threrf23 wrote:claycarver wrote:reload141 wrote:
I know what Sweden is doing is against the grain but in 2 years when all the deaths from corona and suicide (due to loss of business and unable to support family, domestic violence deaths because of lockdown etc) are added up vs other countries and how they fair as a country after compared to everyone else.
They will either come out of this looking incredibly stupid or the only country who truly "survived" this....
In Australia they are talking about everyone having a mandatory app to track your location, seems absolutely ridiculous and invades our privacy hopefully they realise that as people are TOTALLY against it... except my wife who doesn't really leave home unless to drop off and pick up kids and gym, shop etc haha! But she's Russian so maybe she's used to this sort of thing?
Sweden Says Controversial Virus Strategy Proving Effective
https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/sweden-says-controversial-virus-strategy-proving-effective/ar-BB12TP18?li=AAggFp4
Sweden (and Scandinavia as a whole) has a very low population density (30% lower than the US), and even Glasgow has a very modest population density (1/8 of NYC's population density). Going by that MSN link, they also have a highly competent and prepared health care system that doesn't stand to get overwhelmed easily. Median age isn't extremely high, and relatively speaking, I'm not sure how many foreign visitors the country attracts? This means that they can probably get away with things that other countries cannot get away with.
Sweden says that its strategy is working, but that depends on the end goal. That MSN link points out that while Sweden has not faced an overwhelming number of deaths, it has seen far more deaths than it's neighboring countries. It has also seen many more deaths than the state of Arizona (similar to Sweden in terms of population and population density if not population spread). And the virus spreads exponentially, so deaths should continue to pile up in the near future.
So if the goal is to buy time and minimize deaths until a vaccine is introduced or a treatment is figured out, then it is failing badly. But if the goal is literally just to flatten the curve to prevent hospitals from being overwhelmed, and is based on an assumption that the virus cannot be stopped and only slowed, then their approach is probably the right approach - for them.
They acknowledge that they should have done more for the elderly, especially the nursing homes, as that accounts for a massive percentage of their deaths. So, if we wanted to learn from them, that would be a good thing to consider.
As to the health care, we certainly didn't have enough resources to cope earlier but as those resources catch up we should be able to handle a larger surge.
As you say, our country is diverse and this likely wouldn't work in some states...or more likely, it wound't work in some cities. But many states can and should look at what's working in countries like Sweden for best practices.
I don't see how it's possible to go another month without it taking an incredible toll on the economy and household incomes. We can't ignore models for opening up in other countries just because it's a change from what we've been doing so far.
