The lockdown is second best in the Swedish context
Analysis by Gaelle Nohra, Staff Writer
April 27th, 2020
Unlike its Nordic neighbors, Sweden is one of the countries that dared not adhering to social distancing measures and not looking at a government-mandated lockdown as the best option available. According to the Business Insider, this controversial strategy has now led the country to reach a number of deaths almost ten times the numbers in all of Denmark, Finland, Iceland, and Norway.
But what if social distancing isn’t as promising as it exhibits and it turns out that the lockdown tale was really an overrated one?
Labeled as one of the world’s trending topics, going into lockdown might be the optimal recourse for governments to flatten curves – economic growth curves included. Implications resulting from a freezing economic activity stand as a main argument justifying why some countries insist on maintaining an unrestricted public life. But the main point advanced by Swedish Foreign Minister Ann Linde in a separate interview was the decreasing marginal efficiency of the lockdown, especially when people start developing behavioral fatigue, leaving idle any imposed distancing policy. Sweden’s approach even includes allowing exposure to the disease so that herd immunity is achieved. In simpler terms, the strategy envisioned by the government is keeping social contact so that people catch the virus, become immune to the infection, and render transmission for new individuals less probable.
Having surpassed 16,500 cases and 2,000 deaths as of April 23rd, 20 Swedish epidemiologists released an article in Dagens Nyehter (Today’s News) in which they urge national authorities to alter their stance as they believe the adopted strategy is prone to failure with no existing vaccine. The group of scientists also warned of reaching a stage analogous to the Italian scenario.
Rationality in the Swedish behavior – Initiated Vs Dictated restrictions
But Ms. Linde’s perspective suggests to broaden of the sphere of examination and regard the pandemic not as a three or four months matter, yet as a timeless event for which rigid, and fatigue-independent solutions should be provided. The COVID-19 timeline is likely to settle for a considerably long period, this is why sustainability in decisions is more important than severity in measures, and this is why Sweden has called its citizens to take responsibility for their actions, even if no serious measures were enforced. Dr. Anders Tengell, chief epidemiologist at Sweden’s Public Health Agency and author of the Swedish coping strategy, stated to Euronews that voluntary restrictions initiated by people themselves without referral to the government are more likely to survive, which is another reason why the Swedish behavior should be perceived as a rational one. When restrictions autonomously emerge from citizens, this indicates that there is a common sense of understanding and a consensual agreement on how the problem ought to be solved. Anders Wallensten, assistant state epidemiologist added that “If you close society completely, there is more stress on the economy. This is probably more acceptable by the people in general”. This further suggests that keeping the decisions in the hands of citizens will ensure a better environment for the issue to clear instead of having the government dictating rules, especially that according to Government Offices of Sweden, Swedish citizens entertain a high level of trust with their government agencies and are likely to follow any advice given. Adding to this and as outlined by Financial Times, it is unfair to describe Sweden’s behavior as indifferent with the government continuously engaging in deliberations with expert authorities.
As for the argument of Italy, Ms. Linde clearly stated that it is inconceivable to compare the performance of countries surrounded by heterogeneous circumstances. Differences in demographical structure as well as the culture of each are crucial components that need to be addressed when evaluating the efficient means through which the COVID-19 phase can be overcome.
Herd immunity on the verge of realization
Despite the sharp criticism directed to Sweden, Dr.Tengell uncovered the recent updates of his strategy through his statement to CNBC on April 21st affirming that in major regions of the country, the effect of herd immunity started appearing with almost 20% of the population gaining immunity.
Is that a success?
Even though Sweden is managing to prove wrong most of the predictions, success remains a big word. The realization of a herd immunity will never be able to eliminate the tragedies that are still escalating among aging groups. A Radio Sweden article revealed that almost a third of deaths in Stockholm are taking place in nursing home residents for the elderly. Another reason is the time factor, although the considerable efforts invested by governments at forecasting the upcoming numbers, no country until know is aware of its certain position on the curve and whether it is behind or beyond the peak. We also need to reset the context in which a Swedish success is defined, was the Swedish community looking for alleviated economic disruptions before a flattened infection curve? Or instead placing lives as the primary concern?
Lastly, it is worth mentioning that central authorities are no longer looking for successes, it is no question the disease proved the minimal capabilities of the greatest worldwide entities. Consequently governments are no longer looking for gains, but rather lesser losses.
References:
https://www.government.se/articles/2020/04/strategy-in-response-to-the-covid-19-pandemic/
https://www.ft.com/content/5eb0a90b-ceb5-4441-9456-e30f9a2a7028
https://www.euronews.com/2020/04/12/is-sweden-s-covid-19-strategy-working
https://www.euronews.com/2020/04/22/sweden-s-coronavirus-strategy-right-or-wrong