking literally acknowledges that there are a myriad of cherries on the tree, you're just picking the convenient ones.
YOu are cherry picking, I am quoting statistics
No, what you're doing is pushing a narrative. Fuck off.
Uhh this article is pushing a false narrative
keep swearing, makes you look smart
Uhh this article is pushing a false narrative
No, you are, dipshit.
keep swearing, makes you look smart
Do you actually believe I give a shit about decorum when responding to a dogmatic idiot like you? Again, fuck off.
Oh gee maybe you will hurt my feelings
How about having a point?
I suppose belligerent ranting works at the bar, but you have nothing here, no facts.
But I suppose facts are optional, right?
Wouldn't want to get in the way of a good rant
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
You don't care about facts, as you've made plain throughout this thread.
More people died in Sweden due to their policies.
You're conflating causality and correlation. Once you've managed to crawl back to your fainting couch, take a moment to look up false cause fallacy and data dredging. Oh, and if you're not already, go fuck yourself. Idiots like you who continue to push the great taste of authoritarian dick should keep their statist fetishes to themselves.
So people in Sweden just ran in front of buses or somesuch
Keep up with the obscenity, it really makes your point better than actual intelligence would
Keep up with the obscenity, it really makes your point better than actual intelligence would
Like you would know the difference, fuckstick.
More than what? Do you have access to an alternate reality where Sweden did lock down?
North Korea had the fewest recorded COVID deaths per million of anywhere in the world. I would say, "If you don't (didn't) like your COVID policies where you are (were) you're free to move to N. Korea." but that would be a lie.
Also, of course, if you're looking to get vaccinations or treatments generally available elsewhere or avoid totally curable diseases that have have been eradicated in the West for decades, N. Korea probably isn't at the top of your bug out countries anyway.
Sweden had a much higher death rate than its neighbors
The death rate in Sweden was lower than the number of cases in any other Scandinavian country, ergo, Sweden did a better job at preventing the spread of COVID than any other country in Scandinavia.
Go ahead, tell me I'm being disingenuous by conflating death rates and infection rates. Asshat.
Uhh go ahead, make a meaningless comparison
More people died in Sweden because of their bad policies
More people dying is a lot like more people dying
not complicated
>>>The death rate in Sweden was lower than the number of cases in any other Scandinavian country<<
death rate and number of cases are not comparable numbers.
whatever point you might be trying to make is wrong
DK 3 million cases 8800 deaths
Finland 1.5 mill 10200
Norway 1.5 9941
Sweden 2.7 24821
Slightly fewer cases in Sweden than Denmark, almost 3 times the deaths
Nearly twice the cases as Finland or Norway and 2 1/2times the deaths
How is this success?
whatever point you might be trying to make is wrong
My 10 yr. old would understand my point. Whom do you think you're fooling with this "I don't know what you're trying to say but I know it's wrong." demonstrative stupidity?
Nope, because you have none
you cannot even defend it when presented with the numbers you claim to know
By your own data, Sweden had fewer cases than Denmark and had less than twice the number of cases than Finland or Norway despite having roughly twice the population. The definitive metric of infected individuals is cases, not deaths.
You might argue (which would actually be agreeing with them) that they should've done a better job ensuring the elderly didn't or don't get infected, but that wasn't really anyone's COVID policy, rather pointedly even the countries that locked down.
So you think the definitive metric is cases? Oh, please do tell
Sweden failed in cases and deaths
slightly lower cases than DK , and three times the deaths and this is a good thing to you?
Really?
Cases is a flawed metric because it is a limited metric, minor cases are never reported
Read the Economist page,
When lock downs were in effect, deaths and excess deaths in Sweden were out of control
You lost--get over it.
'lost'
is that what you think it is about?
So, I 'lost' because you can spout obscenities over and over
sure
No, you lost because you're statistics exclude confounding variables that you dishonestly ignore. You're way out of your depth, princess.
interesting thing of note.... Sweden very openly did not differentiate between death from covid and death with covid. i know the with versus from trope gets thrown around a lot, but when looking at Sweden, it actually applies.
https://www.cato.org/policy-analysis/sweden-during-pandemic#excess-deaths
"In Sweden, by contrast, authorities automatically checked the lists of people who were infected against the population register, so everyone who died and had tested positive for the virus was counted as a COVID-19 death, even if they died from a heart attack or a fall. "
Ohh, wait that old lie
do run that out, how Sweden counted deaths differently than its other Nordic neighbors
bAck it up with CATO
convincing
https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/coronavirus-excess-deaths-tracker scroll down, there is a section on Northern Europe IT shows the bald face lie of this article Sweden excess deaths soared early in the pandemic while the other Nordic countries did not. This article is trying to use the excess deaths that have occurred after the lockdowns have ended to pretend that lockdowns did not work
IT is a lie bought by fools
One year into the pandemic, every other Nordic country had virtually flat excess deaths except for 'Taa Daa!'
Sweden, huge spike
After lockdowns ended, the differences subsided, no surprise.
"Sweden excess deaths soared early in the pandemic while the other Nordic countries did not. This article is trying to use the excess deaths that have occurred after the lockdowns have ended to pretend that lockdowns did not work"
i guess you were trying to ignore my other response where i explained this to you, but what happened after the lock downs is relevant. the question is if the lock downs made any REAL difference. did they make any difference in how many people died, or did they just influence when. "flattening the curve" meant that the same number of people would ultimately get sick and die, it just happened over a slightly longer time frame. (the people who came up with the idea even said this was what would happen.) if the same number of people got sick and died, but they did it a month later...... that means the lock-downs did not save them.
now for the amusing part.... the data you linked to has the excess deaths since the beginning...... and Sweden is one of the lowest.... and right in the middle of the 4 countries you listed..... it is data someone would reference to demonstrate that the lock-downs made no difference because it shows that the lock-downs had no impact on the final death rates.
BS
Sweden first year excess deaths out of control compared to other Nordic countries
period
not according to the data you linked.
Exactly according to the data I linked
Look at the Economist graphs
Look at worldometer graphs
there is nothing with those labels. there is just the data that says you are a big fat liar. the data that shows that the excess death rate is right in the middle of those 4 neighboring countries, and on the low end for all countries, in general.
Wrong Sweden, when lockdowns were in effect, had much higher covid deaths and excess deaths than their neighbors Go to the links, if they let me post images I would do it here.
and not on the low end for anyone, 44th worst out of 221 countries
you are adding a lot of qualifiers there that are the reason you are full of shit. ("when lockdowns were in effect") we are talking about the overall impact of the lock-downs, not the "look at me, i am doing nothing when it is all said and done" numbers from the couple months they were being imposed. to even pretend you are not full of shit, you have to ignore almost the entire duration of the pandemic. end of the day, the lock-downs did not save a single life.... some deaths were just delayed a month or two.
the data you linked to shows that Sweden had an excess death rate that was in the middle of the countries it neighbors, and was significantly lower than average..... 183rd worst out of 221.... no idea where you pulled that BS 44... it is right there on the page you linked to. (i guess your talking points never bothered with any actual data.)
I am adding qualifiers only where it makes sense
Does it or does it not make sense to compare deaths during the period when lockdowns were in effect when you are talking about the efficacy of lockdowns?
Yes or No?
I am comparing similar countries with similar wealth patterns, similar healthcare systems rather than throwing in a bunch of poorer countries, or first hit countries that had huge initial spikes
Does that make sense?
This article references a CATO article, CATO's entire reason for being is to push a narrative
"Does it or does it not make sense to compare deaths during the period when lockdowns were in effect when you are talking about the efficacy of lockdowns?"
it only makes sense if you are trying to manufacture data to support a conclusion you know to be false. the efficacy of the lockdowns must include consideration of whether you saved lives or just mildly delayed some deaths. if the same number of people died, but just a couple months later, then the lockdowns had no meaningful impact. (also.... all the data you have quoted or linked has not met the criteria you are now trying to claim.)
"I am comparing similar countries with similar wealth patterns, similar healthcare systems ....."
and the data THAT YOU LINKED shows no difference between those countries.
"This article references a CATO article, CATO’s entire reason for being is to push a narrative"
i am 100% talking about data in the LINK YOU PROVIDED. as you attempt to push your narrative, the sources that you have chosen still says you are wrong.
They had a negative excess death date through the pandemic. Just stop with your propaganda.
If they had only had been good little boys and did what they were told...
This is a lie
Swedens excess death rate was far, far in excess of its Nordic neighbors for the majority of the pandemic
it was only actually 'negative' for a few months in 3 years,
https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/coronavirus-excess-deaths-tracker
see above... you are full of shit.
It is quite easy to compare death rates by country. Excess death rates (regardless of attributed cause) are the only valid measure now. Covid-attribution was only important in the early days when containing the epidemic was critical.
For example – Sweden v Finland – Sweden ran much higher overall death rates in 2020 than Finland. Slightly lower in 2021 and more significantly lower in 2021.
So – compare Sweden v US Sweden had slightly higher excess mortality during the Mar/May 2020 timeframe (roughly 40% higher than normal compared to 30% higher than normal) – much much lower excess mortality than the US from June 2020 – Mar 2022 – similar excess mortality later in 2022 and now in 2023 similar mortality (excess is now basically gone).
Sweden has nearly double the population of Finland with a much larger urban population.
Guess when you are wrong all you can do is swear
I can't hear you through your double masking.
Great point excellent
Not
Yes, you've proven that you're both a statist and a coward. Congratulations.
You have proven yourself unable to make a coherent argument, congrats yourself
Coherent arguments? Don't mistake me for someone who thinks you're owed anything other than merciless ridicule. And spare me your bullshit--you've proven multiple times throughout this thread that you're not remotely interested in anything resembling "coherent arguments." Go peddle your garbage somewhere else.
is there a fact there anywhere?
i thought not
What facts do you think you deserve? You're a coward and a liar; expect nothing but contempt.
For comparative purposes, it would have been nice if the article mentioned what the "vaccination" rate was in Sweden in addition to mentioning the other info, since COVID "vaccination" (which isn't actually vaccination as defined) has shown higher subsequent death rates the more "vaccinations" people get.
I would suspect that if Sweden has a lower death rate it must also have a lower voluntary "vaccination" rate.
so this is a lie
In the US vaccination rates are inversely proportional to covid deaths
I would suspect
Meaning you are too lazy to look it up, since it would conflict with your bias
Sweden 85 percent vaccinated
Norway 79 percent
Finland 78 percent
Denmark 82
Stop listening to the stupid look it up yourself
Drop dead, Bozo. I SAID "... it would have been nice if the article mentioned what the “vaccination” rate was in Sweden ..."
You can excuse ANY lazy, ignorant reporting by telling people to look up the relevant information somewhere ELSE.
Meanwhile, this statement of yours is completely FALSE: "In the US vaccination rates are inversely proportional to covid deaths"
The actual data, confirmed by a Cleveland Clinic study published April 19, 2023, is that the more vaccinations people have, the HIGHER the death rate, with those having no COVID vaccinations at all having the LOWEST death rate.
One of the biggest reasons that this has become a trash site is that it allows trash like you to post trash, such as your unsubstantiated claims here.
Lie
Oh and I provided the vaccination rates for the countries, and you can see that you are wrong
The Cleveland clinic study showed no such thing
You are a liar, repeating lies spoon fed to you without thinking about them
You are blindly repeating social media posts without critical thinking
The Cleveland Clinic study made ZERO conclusions about death rate
Sweden 85 percent vaccinated, so, bozo, when I provide the answer to the question you asked, you get all pissy.
truth sucks don't it
unsubstantiated? what substance have you posted, I have posted dozens of stats, with links that you can refute, but you cannot
Pretty obvious at this point that you're just making shit up, troll. Get fucked.
keep swearing Einstein swore a lot I hear making stuff up? like the links and stats I posted? really because they conflict with your preconceived notions?
Yes, made up. You don't give a shit about statistics, only your pathetic narrative.
...they conflict with your preconceived notions?
The only preconceived notion I have is that you're a pussy guilty of the fallacy of incomplete evidence.
So prove me wrong instead of insulting and swearing
But , you are unable
So sad, really
"Effectiveness of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Bivalent Vaccine"
Published: 19 April 2023
Methods
The study included employees of Cleveland Clinic in employment when the bivalent COVID-19 vaccine first became available.
Risk of COVID-19 Based on Prior Infection and Vaccination History
The risk of COVID-19 also varied by the number of COVID-19 vaccine doses previously received. The higher the number of vaccines previously received, the higher the risk of contracting COVID-19 (Figure 2).
William, it does not actually say that. The vaccine did, in no case increase deaths from covid
The report showed some apparent increase in covid risk in increased number of vaccines, but specifically does not say that is the cause.
I'm not here to prove you wrong; mad.casual, Foo_dd, William--really, everyone responding to your bullshit--have already done that. I'm here to point out that nobody believes you, and send you limping back to your pathetic troll farm. We support liberty here, Chicom.
The most serious of the lockdowns and mandates had ended by 1/1 2022
At that point Sweden had 15000 deaths and 1.3 million reported cases
Norway Finland and Denmark had 6300 deaths and 1.5 million cases COMBINED with ~60 percent more population
So the real lie of this article is that they are trying to use 3 1/2 years of data to pretend Sweden's policies worked when:
Most lockdowns effectively ended after vaccinations started.
Deaths and excess deaths went up after lockdowns ended, making Sweden look 'better'
The real measure is deaths or excess deaths during the pre vaccine period when most lockdowns were in full effect.
In this period, Sweden had markedly higher deaths and excess deaths than its immediate neighbors.
Comparing Sweden to its Nordic neighbors is more accurate than comparing to random countries as they have similar social structures, levels of wealth and all have socialized medicine
In this country for instance if MA, CT, and NY all did things differently and had different results it would be more meaningful than comparing those states to North Dakota for instance.
Read the room, needledick--nobody believes you. Half my family is from Sweden, and Scandinavia isn't nearly as homogeneous as you think. You've exposed yourself as both a sophist and a bigot.
hell, I've been a big opponent of the "do nothing"crowd during the pandemic.... and i think this person is full of shit. (I've always said that people should take actions but it should be voluntary.... pretty much the way Sweden did it.)
The OECD found that in terms of pandemic-driven economic contraction, Sweden did marginally better than Europe as a whole, but markedly worse than its Nordic neighbors Denmark, Norway and Finland, “despite the adoption of softer distancing measures, especially during the first COVID wave.” COVID-19, the OECD concludes, “hit the economy hard.”
https://read.oecd-ilibrary.org/economics/oecd-economic-surveys-sweden-2021_f61d0a54-en#page1
Lol, quite convenient that you put an end date, one 21 months ago, on the data. Things must have changed quite a bit after that huh?
And of course they did. Sweden's excess mortality rate was negative through the pandemic. Better even than their Nordic neighbors. Not even comparable to the rest of the world.
It is not convenient at all Is not the point of this article that Sweden’s lack of lockdowns and other measures was superior?
True or not?
So , would it not be logical to compare the efficacy of those policies when there was actually a difference in the policies between countries?
Did not all countries loosen pandemic restrictions after the vaccines came out?
Would it not then, be logical, to choose a point in time when these restrictions ended, when effectively most countries were, to a large extent, equal, and pick that as an end date?
Please, present your argument I chose the date I chose, today, right now, on the Economist site, because it was convenient, but please, present a rationale for a different date and tell us your opinion
Swedens excess mortality was NOT negative during the pandemic, this is a lie. It was NOT better than its Nordic neighbors, it was significantly worse
"So , would it not be logical to compare the efficacy of those policies when there was actually a difference in the policies between countries?"
so you don't want to know if they actually made a difference, you want to limit the data as much as possible to force a conclusion not actually supported by reality.
How do you get that from my post?
Does it or does it not make sense when comparing the efficacy or lockdowns, to compare data from when lockdowns were in effect?
It is more accurate to say the authors of the article want to add noisy data to force a conclusion
No, it doesn't. You can't lock people down forever even if you think it's a good idea. If, as it was originally justified, the lockdowns serve to flatten the curve, then it only serves to spread out deaths in time. So you have to consider what happens after as well. And (as you continue to ignore) you also have to consider the effects of lockdown on other health outcomes. Lots of people delayed medical treatments, suffered from poor mental health, ate too much, drank too much, ODed on drugs, etc. Those are all predictable consequences of lockdown. And we will continue to see those effects for years. Only looking at the time when they are in effect means you miss all of that. It is simply idiotic to try to justify such a policy based only on the metric of covid deaths. You need to consider all consequences of the policy.
Forever? Who said forever?
Right more obfuscation
numbersdon't work make things up
"Forever? Who said forever?"
you did, when you try to justify ignoring the relevant data after the lock downs. when you refuse to evaluate the overall impact you are unwittingly admitting that you know the lock downs have no meaningful impact in the long term..... unless you extend them indefinitely.
"numbersdon’t work make things up"
that is pretty much what you are doing by trying to ignore the real numbers and redefine the meaning of "worked."
Pretty fascinating that bobbleheads cannot even pretend to find statistics to support their religion
Pretty fascinating that you persist despite the general consensus that you're a dutiful idiot peddling lies. Why would anyone respond rationally to someone as disingenuous as you?
support their religion
You're projecting, statist.
Pretty fascinating that someone with so little to say would keep repeating themselves like you do , but hey, whatever makes you happy
Why not make a point?
And I'll happily repeat my point that you're an idiot and a liar. Fuck off.
pretty fascinating that you are still talking out your ass when it has been demonstrated that you are full of shit, and the statistics show you are a liar. i don't often ask this, but are you a paid troll? because i have shown you statistics, some of them you posted yourself, that demonstrate your narrative is BS.
Sad
You have shown nothing, and yet...
paid troll, really
Been here since Volokh moved from WAPO
sounds like a lot of trolls here, paid or otherwise, but little intellect
I'm late to this party but I find it amusing you used the word religion describing everyone else. I don't give a damn about any of the stats showing one outcome or another.
My observation is you are an authoritarian zealot, trying to prove disputed statistics as stone-cold facts, while ignoring any principle of liberty.
FYI - I never wore a mask, never got the jab, didn't lockdown, and hosted much of my family who live in blue states in 2020. One flew up here to simply eat in a restaurant without a face diaper.
The only person here pushing religious dogma is you, Tony.