Sweden has had over a million cases and over 14,000 deaths.
Denmark has had 300,000 cases with 2500 deaths.
The other Scandinavian countries have had about 100,000 cases with less than 1000 deaths.
While Denmark may be catching up, Sweden still has more than twice as many cases per million and 3X as many deaths per million.
You don’t compare with other Scandinavian countries; you compare with the country which spends the most per capita on health care: U.S. 1879 deaths per million, Sweden 1438 deaths per million.
The amount spent on health care isn’t the point. The point is trying to get people to herd immunity with no social distancing or mask mandates. The US response was so badly handled it cannot serve as a control. I maintain that the best comparison are countries in the same area of the world with similar climates which did enforce social distancing and mask mandates.
The other Scandinavian countries? This is a strange way to put it. There are only four Scandinavian countries - Sweden, Denmark, Norway, and Iceland. (You could separate out Greenland, but that’s actually part of Denmark.) If you mean the Nordic countries, you can also include Finland. Finland isn’t a Scandinavian language or even an Indo-European one. To compare all the Scandinavian countries, you need to look at the population of each, the number of cases in each, and the number of deaths in each.
Point of order: “Finland” isn’t a language at all. Finnish is, however.
Another sloppy error I made there. I mean that to say that Finnish isn’t a Scandinavian language. For that reason, Finland isn’t usually considered a Scandinavian country. The term for the Scandinavian countries plus Finland is the Nordic countries.
Classic Dope response - correcting a point which the OP never stated. Nowhere did they suggest that Finland was a Scandi country. They didn’t even mention Finland!
No, my point was that the phrase “the other Scandinavian countries” was a strange way to put it. That sounded to me like psychobunny was talking about a large number of countries. But besides Sweden and Denmark, the only other countries are Norway and Iceland. The side comment I made was that some people included Finland, but really it’s not a Scandinavian country.
Have you asked the OP if they want to include Finland in their remarks?
So, psychobunny, do you want to include Finland?
Swedish, from Sweden here (de-lurking).
I’m not going to debate this, only clear up some misconceptions.
It has not been an “experiment,” at least in the way I understand the word, i.e. “Let’s try this and see if it works.”
In fact, it’s been the only viable way, according to our constitution (“Grundlag”): The state, as in parliament, government and authorities, cannot, repeat, cannot impose any kind of curfew*, mandate masks or social distancing. They can make recommendations.
What can be done, is impose some restrictions, using other laws, e.g. freedom of assembly is guaranteed under the law, but in public spaces you’re going to need a permit prior to things like picketing (this is to ensure traffic safety ASF, no one will be denied a permit for political reasons, as we’ve seen with neo-nazis for many years). So protest marches and picketing has been denied out of health concerns, which haven’t stopped anti-vaxxers or people protesting social distancing.
Local authorities (Counties, municipalities) have some measures that can be applied, but since these are ultimately ruled by local politicians, from across the political spectrum, depending on location, these restrictions can vary very much.
*In peace time, which has lasted since… (checks date) Jan. 15th 1814,
Just to get it back onto what the OP asked, here are the cumulative cases and deaths per million of population [I use Worldometers, but others might be slightly different]
Sweden - 107,791 / 1,438
Norway - 24,693 / 146
Denmark - 53,084 / 437
Finland - 18,240 / 176
If this was forced by constitutional constraints, then I would suggest a serious national reflection is needed on what duty of care the average citizen feels they owe to their fellows so that they can continue to live without an expectation of collective obligation for their safety.
The thing is though, I think “experiment” is a misleading framing (I know it’s the standard framing, not something the OP made up).
It was always obvious that not masking, tracing etc would lead to more cases and fatalities than an aggressive approach.
AIUI the swedish approach was motivated by freedom, inevitability and herd immunity.
To say if it’s successful, we’d probably need to survey the swedish people and look at longer term case graphs (since much of the world is in a fourth wave, and the virus seems to be evolving around our vaccines, herd immunity+ endemic virus might yet be the fate for all).
Don’t get me wrong; I’m in a country that did strict lockdowns early on and so essentially snuffed it out. This was the right approach if every country could do that. But within a world where many countries didn’t or couldn’t do that, maybe it’s still possible to make a case for the swedish approach.
The idea behind all of the recommended health measures was to protect people until a vaccine could be available and widely distributed, the idea being that once a vaccine regime was introduced, we could gradually bring case counts down to a very limited number of cases. Obviously, all countries are struggling with variants that are putting pressure on these vaccine regimes.
But Sweden has clearly failed in terms of protecting people prior to vaccine distribution. The degree to which Sweden distinguishes itself from other modern countries that implemented a more aggressive approach remains to be seen.
That’s sensible but I’m not sure it’s absolutely right.
Like I say, some countries snuffed the virus out so effectively that we wouldn’t have needed a vaccine, had that happened internationally.
And some countries did bet on herd immunity. In the early days it seemed it was a slow-mutating virus, so while this approach was, and is, stupid and callous, it didn’t seem as obviously futile as it looks now.
But yeah, a middle option of just strict lockdowns long enough develop a vaccine is a sensible one. I’m not sure that we everyone’s plan though.
Sweden distinguished itself against its immediate modern country neighbours by failing to prevent the deaths of 2x - 9x more people than they did. I look forward to you seeing that at some point in the future.
On re-reading that, I think I was a bit narkier than I needed to be. My apologies.
Responding in a different way, what additional evidence beyond the huge disparity in death rates with its neighbours do you think is needed to characterise Sweden’s response?
Here are the populations:
Sweden: 10,230,000
Norway: 5,238,000
Denmark: 5,806,000
Finland: : 5,518,000
So cases/deaths per million:
Sweden: 10,537 / 141
Norway: 4,714 / 28
Denmark: 9,143 / 75
Finland: 3,306 / 32
I get the impression you’ve divided by population twice. Banksiaman’s numbers were already per million population.
Based on the Johns Hopkins numbers:
Sweden : 1 095 758 cases out of 10 230 000 means 107112 cases per million, or 10.7%.
Norway : 134 969 cases out of 5 238 000 means 25767 cases per million, or 2.6%.
and so on.
You’re right. Please ignore my last post.