First off, let's start with the impact on the economy. One quote I had up from that August post was about the impact on COVID-19 on Sweden's economy. The New York Times via Yahoo (Jul 8) reported that Sweden's approach did little for their economy when compared to other Nordic countries:
Implicit in these approaches is the assumption that governments must balance saving lives against the imperative to spare jobs, with the extra health risks of rolling back social distancing potentially justified by a resulting boost to prosperity. But Sweden’s grim result — more death and nearly equal economic damage — suggests that the supposed choice between lives and paychecks is a false one: A failure to impose social distancing can cost lives and jobs at the same time.
About a month later, Newsweek (Aug 6) disputed this storyline angle:
Sweden's GDP fell 8.6 in Q2 2020, the country's worst quarterly decline in modern history. The fall came amid the novel coronavirus panic, which Sweden did not implement full lockdown measures over.
However, the Scandanavian nation markedly outperformed the rest of Europe. Its GDP drop in the second quarter was lower than the 12.1 average experienced in the Eurozone, as well as the 11.9 average across the whole of the EU.
Sweden outperformed several European countries, including Spain (18.5 percent fall), France (13.6 percent), Italy (12.4 percent) and Germany (10.1 percent).
The New York Times compared Sweden to Denmark and Norway while the Newsweek article is taken a broader look. Will this economic performance hold up? Who knows, but it does lead one to question the argument that Sweden's approach didn't do anything when it comes to the trade-off between the economy and virus containment.
New York Times (Sep 29) has this current look:
With a population of 10.1 million, Sweden averaged just over 200 new cases a day for several weeks, though in recent days that number has jumped to about 380. The per capita rate is far lower than nearby Denmark or the Netherlands (if higher than the negligible rates in Norway and Finland). Sweden is also doing far better, for the moment, than Spain, with 10,000 cases a day, and France, with 12,000.
. . . In response to the recent outbreaks, many European countries are imposing new restrictions. But political leaders, anxious to avoid unpopular and economically disastrous lockdowns, are relying mostly on social-distancing measures, while trying to preserve a degree of normalcy, with schools, shops, restaurants and even bars open.
In essence, some experts say, they are quietly adopting the Swedish approach.
Yes, European countries are adopting the Swedish approach. In fact, I would say that the United States' approach has been more like Sweden's then say Australia's.
The mention of Denmark in the quote caught my attention as the prior New York Times article had compared Sweden's economy to Denmark's. I took a look at Worldometer and looked at cases in Denmark versus Sweden. Currently, Denmark is definitely going through a second wave that is worse than the first wave. Sweden flatlined over the last 2 to 3 months though there is an uptick in late September that could get worse. Sweden still has far more deaths on a normalized basis and Denmark having a delayed wave might be a good thing as there is more knowledge on how to treat the virus now.
The Associated Press via the LA Times (Sep 21) also took a look at the current situation in Sweden:
Now, as coronavirus infection numbers surge again in much of Europe, Sweden — a country of 10 million people — has some of the lowest numbers of new cases and only 14 COVID-19 patients in intensive care.
Whether this is due to the Swedish government’s strategy, however, is still uncertain.
Its health authorities — and, in particular, its chief epidemiologist, Dr. Anders Tegnell — keep repeating a familiar warning: It’s too early to tell, and all countries are in a different phase of the pandemic.
. . . From the beginning, health officials argued that Sweden was pursuing a sustainable approach toward the coronavirus that the population could adopt — for years, if necessary. “This is a marathon, not a sprint” became a slogan repeated by ministers at every opportunity, given that neither a vaccine nor a cure yet exist.
Maybe the "This is a marathon, not a sprint" quote is being used in a slightly different context, but that has been my approach to the different tactics used across the globe. We really won't know the proper tactic until COVID-19 is conquered -- be it via a vaccine or herd immunity (elimination of the virus is another option, but I doubt that is "marathon" solution at the moment due to how widespread it is across the globe).
This doesn't mean that Sweden's approach was error free. The fact that they rank 12th on Worldometer (I'm excluding 2 of the smaller countries) for deaths per million would indicate that. As mentioned in various articles, they didn't do enough to protect those in nursing homes. That is also true about New York City; however. This will always be a big black mark on their record. But again, this is a marathon and not a sprint. Trade-offs need to be made with keeping the population healthy and not going into a depression. As mentioned in the New York Times' article, European countries appear to be implementing Sweden's approach.
Yet, as always, I take a wait and see approach on strategies. Here's a criticism lodged by Marketwatch (Sep 4) and why infections might come roaring back:
Arne Elofsson, a professor in biometrics at Stockholm University, thinks the population has developed a form of immunity: “Strict rules do not work as people seem to break them. Sweden is doing fine.”
In an interview with the Observer newspaper in London this month, [Dr. Anders Tegnell], the Swedish epidemiologist, claimed that up to 30% of the country’s population could be immune to COVID-19. “It’s very difficult to draw a good sample from the population, because, obviously, the level of immunity differs enormously between different age groups between different parts of Stockholm and so on, and that’s why when we measure one group we get 4% to 5%, and when we measure another group they’re up to 25%,” he said.
. . . Critics say even Tegnell’s most optimistic forecasts for Sweden are still a long way from the critical 60% to 70% goal required for herd immunity to have a chance at working, and save the lives of the elderly and those with underlying conditions — those most vulnerable members of the population.
Sweden's infections need to double before reaching herd immunity based on what the critics state. If these critics are correct, Sweden does need to keep a careful eye on a second wave (which might be starting now based on what I'm seeing on Worldometers). I think as the Associated Press article mentions, Sweden is definitely concerned about a second wave. They're not out there bragging that they've won the war against this virus. I'd say that's a good thing.
No comments:
Post a Comment