6 ms·

Sweden's COVID response was excellent. First of all, the comparison to other Nordic countries is inappropriate. Its population-weighted density is closer to th

Sweden's COVID response was excellent. First of all, the comparison to other Nordic countries is inappropriate. Its population-weighted density is closer to the UK, and closest to Austria: https://swprs.org/judgment-day-sweden-vindicated/ https://swprs.org/judgment-day-sweden-vindicated/ This Nordic cross-comparison is lazy and agenda-driven. Secondly, Sweden had 20 times fewer deaths than initially projected without a lockdown: https://medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.11.20062133v1.full.pdf https://medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.11.20062133v1.fu... The initial calls to lockdown were justified with these projections, not with how many COVID deaths Sweden would have relative to neighboring countries. Thirdly, not instituting a lockdown meant Sweden had far fewer limitations of civil liberties, and fewer adverse lockdown-related health and socioeconomic damage. For example, forcing a million young people to forego in-person schooling for a year would have done enormous damage to education: https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/coronavirus-leading-through-the-crisis/charting-the-path-to-the-next-normal/30-to-40-percent-of-minority-and-low-income-students-werent-learning-during-lockdowns https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/coronavirus-leadi... Not to mention the harm to development from foregoing summer jobs, in-person social interaction, etc for one or two years. The claim that lockdowns were appropriate doesn't even begin to contend with the harm from lockdowns. It focuses on COVID deaths single-mindedly, when it's a policy that affects every facet of society and daily life.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
emn13 5y ago
Whether the article is accurate or at least reasonable I don't know, however this criticism smells fishy - the kind of damages you're ascribing to the lockdown Sweden did suffer from, and not dramatically less so than nearby countries AFAIK. For economic indicators at least the data is available, and IMHO clearly shows Sweden was not unusual, e.g. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1274468/gdp-per-capita-nordic-countries/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/1274468/gdp-per-capita-n... Suppressed human interaction and stress causes harms, I'll postulate to that - but clearly even without any government intervention at all the pandemic will see to that. Whether formal social-distancing measures make that worse is not obvious; they could even conceivably make it better (if coordination helps pick those that work best and reduces their overall length, for instance); and surely the details of the measures, including timing and duration, matter. Ascribing pandemic related damages to lockdowns is wrong. Now, that doesn't mean lockdowns are always harmless, nor that this article is sane; but let's not delude ourselves that it's obvious "lockdowns" in general are terribly harmful, by comparing them to a false baseline of pre-pandemic normality.
- CryptoPunk 5y ago
  >>For economic indicators at least the data is available, and IMHO clearly shows Sweden was not unusual, e.g. Economic indicators over shorter time spans can't reflect long-term harm. Tens of thousands of business closures, and elevated deficit spending to make up for the loss of private income, is going to show up in GDP statistics over a very long period of time. You're correct that sheltering and social distancing behavior manifests in a lockdown-free society as well, but it will be 1. less prevalent (if not, what was the point of the lockdown) and 2. more intelligently applied based on the diverse set of circumstances found in the population. With respect to point 2, a lockdown is a one size fits all solution that treats an elderly person and a young person the same, despite COVID posing a 1,000 times greater risk to the former than to the latter. A lockdown precludes creative ways of minimizing COVID risk, like having social gatherings in venues with better ventilation, or only with people in a low-risk demographics, because again, a one-size-fits-all solution cannot be adaptive/intelligent the way individuals can. A lockdown rule, being rigidly preset, can't know when a young person is facing drug abuse problems, and faces far greater risk from social isolation than from COVID. The US saw a massive spike in fentanyl overdose deaths in 2020, showing the steep cost of social isolation - which lockdowns exacerbate - for public health. People when left to their own devices are able to make judgments based on their individual circumstances, and this latitude is impeded by lockdowns. The potential harm from this is simply ignored by the authors.
  - ModernMech 5y ago
    > People when left to their own devices are able to make judgments based on their individual circumstances The pandemic also revealed that when left to their own devices, people make judgements based on their own individual circumstances without any consideration whatsoever given to the circumstances of others. People were having COVID parties in an effort to intentionally spread the disease -- that should tell you everything you need to know about an individual's capacity to think in terms of public health. > like having social gatherings in venues with better ventilation, or only with people in a low-risk demographics, because again, a one-size-fits-all solution cannot be adaptive/intelligent the way individuals can. The idea that we can let young people do whatever they want while isolating and protecting the old and vulnerable has always been false in our society. Many vulnerable people died as a result. It's created paradoxes where we send kids to school because they are not vulnerable; meanwhile their teachers are in fact vulnerable and have predictably died at a frequency that has created teacher and substitute shortages. > The US saw a massive spike in fentanyl overdose deaths in 2020, showing the steep cost of social isolation - which lockdowns exacerbate - for public health. Fentanyl has been a problem long before the pandemic, and many of the places that are most affected by increased fentanyl deaths over the last 2 years have imposed the least restrictive lockdown measures [0]: Alaska – 385% Colorado – 382% Louisiana – 378% Mississippi – a 373% California – 370% Texas – 350% Oregon – 303% Kansas – 303% Idaho – 283% Alabama – 271% Florida, a state which advertises itself as the state of freedom, and whose governor has positioned himself as an anti-lockdown champion, has the worst fentanyl deaths in the entire nation. So I don't know how much you can say about the causation between lockdowns and fentanyl overdoses. One demographic that has seen the highest increase and absolute rates of fentanyl deaths has been African Americans, particularly young men and teens. If your contention is that fentanyl is a drug of despair, why are you assuming lockdowns are the source of that despair? During the summer of 2020, African Americans (and Americans of all backgrounds) highlighted one of the most pressing concerns in their community: police violence against black men and teens. Have you considered this despair as a possibility for the increase in overdose deaths (particularly considering many of the states hit hardest have very high black populations)? [0] https://www.route-fifty.com/health-human-services/2022/02/states-highest-fentanyl-deaths/361839/ https://www.route-fifty.com/health-human-services/2022/02/st...
goto11 5y ago
> First of all, the comparison to other Nordic countries is inappropriate. Its population-weighted density is closer to the UK, and closest to Austria: According to the linked article, the population-weighed density of Denmark is higher then Sweden.
- CryptoPunk 5y ago
  Yes, you're correct. It identifies Denmark as an outlier: >>In fact, in Western Europe, there is a striking correlation between population weighted density – which may influence both the speed of virus transmission and the amplitude of infection waves – and covid mortality per country (see map below). This correlation does not apply, however, to Denmark, which has a low covid mortality but an average population weighted density (3434).
  - goto11 5y ago
    So you ignore Denmark from the comparison because they did better then Sweden, even with a higher population density?
    - CryptoPunk 5y ago
      I already admitted my mistake, so I don't understand why you're still being accusatory. To make clear, I was incorrect in generalizing all the other Nordic countries as having a lower population-weighted density. But it's an outlier and I think the support for the broader point is still strong.
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
      - ModernMech 5y ago
        I don't understand what you're saying. The post you linked to makes a point to say that we should not compare Sweden to its Nordic neighbors because Sweden is actually closer in population weighted density to the rest of Europe. The article calls population weighted density the most fundamental of the arguments it uses to try and separate Sweden from its Nordic neighbors. The post calls the correlation between population weighted density and covid mortality "striking", I assume to emphasize it is a strong correlation. But then it just throws Denmark out as an outlier. I'm sorry, but when your sample size is 4, you can't throw out one of them and call it an outlier because it doesn't fit the narrative. This sounds like classic cherry picking to me, especially when the narrative is one the author chose specifically to make a comparison favorable to their main argument! For all the submissions on HN decrying bad statistics, you'd think this kind of argument wouldn't fly here. "We can't compare against the Nordic countries because they are not like Sweden, and we can't use population density because that's the wrong way to look it. Instead we look at population weighted density, and we throw out the one that causes our argument to fail. Then when we compare to Austria, look what a winner Sweden is!" I understand that there's some merit to the line of reasoning you are presenting, especially population weighted density, but as far as the article goes, to just throw out Denmark as an outlier because to include it would refute the central argument of the article really puts it in a bad light.
shlant 5y ago
> This Nordic cross-comparison is lazy and agenda-driven. Nothing says "agenda-driven" like claiming that an incredibly complex comparison should be entirely based on "population-weighted density" and posting a blog titled "Judgment day: Sweden vindicated" that also regularly posts misinformation[1]. If you are going to critique an approach, you should at least not make your bias so blatant. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_Policy_Research https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_Policy_Research

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

emn13 5y ago

Whether the article is accurate or at least reasonable I don't know, however this criticism smells fishy - the kind of damages you're ascribing to the lockdown Sweden did suffer from, and not dramatically less so than nearby countries AFAIK. For economic indicators at least the data is available, and IMHO clearly shows Sweden was not unusual, e.g. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1274468/gdp-per-capita-nordic-countries/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/1274468/gdp-per-capita-n... Suppressed human interaction and stress causes harms, I'll postulate to that - but clearly even without any government intervention at all the pandemic will see to that. Whether formal social-distancing measures make that worse is not obvious; they could even conceivably make it better (if coordination helps pick those that work best and reduces their overall length, for instance); and surely the details of the measures, including timing and duration, matter. Ascribing pandemic related damages to lockdowns is wrong. Now, that doesn't mean lockdowns are always harmless, nor that this article is sane; but let's not delude ourselves that it's obvious "lockdowns" in general are terribly harmful, by comparing them to a false baseline of pre-pandemic normality.

CryptoPunk 5y ago
>>For economic indicators at least the data is available, and IMHO clearly shows Sweden was not unusual, e.g. Economic indicators over shorter time spans can't reflect long-term harm. Tens of thousands of business closures, and elevated deficit spending to make up for the loss of private income, is going to show up in GDP statistics over a very long period of time. You're correct that sheltering and social distancing behavior manifests in a lockdown-free society as well, but it will be 1. less prevalent (if not, what was the point of the lockdown) and 2. more intelligently applied based on the diverse set of circumstances found in the population. With respect to point 2, a lockdown is a one size fits all solution that treats an elderly person and a young person the same, despite COVID posing a 1,000 times greater risk to the former than to the latter. A lockdown precludes creative ways of minimizing COVID risk, like having social gatherings in venues with better ventilation, or only with people in a low-risk demographics, because again, a one-size-fits-all solution cannot be adaptive/intelligent the way individuals can. A lockdown rule, being rigidly preset, can't know when a young person is facing drug abuse problems, and faces far greater risk from social isolation than from COVID. The US saw a massive spike in fentanyl overdose deaths in 2020, showing the steep cost of social isolation - which lockdowns exacerbate - for public health. People when left to their own devices are able to make judgments based on their individual circumstances, and this latitude is impeded by lockdowns. The potential harm from this is simply ignored by the authors.
- ModernMech 5y ago
  > People when left to their own devices are able to make judgments based on their individual circumstances The pandemic also revealed that when left to their own devices, people make judgements based on their own individual circumstances without any consideration whatsoever given to the circumstances of others. People were having COVID parties in an effort to intentionally spread the disease -- that should tell you everything you need to know about an individual's capacity to think in terms of public health. > like having social gatherings in venues with better ventilation, or only with people in a low-risk demographics, because again, a one-size-fits-all solution cannot be adaptive/intelligent the way individuals can. The idea that we can let young people do whatever they want while isolating and protecting the old and vulnerable has always been false in our society. Many vulnerable people died as a result. It's created paradoxes where we send kids to school because they are not vulnerable; meanwhile their teachers are in fact vulnerable and have predictably died at a frequency that has created teacher and substitute shortages. > The US saw a massive spike in fentanyl overdose deaths in 2020, showing the steep cost of social isolation - which lockdowns exacerbate - for public health. Fentanyl has been a problem long before the pandemic, and many of the places that are most affected by increased fentanyl deaths over the last 2 years have imposed the least restrictive lockdown measures [0]: Alaska – 385% Colorado – 382% Louisiana – 378% Mississippi – a 373% California – 370% Texas – 350% Oregon – 303% Kansas – 303% Idaho – 283% Alabama – 271% Florida, a state which advertises itself as the state of freedom, and whose governor has positioned himself as an anti-lockdown champion, has the worst fentanyl deaths in the entire nation. So I don't know how much you can say about the causation between lockdowns and fentanyl overdoses. One demographic that has seen the highest increase and absolute rates of fentanyl deaths has been African Americans, particularly young men and teens. If your contention is that fentanyl is a drug of despair, why are you assuming lockdowns are the source of that despair? During the summer of 2020, African Americans (and Americans of all backgrounds) highlighted one of the most pressing concerns in their community: police violence against black men and teens. Have you considered this despair as a possibility for the increase in overdose deaths (particularly considering many of the states hit hardest have very high black populations)? [0] https://www.route-fifty.com/health-human-services/2022/02/states-highest-fentanyl-deaths/361839/ https://www.route-fifty.com/health-human-services/2022/02/st...

goto11 5y ago

> First of all, the comparison to other Nordic countries is inappropriate. Its population-weighted density is closer to the UK, and closest to Austria: According to the linked article, the population-weighed density of Denmark is higher then Sweden.

CryptoPunk 5y ago
Yes, you're correct. It identifies Denmark as an outlier: >>In fact, in Western Europe, there is a striking correlation between population weighted density – which may influence both the speed of virus transmission and the amplitude of infection waves – and covid mortality per country (see map below). This correlation does not apply, however, to Denmark, which has a low covid mortality but an average population weighted density (3434).
- goto11 5y ago
  So you ignore Denmark from the comparison because they did better then Sweden, even with a higher population density?
  - CryptoPunk 5y ago
    I already admitted my mistake, so I don't understand why you're still being accusatory. To make clear, I was incorrect in generalizing all the other Nordic countries as having a lower population-weighted density. But it's an outlier and I think the support for the broader point is still strong.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - ModernMech 5y ago
      I don't understand what you're saying. The post you linked to makes a point to say that we should not compare Sweden to its Nordic neighbors because Sweden is actually closer in population weighted density to the rest of Europe. The article calls population weighted density the most fundamental of the arguments it uses to try and separate Sweden from its Nordic neighbors. The post calls the correlation between population weighted density and covid mortality "striking", I assume to emphasize it is a strong correlation. But then it just throws Denmark out as an outlier. I'm sorry, but when your sample size is 4, you can't throw out one of them and call it an outlier because it doesn't fit the narrative. This sounds like classic cherry picking to me, especially when the narrative is one the author chose specifically to make a comparison favorable to their main argument! For all the submissions on HN decrying bad statistics, you'd think this kind of argument wouldn't fly here. "We can't compare against the Nordic countries because they are not like Sweden, and we can't use population density because that's the wrong way to look it. Instead we look at population weighted density, and we throw out the one that causes our argument to fail. Then when we compare to Austria, look what a winner Sweden is!" I understand that there's some merit to the line of reasoning you are presenting, especially population weighted density, but as far as the article goes, to just throw out Denmark as an outlier because to include it would refute the central argument of the article really puts it in a bad light.

shlant 5y ago

> This Nordic cross-comparison is lazy and agenda-driven. Nothing says "agenda-driven" like claiming that an incredibly complex comparison should be entirely based on "population-weighted density" and posting a blog titled "Judgment day: Sweden vindicated" that also regularly posts misinformation[1]. If you are going to critique an approach, you should at least not make your bias so blatant. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_Policy_Research https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_Policy_Research