Quote:
Originally Posted by russellw
Happy to re-examine them. By their own admission, Sweden has failed to achieve anything close to herd immunity, in part because those with mild cases or who are asymptomatic appear to either not develop antibodies or only very low levels which does not appear (as we discussed a couple of days ago) to provide actual protection against infection in the mid term at least.
Even those with more severe cases who do develop antibodies do not necessarily have actual immunity from the limited research to date and given that the whole premise of the herd immunity approach is predicated on the assumption that infection = immunity from future infection then if that is not the case, the theory fails.
What we do know about Sweden compared with the similarly sized Switzerland is that while their CMR and test percentages are similar; Sweden has had more than twice the number of cases per 100k of population (811 v 402) and two and a half times the number of deaths per 100k (57 v 22) that Switzerland has.
Likewise, Denmark, Norway and Finland are even lower at 241 , 54 and 37 cases per 100k respectively and their death rates are 10, 5 and 6 per 100k.
Nothing I've seen thus far is going to convince me that the Swedish experimentara has been anything other than a dismal fel.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by prydey
And yet it continues to get referenced  |
It's clear the 'Sweden response' has not worked as their authorities had hoped, at least not yet.
I believe people like the idea of the 'Sweden response' because of the idea of no strict lock down.
It is well documented the Swedes trust their government and public officials more than most other countries in the world. So they will do what is asked of them during a crisis such as Covid 19. No need to threaten sanctions to gain compliance.
Countries like USA and Britain have historically low trust in their governments and officials. So the 'Sweden response' could not work in those countries. The 'Sweden response' requires Swedes!