Politicians are scrambling to find a balance of sanctions that harass residents eager to derail the economy or re-engage for the holidays without squeezing the economy.
“The key question now is to decide what is the best package of policies to achieve the maximum policy for health benefits at the least cost,” said Thomas Hale, an associate professor of public policy at Oxford University. “However, this ‘magic formula’ probably differs in different countries and populations, and over time the virus grows or reappears.”
It is a complex and ever-changing calculation, and each country is different.
But three countries, Finland, Norway and Denmark, have outperformed in recent months, according to a CNN analysis. The analysis, which looks at data from Oxford University and Johns Hopkins University, found that while the three countries implemented some of the lightest joint controls on the continent, they still managed to keep daily deaths low – for less than one per million. – A period of three months between 1st September to 30th November.
Denmark may end in success. In late November, for the first time since May, the Danish mortality rate exceeded one million, Johns Hopkins data shows. On Friday, the number of newly registered cases peaked at 4,000. Earlier in the week, officials lifted sanctions and announced a nationwide lockdown aimed at curbing the growing infection.
But what was the reason for the success of the three countries in the fall?
Denmark, Finland and Norway reacted quickly to a slight increase in infection, which would allow them to almost eradicate the virus during the summer and cope with the stronghold of autumn, according to interviews with six scholars. Clear guidance and a willingness of residents to comply are also key, experts said. And increasing the capacity for testing and contact-finding caps and giving sick leave to help localize any outbreaks.
How to be the best (or how to do Finland)
Finland had the lowest average per capita infection and death in Europe in recent months, Johns Hopkins data shows. It manages to contain local outrage by sticking to some of the most relaxed restrictions on the continent. Internal movement was not restricted to those who needed to be able to walk face to face at school and at work, and wearing a mask was not mandatory.
“There’s nothing magical about doing this – we just have a practical approach,” said Pecca Nurti, an epidemiology professor at Tempe University who has worked for public health agencies for more than 25 years.
Cultural, political and geographical factors – such as lower population density, less travel and greater trust in the government – were helpful, but it was the work of the country’s health agencies that made the difference, Newrty said.
During the summer, Finland created “trial-true field epidemic practices,” Nurti said: testing, isolating, contacting, contacting and preventing the spread of diarrhea locally.
Health ministry figures show that the average daily test volume has nearly quadrupled from 2,900 samples in May, according to health ministry figures. In late November, Finnish laboratories performed 23,000 tests a day or 90% of current capacity.
Finland used the summer to prepare for the new wave by responding with preventive measures instead of the la kadown, said Mika Salminen, director of health protection at the Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare. Banning international travel for most of the summer has boosted Finland’s success in the fall, he said.
The government provided financial support to help keep people alone and at home. Salman said thousands of people who were exposed could be separated because the government offered compensation for their lost income.
“It’s not like we didn’t have an outbreak,” Nurtie said. Finland had local flare-ups and super spreader events, but local health officials, coordinated by the central government, were able to include them using real-time data, he said. But as the number of cases increases, it becomes increasingly difficult to identify all transmission sources, Nuorti said.
If the situation worsens, Salmin said, a complete lockdown cannot be ruled out.
Norway route
Around the border, Norwegian officials focused on addressing the most vulnerable people.
Norway’s spring lockdown was the hardest in Scandinavia. The country’s oil and gas industry was able to provide a large economic buffer to soften the impact on people’s purses, but the government soon faced a growing mental health crisis and officials changed their sanctions.
Knowing what to do, doing what you are told
Three experts interviewed by CNN said a key factor in Denmark’s initial success was clear and consistent messages about the risks and the need for behavioral change. They attribute the country’s achievement to a history of mutual trust between its residents and the government.
Peterson said two factors determine whether people behave to avoid infection. There is an inspiration: do they worry about getting infected. The second is whether they know exactly what to do to prevent the spread of the disease, which relies on communications from health officials and politicians, Petersen said.
An official leading the response to the Danish epidemic echoed the issue.
“Handling the epidemic is a humane act,” said Soren Brostrum, general director of the Danish Health Authority.
Human behavior helps spread disease, and its control is where the solutions come from, Brostrom said. Physical distance, not medicine or vaccines, everyone hopes there is a “medical magic bullet,” he said.
Brostem spoke to CNN before the recent increase in cases in Denmark. But at a press conference on Wednesday, Prime Minister Matt Frederickson addressed the deteriorating situation in the country.
“In the end, only one thing works against Corona,” Frederickson said. “This is if you and I and we all take responsibility for ourselves and each other.”
Calibration of restrictions
But experts told CNN that people going into epidemic fatigue are more reluctant to follow the strict new measures.
“In the long run, constant social distance is not sustainable,” said Brussel Strum. The country needs adequate controls to control the epidemic.
“I think we think we’ve really struck a good balance in this country.”
Even in Denmark, a mistake can have a detrimental effect on trust and then compliance, experts said.
But the government’s initiative shook Danish unity, Petersen said.
“Right now, we’re seeing more polarization. We’re seeing less support for the government’s strategy. And the question we’re having here in Denmark is, ‘What will be the outcome for the epidemic next month?'” Peters said.
Recommendations against the rules
Danish authorities are preparing to impose tougher measures when there is a standoff, unlike in Sweden, where officials first took a light hand to try and shake off the epidemic.
Roland Cao, a professor of veterinary epidemiology at the University of Edinburgh, said there was a greater emphasis on voluntary action without the extreme ‘shutdown’ measures imposed in Denmark (spring in you).
“Other Nordic countries are much larger than the rest of Europe,” Cao said. “They had a hard lockdown in the spring and did it sooner.”
Cao said Sweden’s cases improved in June because of this approach, while most other European countries were recovering, inevitably. And in November, Sweden was struck by a nationwide rage, despite having a higher average tight score than other Scandinavian countries.
“When the Covid-19 arrived in our country, we all agreed to take responsibility,” L’Fave said. “This fall, many of us have ignored the advice and recommendations.”
When it comes to a disease that spreads very fast, Professor Cao of Edinburgh said that very small differences in how things are done can make all the difference in the world.
How CNN reported this story
For this story, we sought to investigate the relationship between government sanctions and Covid-19 deaths during the period from September 1 to November 30, when many countries were on the verge of a resurgence.
To do this, we analyzed Johns Hopkins University data to calculate the daily new deaths of every million inhabitants in 31 European countries. For example, as a result of delays in reporting on the weekends or a change in data collection methods that would lead to a sudden increase in daily statistics, we have used the accounting moving average for data diversification. We have used new deaths instead of new cases because the criteria for reporting deaths are more consistent across countries than in cases, which are part of the amount of testing.
We then plotted a new mortality rate against each country’s strict score, which we found using Oxford University’s Strengthening Index. The index scores the Covid-19 response measure of countries on a scale of one to 100.
We have analyzed the 27 members of the European Union, the United Kingdom and the free trade countries (Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland). We then excluded Liechtenstein because strict scores were not available for that country.
After interviews with experts, we define countries with the lowest infection rates, with one or less deaths per million inhabitants. We have defined less restricted countries, such as those with a stinginess score below 60, because at the time we had data on the lockdown status of European countries, according to the data associated with data, the minimum score for countries with full low down in October and November.
We focused on Finland, Norway and Denmark as they were the only countries that consistently maintained low mortality rates (one in a million or less) during the period from 1 September to 30 November. Other countries also maintained low mortality rates, but we did not focus on them because they either enforced a strict lockdown (Ireland) or had a high stringency score (Cyprus).
The story was contributed by Antonia Mortensen, Samantha Tapfumanei, Nina Avmova, Sharon Braithwaite and Amy Cassidy.
.
