I think we can reasonably speculate that Sweden is only testing patients that are already symptomatic, if not clinically diagnosed.

"Sweden has 265 reported COVID-19 deaths per million population. That is somewhat higher than in the U.S. (204 per million) but lower than the number in many other EU countries."

They do have more old people, however.

"As elsewhere, Swedish COVID-19 deaths are overwhelmingly among the frail elderly and those with serious chronic disease. Over half of Swedish deaths are in nursing homes. Of those who died, 90 percent were over 70 and half were over 86, with just 1 percent younger than 50.

It is ironic that half of the Swedish deaths are in people over the age of 86. Life expectancy in Sweden is 83, whereas it's 79 in the U.S., so it isn't surprising that there are relatively more frail elderly in Sweden. Out of every 100,000 births, about 10,000 more Swedes are still alive at age 85 than Americans are, so Sweden's slightly higher COVID-19 death rate, compared with ours, mostly reflects the fact that a larger percentage of Swedes live well past 79."

GAC06 said:

---

It's becoming increasingly obvious that for most of the country we have vastly over reacted

---

Agree.

DadHammer said:

---

Sweden has now seen a drop in active cases. No massive rise in deaths as predicted be the media.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/sweden/

---

There are 3 countries that directly neighbor Sweden.

Deaths per million as of a couple of days ago:

Sweden 265
Denmark 83
Finland 40
Norway 38

Who knows what the stats will say in a year but right now there is not a debate about which of these 4 has sacrificed their citizens to not be 100% shutdown. And for what? Their economy?

Quote:

---

Nonetheless, data released from the country's central bank and a leading Swedish think tank show that the economy will be just as badly hit as its European neighbors, if not worse.

Sweden's central bank, the Riksbank, gave two possible scenarios for the economic outlook in 2020, which it said "depend on how long the spread of infection continues and on how long the restrictions implemented to slow it down are in place." Both possible economic outcomes are bleak.

In the first scenario (scenario A in the chart below), gross domestic product contracts by 6.9% in 2020 before rebounding to grow 4.6% in 2021. In a more negative prediction (scenario B), GDP could contract by 9.7% and a recovery could be slower with the economy growing 1.7% in 2021.

---

Quote:

---

The International Monetary Fund predicted earlier in April that Germany and the U.K. will see their economies contract by 6.5% and 7% this year, respectively. France is expected to see a 7.2% contraction, Spain an 8% contraction and for Italy to see its economy shrink 9.1%.

Sweden's neighbors Finland and Denmark, which also imposed lockdowns, are also expected to see their economies contract by 6% and 6.5%, respectively.

---

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/30/coronavirus-sweden-economy-to-contract-as-severely-as-the-rest-of-europe.html

Quote:

---

Who knows what the stats will say in a year but right now there is not a debate about which of these 4 has sacrificed their citizens to not be 100% shutdown. And for what? Their economy?

---

Just the mere language that you use tells us that you have are totally oblivious to what a lockdown does to society. It's not "just" the economy, it's life itself. It's more than money--it's about physcial survival (can't eat if you can't buy food) and mental health (no job, nothing to do, confined to a small space is not good for mental health). You can't evaluate how a government is handling coronavirus without taking everything into consideration, and that means more than deaths per million, R factors, or any other viral spread statistic you care to name.

Quote:

---

Just the mere language that you use tells us that you have are totally oblivious to what a lockdown does to society.

---

Oh, stop. No it doesn't.

And this board doesn't need to be anymore bombastic projections unto other posters

UTExan said:

---

Sweden projected Covid 19 deaths now back around 10,000.

https://covid19.healthdata.org/sweden

---

And the model whiffed right out of the gate, predicting 404 deaths for May 2nd through 5th.

Reality is 201.

Does the post below yours count as a "bombastic" projection? Or does that only work in one direction.

Keegan99 said:

---

UTExan said:

---

Sweden projected Covid 19 deaths now back around 10,000.

https://covid19.healthdata.org/sweden

---

And the model whiffed right out of the gate, predicting 404 deaths for May 2nd through 5th.

Reality is 201.

---

It'd obviously be great news for everyone if the numbers stay in the lower third or so of their projected range.


I'd be cautious drawing conclusions from a few days data, especially weekends.

They only reported 16 deaths on Saturday and 10 on Sunday. It was 90 on Monday, which was near their median projection of 102.

The previous Sunday, Sweden only reported 2 deaths. It jumped to 80 on Monday and increased daily up to 124 on Thursday.

It'll probably even out that they're still below the median projections, but they'll likely do some "catching up" as the week goes on.

TheAngelFlight said:

---

twk said:

---

Does the post below yours count as a "bombastic" projection? Or does that only work in one direction.

---

There's a difference between posting a link to a model and what you said. And you know that.

I'm all for posting models, and I'm for honest discussion and critique of the models.

---

I reiterate my prior comments. You can post all the models you like, but that is only dealing with, at most, one half of the equation. You can't answer the original question posed in the OP by focusing solely on how many contract or die directly from the illness.

Honestly this seems like a question that can only really be debated after the fact, not en media res.

Meanwhile, in Russia:

"It is rare for doctors to fall from windows in Russia, but Shulepov was the third health worker to fall out of a window in the country in the past two weeks."

Interesting

DadHammer said:

---

Nashville is very spread out, Stockholm is not.

Maybe that explains it?

---

It is based on percent change, so its relative to each city's baseline.

HotardAg07 said:

---

Interesting

---

Saying those graphs are the same or similar is just stupid.

Beware of Doug said:

---

HotardAg07 said:

---

Interesting

---

Saying those graphs are the same or similar is just stupid.

---

It doesn't say the graphs are the same. It says the two cities have nearly the exact same adjustment in driving, walking, and transit use, and they're at most a 2% difference from each other.

twk said:

---

Quote:

---

Who knows what the stats will say in a year but right now there is not a debate about which of these 4 has sacrificed their citizens to not be 100% shutdown. And for what? Their economy?

---

Just the mere language that you use tells us that you have are totally oblivious to what a lockdown does to society. It's not "just" the economy, it's life itself. It's more than money--it's about physcial survival (can't eat if you can't buy food) and mental health (no job, nothing to do, confined to a small space is not good for mental health). You can't evaluate how a government is handling coronavirus without taking everything into consideration, and that means more than deaths per million, R factors, or any other viral spread statistic you care to name.

---

First, I hope everybody that reads this is doing as well as possible under these trying times. I'm sorry if my statement came off as callous in regards to our close to total lock down that most of us have experienced these past few weeks. I know it's stressful for everybody in different ways.

I was responding to this statement

Quote:

---

No massive rise in deaths as predicted be the media.

---

So I showed that Sweden does indeed have a massive difference in deaths as compared to their neighbors and then I cited a couple of GDP predictions that show Sweden has been devastated economically just as much as their neighbors. (In fairness, he was certainly talking about a non-existent recent massive rise in deaths that didn't happen).

As to your point, there is no doubt being able to make the CHOICE to stay home or roam freely has a massive effect on most people's state of mind. I can't imagine being locked down in Wuhan for months in a tiny apartment or for weeks in a place like NYC wondering how you are going to survive economically.

Sweden's economy is fairing way better than its neighbors in lockdown. Where people are getting this false information?

According to this source, Sweden's numbers are clearly superior:

Quote:

---

Personal spending in Denmark is down 66 percent and in Finland it stands at 70 percent, compared to only 30 percent in Sweden. Unemployment claims in Norway are rising four times as fast as those in Sweden.

---

It is also expected to rebound much faster as well. Also Norway and Finland are not counting the elderly deaths the same as Sweden lowering their death numbers dramatically.

A little more on Sweden's economic situation:

Quote:

---

Official figures show the country's economy shrank by just 0.3pc in the first three months of 2020, a far smaller decline than most forecasters and its central bank expected. The Riksbank had pencilled in a drop of between 0.8pc and 1.8pc.

The smaller scale of the fall contrasts with record slumps seen elsewhere across the Eurozone over the quarter as governments imposed much more stringent measures. France's economy tumbled 5.8pc, Italy's 4.7pc and Spain's by 5.2pc, while the Eurozone's output overall sank by 3.8pc - the worst decline in its history. The figures are likely to be far worse in the second quarter as lockdowns grind on.

---

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2020/05/05/light-touch-sweden-suffers-smaller-growth-hit-coronavirus/

No doubt, the Swedish economy will suffer from the huge drop in worldwide demand, but they clearly have fared better than everyone else. If the US had taken a similar approach, it would have been beneficial for not only the US, but the entire world economy.

Their biggest failure on the health front, as mentioned, has been in nursing homes, which are proving troublesome everywhere (ask New York about that). While their numbers don't look as good as their closest neighbors, they are in line with much of Europe. It is fair to point out that the Swedes didn't just stand around and do nothing, but the point is that the government took some calculated risks (such as keeping elementary schools and restaurants open) that appear not to have resulted in a health catastrophe by any objective measure. You can argue that they fared worse than their closest neighbors, but they managed to avoid overwhelming their health care system while minimizing the damage to the economy.

fig96 said:

---

Beware of Doug said:

---

HotardAg07 said:

---

Interesting

---

Saying those graphs are the same or similar is just stupid.

---

It doesn't say the graphs are the same. It says the two cities have nearly the exact same adjustment in driving, walking, and transit use, and they're at most a 2% difference from each other.

---

Look at the driving line, Sweden bottoms out at around ~33%, Nashville at 70%. Just because the lines might intersect at a point doesn't mean they are similar. At some point in the last few years I attained the same muscle mass of Randy Macho Man Savage. It doesn't mean we are similar, it just means he has been decomposing for 9 years.


Also, I have worked in both towns, and the entire comparing of Nashville and Stockholm is just silly. One is on archipelago which changes a lot of how you travel in and out of the city. Sweden also goes through a big transformation of activity from March to May as they go from no day light and freezing, to a ton of day light. Also comparing a European country and Tennessee on biking habits is like comparing the swimming habits of a duck and a cinder block.