I doubt anyone has statistically significant quantities of data in that detail. I’ve been looking for “hospitalized by age” and “died by age” as the most likely useful data comparison.
from post 457 in this thread on June 26
Another quote from the article
Post 456 has more quotes from the article as well.
Is there some evidence or reason to think that medical technological advancement would be moving in the opposite direction? I would think that there have been more medical advancements. The falling mortality rates could be evidence of this. But there are other factors in Sweden in particular as well. Since the Prime Minister of Sweden called for an investigation of the handling of the coronavirus and stated that things would change,(post 463 on July 2) there have been more articles written about the increased stringency of the regulations. (post 550 on Aug 11).
More current news in Sweden.
Indeed if the data is there I am also not able to find it. FWIW, not numbers but the sense of it-
Today’s NYT -
And from today’s article:
FWIW I still think that judgement will have to wait until winter is past. I will be shocked if Sweden does not have more of another wave over winter, even if it is one blunted compared to many other nations, and their failure to protect nursing home residents in their first wave was horrific. But yeah, most of Europe is now using an modified Swedish model.
Sweden’s strategy may not work for other places due to its unique demographic of having a high proportion of people who live alone.
Interesting to see the foreign press reporting that it is “controlled”, because the local press here was full of how the week by week cases have doubled in Stockholm, the worst affected area (when comparing last week with the previous week).
I don’t have an English link but you can Google Translate on this:
For the moment, the trend in Sweden in still on the rise for infections
I disagree, it is more complicated than that. But you might find this article from the Atlantic interesting. It says that according to some metrics concerning the modes of dispersion it is Sweden who is doing the same as other countries.
The article is lightly paywalled, you should be able to read it if you delete your coockies or use a second browser.
Sweden’s current new case 7 day average 42/m. Netherlands is 172. Denmark (possibly coming back down) 85.
Coming back down without locking things down more than Sweden had.
I continue to reserve making firm conclusions.
Denmark has half the cases per million and a fifth of the deaths per million that Sweden had.
Denmark has been dropping for five weeks or so. Sweden’s dropped slightly this week after about five or six weeks of constant increasing.
Denmark’s peak in 7 day daily average new cases was, per 91-divoc, 7 days ago, at 92.7 (okay one blip a fraction higher a few days earlier). They hadn’t even begun their recent surge five weeks ago. Sweden OTOH is not yet dropping from their recent fairly shallow surge, and latest 7 day average was 42.7.
No question that Denmark’s recent surge has NOT resulted in a huge number of deaths. Yet their current policies are nowhere near as stringent as they were in the first surge, and are very similar to what Sweden implemented, except, one presumes, doing a better job keeping it away from the more vulnerable age groups. Here’s their stat page (google will translate) … peak group with infections by far is the 20 to 29 group, and fairly few in the over 60 cohorts. Those older cohorts still get sicker much more often - the 60 to 69s 10X as often as the 20 to 29s, the 70 to 79s 23x as often, the 80 plus over 25x as often … but there’s fewer of them getting infected.
Curious though … any idea why rates there are dropping without very stringent actions taken in response to the surge? Schools open and such … It’s not poof a miracle.
Sometimes you just have to admit when you are wrong.
I used here:
And selected the “7 day rolling average”. The data may be 7 day rolling average, but the pop up bar chart when you mouse over a country is still daily, whereas I read it as weekly. I posted when I should have been in bed (it was going on 1am).
Still, it isn’t a “possibly falling”. It is a “clearly falling”.
Sweden will keep their restrictions for another year with some easing for larger crowds.
Johan Carlson: “The measures will remain for at least a year”
Sweden has added another restriction due to the increased spread of infection. Members of an entire household are suggested to self-isolate if any member becomes infected with Covid-19. Tegnell says that the rise of infection is now driven by the 20-29 year old age group. He also says that Sweden has not reached herd immunity, and that it’s a “foggy concept.”
Some critics of Sweden’s coronavirus policies faced backlash even when the critiques were conforming with the science from the rest of the world. The article gives a lengthy rundown of Sweden’s policies over the course of the pandemic.
Here, Tegnell was and still is against the use of face masks. Critics of that policy faced backlash in Sweden. One example in the article is of a worker in an eye clinic who received reprimand from her manager for wearing a face mask because her patients were elderly. One pulmonologist said that her contract was not renewed because she wore a face mask.
Until last month, Sweden’s policy was that only people with symptoms spread the virus, so members of the household were still required to work and go to school. This changed recently with the policy in the article above.
The article states that because of these policies, harm seems to have occurred.
Some of the critics of Sweden’s coronavirus policies are leaving Sweden. Some feel that the price of the policies was too high, killing many people.
A quote I found interesting from that article. Since Sweden was one of the only countries that kept schools open, people often cite Sweden as evidence that it’s safe to open schools based on Sweden’s example. According to this article, there were at least a couple of areas in Sweden’s coronavirus response where data was not as transparent as it seemed.
I’m not understanding the logic. The elderly have the highest death rate, so they’re the “main problem” and the solution is to loosen their restrictions? I might understand it a bit more if the rest of the population were going to tighten their restrictions, and that seems to be happening, so maybe those two actions go together. If they do, that’s not laid out in the article.
What I would guess, if the article doesn’t claim otherwise, is that he refers to the overall health, physical and mental, of the elderly. He has mentioned before what a toll the isolation takes on them, and how risky that is. I would imagine he’s trying to find a way to get a little of their lives back.