Originally Posted by
the810
No, it didn't. Predictions of Sweden's health care system collapsing never materialized, which was the main reason for flattening the curve (before people forgot about the concept). If Swedish model failed, why is virtually whole Europe moving towards the Swedish model?
In the beginning, I predicted that restrictions will not be lifted because we'll "get rid of the virus" but rather because we will learn to accept it as yet another disease we have to live with. The shift will be psychological, not epidemiological. So far it seems to indeed be the case in Europe, where measures are being retracted even though the number of (new) cases is higher than it was when they were introduced.
Sweden's approach would be one of the most viable for developed countries, in the worst-case scenario of vaccine unavailability plus successive waves of virulence. We will know in a year or two if it is the 'best' among options that all have localized and common weaknesses.
These authors outline the considerations they faced from which risk/benefit calculations were made.
Sweden’s Coronavirus Strategy Will Soon Be the World’s
- People receiving nursing and elder-care services account for upward of 50 percent of COVID-19 deaths in Sweden, according to Tegnell, in part because many facilities were grievously slow to implement basic protective measures such as mask wearing. Immigrants have also suffered disproportionately, mainly because they are poorer on average and tend to work in the service sector, where working remotely is usually impossible. But Swedish authorities have argued that the country’s higher death rate will appear comparatively lower in hindsight. Efforts to contain the virus are doomed to fail in many countries, and a large percentage of people will be infected in the end. When much of the world experiences a deadly second wave, Sweden will have the worst of the pandemic behind it. -
- Sweden’s response has not been perfect, but it has succeeded in bolstering immunity among the young and the healthy—those at the lowest risk of serious complications from COVID-19—while also flattening the curve. The country’s intensive care units have not been overrun, and hospital staffs, although under strain, have at least not had to juggle additional childcare responsibilities because daycares and lower schools continue to operate.
Whether or not they have openly embraced the Swedish approach, many other countries are now trying to emulate aspects of it. Both Denmark and Finland have reopened schools for young children. Germany is allowing small shops to reopen. Italy will soon reopen parks, and France has a plan to allow some nonessential businesses to reopen, including farmers’ markets and small museums, as well as schools and daycare centers. In the United States, which has by far the highest absolute number of reported COVID-19 deaths, several states are easing restrictions at the urging of President Donald Trump, who despite bashing the Swedish model, is pushing the country toward something very similar. -
- Lockdowns are simply not sustainable for the amount of time that it will likely take to develop a vaccine. Letting up will reduce economic, social, and political pressures. It may also allow populations to build an immunity that will end up being the least bad way of fighting COVID-19 in the long run. Much about the disease remains poorly understood, but countries that are locked down now could very well face new and even more severe outbreaks down the road. If these countries follow the Swedish path to herd immunity, the total cost of the pandemic will decrease, and it will likely end sooner. -
They would have gotten it mostly right too, if only they had put more attention and resources on broader surveillance and the nursing home population, which is typically the most at risk.
Coronavirus: What's going wrong in Sweden's care homes?
- Mikael Fjällid, a Swedish private consultant in anaesthetics and intensive care, says he believes "a lot of lives" could have been saved if more patients had been able to access hospital treatment, or if care home workers were given increased responsibilities to administer oxygen themselves, instead of waiting for specialist Covid-19 response teams or paramedics. -
- Christoffer Bernsköld, a spokesperson for geriatric care for Region Stockholm, insists there are enough resources to ensure patients in the capital get acute or palliative care, with a focus on "specialist homecare units" providing help in the first instance. He points to a new, unused, military field hospital in southern Stockholm as proof that the elderly are not being held back from treatment because of a lack of beds. But he says it can be an "ethical dilemma" whether to administer oxygen or transfer patients to hospital.
Critics like Mikael Fjällid see that field hospital as a sign that officials in the capital have been cautious about hospitalising the elderly because they fear overstretching resources, which would be needed to cope with a future spike in cases. -