• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Herd immunity has failed in Sweden as another wave hits

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Covid-19: Sweden's herd immunity strategy has failed, hospitals inundated - NZ Herald

It looked like Sweden might be vindicated for its Covid-19 strategy. But in the past few weeks, the country of 10 million has been smashed by the virus.

With three words, Sweden's King Carl Gustaf captured the panic engulfing his country as it backflips on a controversial herd immunity strategy and coronavirus case numbers explode.

On Instagram, he wrote, simply: "Hold on tight!"

The message is echoing around the Nordic breakaway nation which, up until now, has run a distinctly different race to its neighbours who locked down hard when the pandemic breached its borders.

It signals a complete reversal of a policy that allowed Swedes to govern themselves in the hopes that life could go on as normal.

There were 6000 cases in a single day last week and hospitalisations are rising faster than anywhere else in Europe.

The death toll is following predictably behind. The Washington Post reports that Sweden's per capita death rate is several times higher than in Finland, Denmark and Norway – all of which locked down early.

It is believed roughly one-in-five people in Stockholm are infected.

With numbers exploding, Prime Minister Stefan Lofven has been forced to swallow his pride and admit that he got it wrong.

Well, there's a novel idea: A national leader admitting he was wrong.

At a news conference on Monday, he did just that, telling reporters: "It is a clear and sharp signal to every person in our country as to what applies in the future. Don't go to the gym, don't go the library, don't have dinner out, don't have parties – cancel!"

And with that, Sweden's experiment was officially crushed. But critics say it was never going to succeed.

Australian man and Covid-19 long-hauler David Steadson, who worked as an epidemiologist with the University of Queensland before moving to Sweden 20 years ago, told news.com.au the Swedish model rested too heavily on the wishful thinking that Swedes would keep themselves safe.

So, they were hoping that Swedes would voluntarily exercise personal responsibility and follow the guidelines without a government mandate. But apparently, that didn't happen.

But the attitude that Covid-19 was not to be taken seriously became intertwined in the public health response.

When Mr Steadson first became ill, the advice from doctors was to stay away.

"Having suspected I had Covid-19, I was told not to even go to the doctor for fear of infecting health staff," he says.

Dr Nick Talley is editor-in-chief of the Medical Journal of Australia. He says the Swedish model has been a failure.

"In my view, the Swedish model has not been a success, at least to date," he told news.com.au.

"One clear goal at least early on was [to] reach herd immunity – but this was not achieved, not even close, and this was arguably predictable."

Annika Linde, who was the predecessor to Sweden's top public health officer Anders Tegnell, told the UK's Daily Telegraph that she "hoped" Dr Tegnell was right about projections that Sweden would suffer less casualties because of accrued immunity.

"I hoped he was right. It would have been great. But he wasn't," she said. "Now we have a high death rate, and we have not escaped a second wave: Immunity makes a little difference maybe, but not much difference."
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
Covid-19: Sweden's herd immunity strategy has failed, hospitals inundated - NZ Herald







Well, there's a novel idea: A national leader admitting he was wrong.







So, they were hoping that Swedes would voluntarily exercise personal responsibility and follow the guidelines without a government mandate. But apparently, that didn't happen.
Interesting, but what I would like to see is what proportion of the population is now thought have had the virus and is presumably immune.

You won't get much reduction in the rate of spread until 30-40% of the population has had it, I'd have thought. I can only assume Tegnell must have hoped for numbers like that going into Autumn, but actually only maybe 15% of the people have had it, hence this explosion in cases now. Or something like that. It would be really interesting to see the numbers.
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
Herd immunity is very much misunderstood and as believed by many, and in today's world it is meme myth promoted by foolish wishful thinking. Actually Sweden did not propose their strategy as herd immunity. They actually expected the COVID-19 pandemic to pass with only minimal to moderate precautions. On the other hand President Trump and the conservatives of the USA, and Brazil believed the pandemic did not exist or would pass quickly, and actively advocated avoiding preventive measures, and actively spread COVID-19 with their activities. I call this strategy 'Conservative Eugenics' or thinning the herd.

The concept of herd immunity is a long term development of immunity in populations in varying degrees with different viruses. Vaccines can contribute to herd immunity in the resistance to some viruses.

It is well known the populations in regions develop genetic resistance to clades of viruses like the coronaviruses that COVID-19 is a part of in the Orient. The genetic resistance to clades of related viruses to COVID-19 ins highest in the region of Southeast Asia where the animals that the virus comes from that carry the virus, but the Orient in general appears to have some genetic resistance to these coronaviruses. This has been demonstrated when Europeans moved into the Americans carrying, diseases like Small Pox which was devastating to native populations.
 

stvdv

Veteran Member: I Share (not Debate) my POV
but what I would like to see is what proportion of the population is now thought have had the virus and is presumably immune
I saw them mentioning that number somewhere in the end of the article
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
I don't think Swedish authorities were aiming for herd immunity. They just seemed to think they could control the spread without lockdown.
Yes, I've just checked and you are quite right. Tegnell indeed aimed simply to (a) shield the most vulnerable and (b ) control the rate of spread enough to avoid overwhelming the health service.

Now, as we get into the cold weather they are having to ramp up the countermeasures, just like everyone else. Whether this represents a "failure" of their policy or not is not very clear to me. If the policy is as I have described it above (which I got from Wiki), then more severe countermeasures in winter are fully consistent with that policy, rather than representing any abandonment of it.

It looks, rather, as if there is a convergence of Swedish measures and those taken elsewhere. Almost nobody has gone for a full lockdown this autumn (schools still open, people still working, etc.), but with a clampdown on socialising and hospitality. The Swedes now seem to be ending up in a similar spot.
 

ecco

Veteran Member
I call this strategy 'Conservative Eugenics' or thinning the herd.
1024px-SMirC-thumbsup.svg.png
 

viole

Ontological Naturalist
Premium Member
I don't think Swedish authorities were aiming for herd immunity. They just seemed to think they could control the spread without lockdown.
Well, they did. Now they have to try it again. Same as those places which had a massive lockdown for months in springs to find themselves overwhelmed again in october, like Italy. Lockdowns also did not work, then.

that fact alone, should show that lockdowns are not differentiating between success and failure. Ergo, they are not necessary. And since they are intrusive, for what concerns basic liberties, they must be avoided.

ciao

- viole
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
They still are not going into the lockdown craziness like the UK has done.
What lockdown craziness would that be, then? The schools are open. Those that cannot work from home are still going to work. So the economy is still basically running, except for the hospitality sector, and non-essential retail, those are the environments in which many people pass on the infection - which we know from the test and trace system.
 

viole

Ontological Naturalist
Premium Member
Or France or Germany (to a lesser extent) and other countries who have learned from the first wave, lockdown works. So what is crazy about attempting to save lives?
I never said it is crazy. I said it is not necessary. I see that in Switzerland today. We managed to bring down Rt without any lockdown, despite having had the biggest growth pro capita. And in several cantons with huge peak, things are back to normal without sending people in house arrest, closing restaurants or, Thor forbid, schools.

And in the cantons where things are more serious, we simply need to implement already available criteria which determine who has access to that remaining bed, in case of conflict. For instance, a current idea in Switzerland is to exclude negationists from the right of ICU, in case they get corona, and there are not enough beds.

But If some nations feel more confortable and prefer to be locked down at home without maybe a real reason, they can do if they want. We simply believe that the right to be cured is just one of many rights. Including work, freedom of movement and education. And we should not sacrifice all to only one, but we should try to sort of optimize them all. In a sustainable way.

what I am saying is that this second resurgence hits most of Europe. Sweden, like Italy, France, Austria. Especially countries which started a massive and total lockdown in spring.

So, to say that Sweden experienced a second wave because it did not implement a lockdown in spring, is obviously irrational.

Ciao

- viole
 
Last edited:

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
I never said it is crazy. I said it is not necessary. I see that in Switzerland today. We managed to bring down Rt without any lockdown, despite having had the biggest growth pro capita. And in several cantons with huge peak, things are back to normal without sending people in house arrest, closing restaurants or, Thor forbid, schools.

And in the cantons where things are more serious, we simply need to implement already available criteria which determine who has access to that remaining bed, in case of conflict. For instance, a current idea in Switzerland is to exclude negationists from the right of ICU, in case they get corona, and there are not enough beds.

But If some nations feel more confortable and prefer to be locked down at home without maybe a real reason, they can do if they want. We simply believe that the right to be cured is just one of many rights. Including work, freedom of movement and education. And we should not sacrifice all to only one, but we should try to sort of optimize them all. In a sustainable way.

what I am saying is that this second resurgence hits most of Europe. Sweden, like Italy, France, Austria. Especially countries which started a massive and total lockdown in spring.

So, to say that Sweden experienced a second wave because it did not implement a lockdown in spring, is obviously irrational.

Ciao

- viole

My post wasn't addressed to you, it was @Twilight Hue who stated lockdown was crazy

However, lessons have been learned from the first wave. Lockdown works, i, among others, am happy to be doing something positive to help reduce the spread of the virus and consistently saving lives even if that something is doing nothing.

I have never said anything about the failure in Sweden
 
Top