47 ms·

I imagine the motivation behind this paper was, it is embarrassing to the rest of the world that Sweden got it right about lockdowns and masks, so we mush punis

by paul_f 5y ago

I imagine the motivation behind this paper was, it is embarrassing to the rest of the world that Sweden got it right about lockdowns and masks, so we mush punish them. Let's write a paper claiming they did something else unrelated wrong. That paper could easily have been written about at least one COVID policy in every country on earth, but Sweden was singled out.

ninjin 5y ago
If you have a look at the background and affiliation of the authors, there is a perfectly reasonable explanation as to why the country of study is Sweden without having to resort to mildly conspiratorial thinking. Not saying that there is no political nonsense going on related to the subject at hand. But this is (to a scientist in a different field) a well-authored article in a respectable journal. Thus I think it is a fair addition to a very complex debate that will likely continue among scientists long after the pandemic settles. Edit: I may be wrong about the journal. Springer has a rather elaborate network of journals using their “brands” and it looks to me like this one is far from receiving the same level of editorial scrutiny that one would expect [1]. The hint may be “communications” in the name, possibly indicating that this is a more to be treated like a scientific opinion piece (still, far better than an op-ed) than anything else. It also appears to be in the area of humanities and social sciences rather than “pure” medicine for some reason; with a majority of the editorial board lacking relevant expertise [2]. Anyone more familiar with publishing in medicine, medical policy, etc. is more than welcome to chime in. [1]: https://doaj.org/toc/2662-9992 https://doaj.org/toc/2662-9992 [2]: https://www.nature.com/palcomms/editorialboard https://www.nature.com/palcomms/editorialboard
- rsfern 5y ago
  The “communications” branding has more to do with the prestige level and expectation of faster-paced short research notes. Usually opinion pieces are explicitly filed under a “perspective” track (vs review and original research track). The hierarchy usually goes Nature, Nature Communications, Nature [field name] communications, then field specific nature-owned journals (which sometimes have higher status than the field specific communications journals)
TazeTSchnitzel 5y ago
“Sweden got it right” More people died here and continue to die every week, yet our economy still took a big hit and important societal functions have still been harmed. In what way did we “get it right”?

by paul_f 5y ago

ninjin 5y ago

If you have a look at the background and affiliation of the authors, there is a perfectly reasonable explanation as to why the country of study is Sweden without having to resort to mildly conspiratorial thinking. Not saying that there is no political nonsense going on related to the subject at hand. But this is (to a scientist in a different field) a well-authored article in a respectable journal. Thus I think it is a fair addition to a very complex debate that will likely continue among scientists long after the pandemic settles. Edit: I may be wrong about the journal. Springer has a rather elaborate network of journals using their “brands” and it looks to me like this one is far from receiving the same level of editorial scrutiny that one would expect [1]. The hint may be “communications” in the name, possibly indicating that this is a more to be treated like a scientific opinion piece (still, far better than an op-ed) than anything else. It also appears to be in the area of humanities and social sciences rather than “pure” medicine for some reason; with a majority of the editorial board lacking relevant expertise [2]. Anyone more familiar with publishing in medicine, medical policy, etc. is more than welcome to chime in. [1]: https://doaj.org/toc/2662-9992 https://doaj.org/toc/2662-9992 [2]: https://www.nature.com/palcomms/editorialboard https://www.nature.com/palcomms/editorialboard

rsfern 5y ago
The “communications” branding has more to do with the prestige level and expectation of faster-paced short research notes. Usually opinion pieces are explicitly filed under a “perspective” track (vs review and original research track). The hierarchy usually goes Nature, Nature Communications, Nature [field name] communications, then field specific nature-owned journals (which sometimes have higher status than the field specific communications journals)

TazeTSchnitzel 5y ago

“Sweden got it right” More people died here and continue to die every week, yet our economy still took a big hit and important societal functions have still been harmed. In what way did we “get it right”?