3 ms·

Sweden allowed for gatherings of up to 500 people 10+ days after Norway and Denmark had set the limit to less than 50 trying to explain it with "just bad luck"

by Lewton 6y ago

Sweden allowed for gatherings of up to 500 people 10+ days after Norway and Denmark had set the limit to less than 50 trying to explain it with "just bad luck" is ridiculously revisionist history edit: sources https://www.thelocal.dk/20200317/denmark-shuts-down-restaurants-and-cafs-and-bans-all-gatherings https://www.thelocal.dk/20200317/denmark-shuts-down-restaura... 17. of march, Denmark banning gatherings above 10 people https://www.dw.com/en/coronavirus-sweden-still-skiing-despite-concerns/a-52908473 https://www.dw.com/en/coronavirus-sweden-still-skiing-despit... 25. of march, sweden still having parties of 499 people

alkonaut 6y ago
> trying to explain it with "just bad luck" I didn't. No one is. It's a combination of 1) poor protection of elderly homes 2) a larger seed outbreak most likely in the Stockholm area 3) less mitigations. I think 1+2 makes the majority of the difference while 3 makes less of a difference, because people changed behavior similar to other countries (and obviously other countries just like Sweden changed behavior before regulations were put in place). Obviosly the decision to keep business and schools open weren't taken assuming it would make no difference to the outcome. There is an element of calculated risk here. No one is denying that. But very few as far as we know have been infected by school children so that risk seems like the correct one, for example. The limits of 500 and later 50 people for gatherings was laws for public gatherings i.e. these were laws on businesses. You couldn't arrange concerts larger than that, and so on. The recommendations towards individuals was always to keep social distancing, not socialize in large groups, not travel unnecessarily and so on. I think in some countries there were bans even for private gatherings, e.g. laws restricting the size of private gatherings. That was never in place in Sweden (unsure if it would have required some constitutional change or similar, but it was said to be impossible). So even when the restriction is 50 people, I can still arrange a private wedding for 1500 people. But obviously, no one is going to do that so it's hypothetical. The question is what happened, not so much what was allowed. Most places with lockdowns saw the majority of the effect predate the lockdowns, because people change behavior. I doubt there were many cases of large gatherings any time after mid March. There will always be idiots obviously (such as the weekend afterskiers that week in march in Åre), but such things occurred elsewhere too with "corona parties" etc. The difference is that they could take place in a few places in the open in Sweden.

by Lewton 6y ago

alkonaut 6y ago

> trying to explain it with "just bad luck" I didn't. No one is. It's a combination of 1) poor protection of elderly homes 2) a larger seed outbreak most likely in the Stockholm area 3) less mitigations. I think 1+2 makes the majority of the difference while 3 makes less of a difference, because people changed behavior similar to other countries (and obviously other countries just like Sweden changed behavior before regulations were put in place). Obviosly the decision to keep business and schools open weren't taken assuming it would make no difference to the outcome. There is an element of calculated risk here. No one is denying that. But very few as far as we know have been infected by school children so that risk seems like the correct one, for example. The limits of 500 and later 50 people for gatherings was laws for public gatherings i.e. these were laws on businesses. You couldn't arrange concerts larger than that, and so on. The recommendations towards individuals was always to keep social distancing, not socialize in large groups, not travel unnecessarily and so on. I think in some countries there were bans even for private gatherings, e.g. laws restricting the size of private gatherings. That was never in place in Sweden (unsure if it would have required some constitutional change or similar, but it was said to be impossible). So even when the restriction is 50 people, I can still arrange a private wedding for 1500 people. But obviously, no one is going to do that so it's hypothetical. The question is what happened, not so much what was allowed. Most places with lockdowns saw the majority of the effect predate the lockdowns, because people change behavior. I doubt there were many cases of large gatherings any time after mid March. There will always be idiots obviously (such as the weekend afterskiers that week in march in Åre), but such things occurred elsewhere too with "corona parties" etc. The difference is that they could take place in a few places in the open in Sweden.