35 ms·

Deaths and infections have been much higher (per capita too) in Sweden compared to nordic (who had lockdowns) countries. But faired better compared to UK, which

Deaths and infections have been much higher (per capita too) in Sweden compared to nordic (who had lockdowns) countries. But faired better compared to UK, which had several madatory lockdowns. So its not either or, but a gray area. There are several reasons that could explain why Sweden had high death rate.

leesalminen 6y ago
People seem to really want to correlate all kinds of things together with this virus when in reality we just don’t know. There are 1000s of variables- many of which we don’t even know of yet. One thing I’ve personally found interesting in the US is that nobody talks about the general poor health of a plurality of Americans. We lead the way in obesity and related diseases. Surely that is a factor in covid deaths but I haven’t seen anyone say it aloud.
- lambdaba 6y ago
  Americans probably have the worst health, or more precisely immune system fitness, in the world, as evidenced by the epidemic of chronic disease. My opinion is that, along with population density, is the only significant factor. The reason it's not discussed much is that society as a whole is still under the pharma paradigm, where individual agency on health is all but negated, and "health", is mostly dispensed by a doctor prescribing medicine. Hence the focus on things like masks and expensive drugs like Remdesivir (which is useless) VS getting proper vitamin D status, for example (which is crucial for immune system function and has been shown to be a major factor in COVID).
  - literallycancer 6y ago
    Why do you think it's useless?
    - lambdaba 6y ago
      I read that in studies, including a meta-study showing no difference in mortality rate. I suppose it's not strictly "useless" as it apparently can reduce time spent in ICU in patients who would get better anyway, but in my view to call it useful it should affect outcomes. I'm also betraying my frustration with pharma's hold on the medical system and minds, where common sense interventions like correcting deficiencies in vitamin D, zinc etc. are seemingly ignored. Even the media is in on it. It's really an awful situation.
  - akiselev 6y ago
    That "epidemic of chronic disease" isn't an American phenomenon, it's a global one. The percentage of people suffering from chronic conditions is surprisingly stable from country to country. It's the prevalence of acute diseases that changes due to quality of healthcare and (in the case of COVID) transient government competence. The each step in the shift from subsistence agriculture => industrial labor => sedentary lifestyles are characterized by their own maladies. It starts with chronic malnutrition, then moves to chronic diseases cause by pollution, then to chronic obesity and heart disease and is compounded by climate. Each country has its own unique mix of the four but the overall rates don't change much.
    - lambdaba 6y ago
      I agree, it's not American but it's an American invention and as such America has it more extreme: nowhere else do you see such extreme obesity, and so much processed food... I don't agree that America doesn't have the highest rate of lifestyle-induced disease, of that's what you were implying.
      - akiselev 6y ago
        You can't judge a chronic disease by whether or not it's a lifestyle choice. A chronic disease is a chronic disease and in most cases, it doesn't just go away - otherwise, it'd be called an acute disease. It's not even particularly right anyway. Most of the western world is a few years or a few decades behind the United States in obesity rates and not far behind at all on heart disease.
- clairity 6y ago
  talking about the poor general health of americans is brushed aside seemingly because it only stirs negative feelings like helplessness, even though improving nutrition and fitness would do much more to reduce illness, declined quality of life, and premature death than nearly any other health mitigation (even in relation to covid). it's the same as with the performative aspects of masks: worn in public to feel affirmed for positive action but having no meaningful impact, while doing nothing in private (due to psychosocial awkwardness and its negativity), where some distance can meaninfully reduce transmission rates but provides no positivity (esteem).
Retric 6y ago
You need to compare relatively similar countries to verify how successful their strategy was vs differences in population demographics etc from playing a role. As such Sweden vs Norway shows how Sweden failed from a public health standpoint, but both countries had significant advantages over the UK due to their dramatically lower population density. In that context Sweden’s strategy is actually reasonable for such a low population country to attempt.
- neuronexmachina 6y ago
  I didn't realize until I looked it up just now that the Nordic countries have a population density 1/10th that of Germany and the UK: https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/european-countries-by-population-density.html https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/european-countries-by-po...
  - Gwypaas 6y ago
    Population density really doesn't matter in these discussions regarding spread. How does the huge Canadian arctic influence any spread happening in public transportation in Toronto? It doesn't. Same with Sweden and the other Nordic countries with vast forests between towns. A more general measure is urbanization, and by that measure Sweden is more urbanized at 88% than both Germany at 77.5% and United Kingdom at 84%. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urbanization_by_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urbanization_by_country
    - clairity 6y ago
      urbanization doesn't matter either. it's indoor mixing density (which population density and urbanization poorly approximate in this case) that matters. that's again why the key mitigation is to avoid breathing others' direct exhaust, which is most directly heuristicized by distancing indoors (which implicitly addresses density, unlike masks which only help at the margins and are mostly performative due to their counterintuitive failure modes, such as every breath rehydrating and potentially dislodging virus particles otherwise caught in the mask).
    - 6y ago
hristov 6y ago
UK had mandatory lockdowns only after they tried herd immunity which caused the virus to go wild in their population. By the time they had mandatory lockdowns, infections were already through the roof. In general, scandanivian countries should be much better protected against the virus, all other things being equal. Scandinavian countries tend to have much lower population density, they culturally require more personal space, they have much lower average dwelling occupancy, in fact they have a lot of people living alone in their apartments etc. If you compare Sweden with their Scandinavian neighbors you can see how their coronavirus policies failed. If you compare England with their European neighbors and peers (e.g., France, Germany, Netherlands, Belgium), you can see how their policies failed. Comparing Sweden and England is not as instructive. These are two countries that both had failing policies but Sweden did much better because it was better demographically and culturally set up for a pandemic.
cma 6y ago
UK is over 10 times more dense than Sweden I believe.

leesalminen 6y ago

People seem to really want to correlate all kinds of things together with this virus when in reality we just don’t know. There are 1000s of variables- many of which we don’t even know of yet. One thing I’ve personally found interesting in the US is that nobody talks about the general poor health of a plurality of Americans. We lead the way in obesity and related diseases. Surely that is a factor in covid deaths but I haven’t seen anyone say it aloud.

lambdaba 6y ago
Americans probably have the worst health, or more precisely immune system fitness, in the world, as evidenced by the epidemic of chronic disease. My opinion is that, along with population density, is the only significant factor. The reason it's not discussed much is that society as a whole is still under the pharma paradigm, where individual agency on health is all but negated, and "health", is mostly dispensed by a doctor prescribing medicine. Hence the focus on things like masks and expensive drugs like Remdesivir (which is useless) VS getting proper vitamin D status, for example (which is crucial for immune system function and has been shown to be a major factor in COVID).
- literallycancer 6y ago
  Why do you think it's useless?
  - lambdaba 6y ago
    I read that in studies, including a meta-study showing no difference in mortality rate. I suppose it's not strictly "useless" as it apparently can reduce time spent in ICU in patients who would get better anyway, but in my view to call it useful it should affect outcomes. I'm also betraying my frustration with pharma's hold on the medical system and minds, where common sense interventions like correcting deficiencies in vitamin D, zinc etc. are seemingly ignored. Even the media is in on it. It's really an awful situation.
- akiselev 6y ago
  That "epidemic of chronic disease" isn't an American phenomenon, it's a global one. The percentage of people suffering from chronic conditions is surprisingly stable from country to country. It's the prevalence of acute diseases that changes due to quality of healthcare and (in the case of COVID) transient government competence. The each step in the shift from subsistence agriculture => industrial labor => sedentary lifestyles are characterized by their own maladies. It starts with chronic malnutrition, then moves to chronic diseases cause by pollution, then to chronic obesity and heart disease and is compounded by climate. Each country has its own unique mix of the four but the overall rates don't change much.
  - lambdaba 6y ago
    I agree, it's not American but it's an American invention and as such America has it more extreme: nowhere else do you see such extreme obesity, and so much processed food... I don't agree that America doesn't have the highest rate of lifestyle-induced disease, of that's what you were implying.
    - akiselev 6y ago
      You can't judge a chronic disease by whether or not it's a lifestyle choice. A chronic disease is a chronic disease and in most cases, it doesn't just go away - otherwise, it'd be called an acute disease. It's not even particularly right anyway. Most of the western world is a few years or a few decades behind the United States in obesity rates and not far behind at all on heart disease.
clairity 6y ago
talking about the poor general health of americans is brushed aside seemingly because it only stirs negative feelings like helplessness, even though improving nutrition and fitness would do much more to reduce illness, declined quality of life, and premature death than nearly any other health mitigation (even in relation to covid). it's the same as with the performative aspects of masks: worn in public to feel affirmed for positive action but having no meaningful impact, while doing nothing in private (due to psychosocial awkwardness and its negativity), where some distance can meaninfully reduce transmission rates but provides no positivity (esteem).

Retric 6y ago

You need to compare relatively similar countries to verify how successful their strategy was vs differences in population demographics etc from playing a role. As such Sweden vs Norway shows how Sweden failed from a public health standpoint, but both countries had significant advantages over the UK due to their dramatically lower population density. In that context Sweden’s strategy is actually reasonable for such a low population country to attempt.

neuronexmachina 6y ago
I didn't realize until I looked it up just now that the Nordic countries have a population density 1/10th that of Germany and the UK: https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/european-countries-by-population-density.html https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/european-countries-by-po...
- Gwypaas 6y ago
  Population density really doesn't matter in these discussions regarding spread. How does the huge Canadian arctic influence any spread happening in public transportation in Toronto? It doesn't. Same with Sweden and the other Nordic countries with vast forests between towns. A more general measure is urbanization, and by that measure Sweden is more urbanized at 88% than both Germany at 77.5% and United Kingdom at 84%. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urbanization_by_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urbanization_by_country
  - clairity 6y ago
    urbanization doesn't matter either. it's indoor mixing density (which population density and urbanization poorly approximate in this case) that matters. that's again why the key mitigation is to avoid breathing others' direct exhaust, which is most directly heuristicized by distancing indoors (which implicitly addresses density, unlike masks which only help at the margins and are mostly performative due to their counterintuitive failure modes, such as every breath rehydrating and potentially dislodging virus particles otherwise caught in the mask).
  - 6y ago

hristov 6y ago

UK had mandatory lockdowns only after they tried herd immunity which caused the virus to go wild in their population. By the time they had mandatory lockdowns, infections were already through the roof. In general, scandanivian countries should be much better protected against the virus, all other things being equal. Scandinavian countries tend to have much lower population density, they culturally require more personal space, they have much lower average dwelling occupancy, in fact they have a lot of people living alone in their apartments etc. If you compare Sweden with their Scandinavian neighbors you can see how their coronavirus policies failed. If you compare England with their European neighbors and peers (e.g., France, Germany, Netherlands, Belgium), you can see how their policies failed. Comparing Sweden and England is not as instructive. These are two countries that both had failing policies but Sweden did much better because it was better demographically and culturally set up for a pandemic.

cma 6y ago

UK is over 10 times more dense than Sweden I believe.