Sweden

L

Lexingtongue

Guest
Often heralded as doing things the right way by some of the badly misguided and downright disingenuous on here are looking to bring in local lockdowns apparently. Discuss.

 


Their deaths pro rata arent as good as we're led to believe.
It does depend which set of figures you stumble across tbf.
Hard to compare countries as everyone seems to have a different recording system
 
Their deaths pro rata arent as good as we're led to believe.
It does depend which set of figures you stumble across tbf.
Hard to compare countries as everyone seems to have a different recording system
Their population density probably helped them and, even considering that, their numbers aren't as great as some try and persuade us they are.
 
Their population density probably helped them and, even considering that, their numbers aren't as great as some try and persuade us they are.

They are very poor compared to their neighbouring countries. I suppose the only saving grace is you could still argue that long-term, they may be better off with lower rates of lockdown-related morbidity and mortality, but that's a long shot.
 
In reality the uk lockdown was closer to Sweden’s than say france or Spain . What I dont get is the use of Sweden as an example fir uk to have less measures....that only results in eventually more deaths and nhs even more overwhelmed

Sweden does have underlying advantages over uk in terms of higher single occupancy homes, far better financial support (as a standard) , greater belief / support in their state

Sweden has done far worse than Germany, Norway, Denmark, Finland....
 
Their population density probably helped them and, even considering that, their numbers aren't as great as some try and persuade us they are.

If they’ve taken a different approach without drastic measures how could their figures be anything but high and therefore not great?

The argument is without the measures we brought in they are not currently in a worse position.
 

The headline is factual but at the same time quite misleading - their death count for the last 3 months or so has been incredibly low (rolling average is approx 2 a day) and as of yet, shows no sign of rising.

 
If they’ve taken a different approach without drastic measures how could their figures be anything but high and therefore not great?

The argument is without the measures we brought in they are not currently in a worse position.
Except that they are in relation to comparable Scandinavian countries.
 
Sweden took measures they believed were better at a time when no one actually understood what the impact was of lockdown and it’s impact on the economy.
Unsure how there economy is compared to us and the debt they have had to take on.
They may recover financially quicker than us but with a higher COVID impact.
Undoubtedly there population isn’t as packed as here, so must affect infection rates.
It’s still too early to criticise them compared to us, the bigger picture will be in 24 months time and how they have recovered economically compared to the rest.
 

Back
Top