The Nordic country of Sweden has been an outlier among other European countries in its approach to the coronavirus pandemic, choosing not to impose a lockdown, instead relying on its citizens to follow social distancing guidelines, with schools (for under age 16) gyms, restaurants and stores remaining open throughout the pandemic.
Has their policy worked? No. Sweden, with a population of 10 million, has 27,000 confirmed cases and a death toll of 3,300. It’s in the top 20 in the world of total number of cases, with a death toll of about 32 per 100,000, compared to 24 in the U.S. and about 9 in neighboring Denmark. Denmark imposed a strict lockdown in the early stages of the pandemic and its death rate is less than a third of Sweden’s.
Furthermore, in the wake of the mounting death toll at nursing homes and other facilities, Sweden is changing its strategy for dealing with the coronavirus in the elderly, earmarking funds to increase staff. Swedish prosecutors have even initiated a criminal investigation into one facility where over a third of its resident has died of the coronavirus. Critics of government policy say much of the deaths at facilities could have been avoided in the first place if the government had been more proactive from the start in protecting the elderly.
Several of the deaths have been in the Jewish nursing home in Stockholm, including Holocaust survivors, according to a Jerusalem Post report. Alice Humble, a Jewish resident of Gothenburg (Sweden’s 2nd largest city) told The Post that although Swedish healthcare is managing and there are enough hospital beds, she thinks “that the government has failed when it comes to protecting the elderly, especially in nursing homes. Unfortunately, we have seen it in the Jewish community as well.”
STAY UPDATED WITH BREAKING UPDATES FROM YWN VIA WHATSAPP – SIGN UP NOW Just click on this link, and you will be placed into a group.
It seems as if the Jewish community doesn’t have the same level of trust in the government as other Swedish citizens and not all relied on the government’s instructions (or lack of instructions).
Malmö Chief Rabbi Moshe David Hacohen told The Post: “We didn’t have to close our shuls, but we chose to do so way before it was even suggested,” he said. “I think it was very important to send a strong message from the beginning, also in consideration of the fact that more than half of the members of our community are over the age of 60.”
The Jewish community in Malmö, which is the third-largest city in Sweden after Stockholm and Gothenburg, has also canceled summer camps and moved its community events online.
According to Hacohen, the toll of the coronavirus in Jewish communities in Sweden varied widely according to their locations. The death toll in Stockholm has been particularly high but Malmö is in the south of the country, where there have been very few cases of the virus.
Hacohen, who is Israeli, does think that cultural differences made a difference in the government’s policies, saying that ” people here in Sweden have a very strong sense of personal responsibility. They are making an effort to follow the guidelines, and this allows everyone to still be able to go out and certain activities to continue, but in a responsible way.”
“I think that encouraging a sense of trust as opposed to a sense of fear is a positive approach. Also, it is important to remember that politicians here did not make any decision, but followed the opinion of medical experts.”
(YWN Israel Desk – Jerusalem)
Join the official YWN WhatsApp status
7 Responses
It’s way too soon to say whether Sweden’s approach has worked. Rather than cutting and pasting, I will just urge people to search euronews.com for an article by Darren McCaffrey,titled “Analysis: Is Sweden right in its handling of COVID-19?” The answer is a definite maybe.
In order to judge that Sweden’s policy failed you need to know what was their goal.
Was their goal to avoid deaths at any cost? No.
Actually, Sweden’s policy was quite successful given 3 criteria:
1) it’s stated goals (to allow as much as possible a normal life without overloading the healthcare system)
2) protecting the economy
3) considering that we are in the long run with this coronavirus
I will explain.
Unlike other countries that have virologists at the head of the COVID-19 task-force, Sweden has an epidemiologist. From the start, Sweden understood that we are in the long run with this virus and a vaccine will not be in the market before at least 12 to 18 months, and that’s optimist. Also betting that a drug will be developed in the next few months is a risky bet.
Lockdown strategies are primarily been implemented to avoid overloading the healthcare services when it’s too late. Italy, Spain, France, UK, etc are in that case. It comes at a huge economic cost but it can be argued that having overloaded healthcare services is also a serious problem and has a high cost too in lives. According to this view, if you manage to avoid overload without a lockdown it’s the best way to go.
Now, other countries like Israel, Denmark and a few others implemented a lockdown very early to avoid as many deaths as possible. It is actually questionable if this is the best approach (versus a lockdown of elderly/at risk populations for example). I am not saying it’s not but what I am saying is that these countries don’t know yet if it is was a good strategy because there might be another wave or the population might get tired of long stringent measures and start civil disobedience or because you can do a lockdown once but if you try it twice you can say goodbye to you economy.
Major death tolls in nursing homes happened in lockdown countries as well, such as France and Belgium. It’s not at all sure that a lockdown would have prevented these deaths since the major culprit in Sweden is the “industrial”size of nursing homes. If one person gets infected (which can happen even in lockdown, via nursing home personnel) the potential for spreading is much higher.
Actually, Sweden death toll is much lower than Belgium and other lockdown countries.
It’s not just “lives vs dollars”. Some epidemiologists (not financiers and economists) explain that it’s “lives vs lives”. The cost of the “Greatest Depression” ahead of us, triggered by the lockdowns will cost millions of lives (more than 100 millions deaths of hunger, according to a UN agency), stress, depression will get their toll in deaths, and also, the bad shape of the economy will lead to less investment in healthcare. I remember when I was working at GSK, I was told that Spain had decided to stop funding some life-saving pediatric vaccines due to the 2007-2009 crisis. This will happen again, Government will have to chose their priorities due to the crisis and healthcare, social and welfare services will probably be lowered in many countries.
Lastly, although they have 3300 deaths, Sweden now probably achieved a level of immunity of 30, 40, 50 %. In Stockholm, for sure, most of the population will have been exposed. Experts don’t know if the immunity last for several years but it’s quite sure that there is some immunity lasting at least a year or a bit less. Otherwise, people who have recovered would not be invited to donate blood.
In case of a second wave in in Sep-Oct-Nov, Sweden will be in the best shape to continue it’s current measures and to avoid many deaths.
Other countries, will either implement other lockdowns and destroy their economy
As I heard it, Swedish experts say it’s a marathon, not a sprint. The lockdown strategy is like sprinting at the beginning of the marathon, giving all your energy. If you need some energy afterwards, you will be depleted. Several populations will simply not agree with other lockdown. If there isn’t a widespread belief among the population that such measures are write, it will not work and the police will not be able to enforce.
Living here in Israel, I can tell you that many people have had it with the lockdown. I am not sure if another lockdown will work so well.
And if other populations agree with such re-lockdowns, they will pay an heavy price.
In the end, I bet many countries will do a partial lockdown or simple enhanced social distancing rules in case of a second wave, following the swedish example. I that happens the Swedish would just have been ahead in time.
In conclusion, it’s only at the end of the pandemic, probably next year, that we’ll be able to say if Sweden’s measures were sounder or not.
Shabbat Shalom
Well, as Mark Twain said, there are lies, there are damn lies, and there are statistics. Consider that the population of New Jersey is 8.9 million people vs 10 million for Sweden. How many Covit-19 deaths in NJ: 9,946. 3,300 for Sweden vs 9,946 in NJ: Sounds like Sweden is doing pretty good. And, no economic ruin caused by a shutdown. I’ll take Sweden, you take New Jersey! P.S. The author of the above article obviously has a political agenda.
Lets wait until this is over before deciding which way worked. The usa might have the same amount of deaths at the end just it will take a little longer to get there. Also the people alive in Sweden will be immune while the people here who survived are still in danger.
I think it is premature to simply say “no it hasn’t worked”. Sweden is on the verge of achieving herd immunity, while all the rest of the world is bracing for “second waves” of the pandemic when we re-open or in the fall. We don’t know what the death rate will look like when all is said and done.
“Has their policy worked? No. Sweden, with a population of 10 million, has 27,000 confirmed cases and a death toll of 3,300. It’s in the top 20 in the world of total number of cases, with a death toll of about 32 per 100,000, compared to 24 in the U.S. and about 9 in neighboring Denmark. Denmark imposed a strict lockdown in the early stages of the pandemic and its death rate is less than a third of Sweden’s.”
This is a highly debatable statement. While correct that Denmark’s and the US are much lower in deaths per 100,000 Sweden’s 32 per 100,000 is hardly out of the norm. As an example here are the rates per 100,000 of some other European countries that have implemented full lockdowns:
Ireland – 31
Netherlands – 33
France – 42
UK – 50
Italy – 52
Spain – 59
Andorra – 63
Belgium – 77
Additionally, the Swedish authorities have readily admitted they didnt do a good enough job protecting nursing homes and facilities like that (where the risk is high) and that has lead to more deaths than they hoped.
The last and most important point of the whole Sweden argument is this: It is a long term strategy. The point of this is that there is no fear of a 2nd wave or anything like that because they have always been open. They are reaching the end of the line with this as they achieve herd immunity. Other countries will eventually have to reopen and people will get it then. The Swedish argument is that in one year the deaths will be roughly similar in all countries but Sweden wont have a devastated economy.
There also are many alarming numbers coming out about the mental impacts of the lockdown and job losses on people. They are predicting about 40,000 extra suicides + substance abuse deaths due to this. (Roughly 2,000 per 1% unemployment increased).
The decrease in cancer visits and treatment. Many preventable things will become issues due to doctors offices being closed and the general panic that has caused people not to go.
1.4 million health care workers have been let go. Thats not going to make hospitals any better.
There are severe impacts of lockdowns with minimal (if any) long term gains.
And this craziness about staying locked down until vaccine/treatment. The absolute best case if everything works out perfectly and basically a miracle would be January 2021 for a vaccine. Which would mean absolute destruction of the country. Over 35 million people have lost their jobs in about 2 months. 6 more months is national suicide.
And thats the best case scenario. Not to scare anyone but there are many diseases we have been working on vaccines for for decades to no avail (Malaria, Chagas disease, Dengue, HIV among many others). There has never been a vaccine to a human coronavirus. Ever. Granted there was never such a concentrated effort to get it done like now so hopefully we can get one, but its far from a given.
Even though you say it hasn’t worked, It seems that Rabbi Hacohen is in favor of the country’s approach. “I think that encouraging a sense of trust as opposed to a sense of fear is a positive approach. Also, it is important to remember that politicians here did not make any decision, but followed the opinion of medical experts.”