As a lot of the world shut down early within the Covid pandemic, Sweden remained open. The nation’s strategy was controversial, with some calling it “the Swedish experiment”. But nearly two-and-a-half years after the pandemic started, what can we are saying right this moment in regards to the outcomes of this “experiment”?
First, let’s recap what Sweden’s strategy regarded like. The nation largely caught to its pandemic plan, initially developed for use within the occasion of an influenza pandemic. Instead of lockdowns, the objective was to attain social distancing via public well being suggestions.
Swedes have been inspired to make money working from home if potential and limit travel inside the nation. In addition, individuals aged 70 or older have been requested to restrict social contact, and folks with Covid symptoms have been requested to self-isolate. The objective was to guard the aged and different high-risk teams whereas slowing down the unfold of the virus so the healthcare system wouldn’t turn into overwhelmed.
As the variety of instances surged, some restrictions have been imposed. Public occasions have been restricted to a maximum of 50 people in March 2020, and eight people in November 2020. Visits to nursing properties were banned and upper secondary schools closed. Primary colleges did, nevertheless, stay open all through the pandemic.
Face masks weren’t advisable for most of the people in the course of the first wave, and solely in certain situations later within the pandemic.
During spring 2020, the reported Covid demise charge in Sweden was among the many highest in the world. Neighbouring international locations that applied fast lockdown measures, comparable to Norway and Denmark, have been faring a lot better, and Sweden obtained harsh criticism for its lax strategy.
But defenders of the Swedish strategy claimed it could pay off in the long term, arguing that draconian measures weren’t sustainable and that the pandemic was a marathon, not a dash.
So did Sweden’s strategy pay off?
Let’s have a look at extra mortality as a key instance. This metric takes the whole variety of deaths and compares this determine with pre-pandemic ranges, capturing the broader results of the pandemic and accounting for incorrect reporting of Covid deaths.
Although Sweden was hit exhausting by the primary wave, its complete excess deaths in the course of the first two years of the pandemic have been truly amongst the lowest in Europe.
The choice to maintain major colleges open additionally paid off. The incidence of extreme acute Covid in kids has been low, and a latest research confirmed that Swedish kids didn’t endure the learning loss seen in lots of different international locations.
In this gentle, the Swedish strategy has gone from being referred to as “a disaster” and “cautionary tale” to a “Scandinavian success”. But to attract any related conclusions, it’s essential we dig somewhat additional into how Swedes navigated the pandemic.
Notably, any perceptions that folks in Sweden went on with their on a regular basis lives in the course of the pandemic as if nothing had modified are unfaithful.
In a survey by Sweden’s Public Health Agency from the spring of 2020, more than 80% of Swedes reported they’d adjusted their behaviour, for instance by practising social distancing, avoiding crowds and public transport, and dealing from dwelling. Aggregated cellular information confirmed that Swedes diminished their journey and mobility during the pandemic.
Swedes weren’t compelled to take motion in opposition to the unfold of the virus, however they did so anyway. This voluntary strategy won’t have labored in every single place, however Sweden has a historical past of excessive belief in authorities, and folks tend to comply with public well being suggestions.
It’s additionally tough to check Sweden’s outcomes to these of nations exterior of Scandinavia which have very completely different social and demographic situations.
Strengths and weaknesses
Despite the advantages of avoiding lockdown, the Swedish response was not flawless. In late 2020, the Corona Commission, an unbiased committee appointed by the federal government to judge the Swedish pandemic response, found the federal government and the Public Health Agency had largely failed of their ambition to guard the aged.
At that point, nearly 90% of those that had died with Covid in Sweden have been 70 or older. Half of those individuals have been residing in a care dwelling, and just below 30% have been receiving dwelling assist providers.
Indeed, quite a few issues inside aged care in Sweden grew to become evident in the course of the pandemic. Structural shortcomings comparable to inadequate staffing ranges left nursing properties unprepared and ill-equipped to deal with the scenario.
In its closing report on the pandemic response, the Corona Commission concluded that harder measures ought to have been taken early in the pandemic, comparable to quarantine for these coming back from high-risk areas and a short lived ban on entry to Sweden.
The fee did, nevertheless, state that the no-lockdown strategy was basically cheap, and that the state ought to by no means intrude with the rights and freedoms of its residents greater than completely mandatory. The fee additionally supported the choice to maintain major colleges open.
By comparability, the Corona Commission in Norway, one of many few international locations in Europe with decrease extra mortality than Sweden, concluded that though the dealing with of the pandemic in Norway was usually good, kids have been hit hard by lockdowns and the authorities didn’t adequately defend them.
The focus of Sweden’s strategy was to scale back the unfold of the virus, but additionally to think about different elements of public well being and defend freedom and elementary rights. While the Swedish strategy stays controversial, right this moment most international locations are taking related approaches to the persevering with pandemic.
Looking again, it appears a bit unjust that the nation that adopted its pre-pandemic plan was the nation accused of conducting an experiment on its inhabitants. Perhaps Sweden as a substitute ought to be thought of the management group, whereas the remainder of the world underwent an experiment.
Emma Frans, Senior analysis specialist, C8 Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet.
This article is republished from The Conversation below a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
