Chaplinsk suggests learning from Sweden without insurance: it has saved many lives

Analysis of the data now shows that despite the widely criticized strategy chosen, the death rate from COVID-19 in Sweden is even lower than in many European countries that have introduced a strict quarantine.

Sweden: 18 out of 26 countries

Until other countries introduced quarantines, Sweden relied heavily on advising the public to adhere to social distancing, good hygiene and other rules that prevented the closure of schools, restaurants or shops, thus preserving the economy.

True, according to Reuters, which released the data, infectious disease specialists caution that these results should not be interpreted as evidence that the quarantine was unnecessary. Still, experts acknowledge that the results warrant further investigation.

Preliminary data from the European Union (EU) statistical agency Eurostat, compiled by Reuters, shows that in 2020, deaths in Sweden increased by 7.7% compared to the average of the previous four years. By comparison, countries that have repeatedly introduced strict quarantines, such as Spain and Belgium, recorded the so-called death toll of 18.1%, respectively. and 16.2 percent.

Up to 21 of the 30 countries for which statistics were provided had a higher death toll than Sweden. However, Sweden has fared much worse in fighting the pandemic than other Scandinavian countries. In Denmark, for example, the death toll was only 1.5% and in Finland 1%. Norway had no death toll in 2020, writes Reuters.

In the mortality analysis, which was adjusted to account for differences between the countries examined, in terms of age groups and seasonality-related mortality, Sweden ranked 18th out of 26. The highest mortality rates were recorded in Poland, Spain and Belgium.

Sweden’s chief epidemiologist Anders Tengell, a previously unknown figure who later became an international celebrity by choosing Sweden’s pandemic strategy, told Reuters that he thought the available data cast doubt on the usefulness of the quarantine.

“I think people will probably think very carefully about these full closures, how good they really are. They may have a short-term impact, but in the face of a pandemic, there are growing doubts, “Tengell told Reuters, who had received death threats and bouquets of thanks for his decision not to impose a strict quarantine.

It was not a ban, but a means of dialogue with citizens

Sweden’s better results were not much of a surprise to infectious disease specialist Professor Saulius Čaplinsk, who from the first days wondered how the Swedes who had chosen a different strategy to fight a pandemic without quarantine were going to succeed.

“Many different myths about Sweden circulated. It is not true, for example, that there were no restrictions in Sweden. The Swedes themselves, society itself, realized the need to be careful: those who could work from home did so, spending less time in public places, etc.

In other words, the Swedish example shows: it is not about declaring one quarantine or another, closing one city or another, moving between municipalities, etc., strictly requiring the use of masks in the open air even when walking alone, or not leaving clear educational communication, why behave in one way or another, why vaccination is recommended. Sweden did not follow the path of prohibition and control, although there was also control, but the path of monitoring and dialogue with the public, for which I constantly campaign ”, Professor S. Čaplinskas told the Delfi portal.

Andrius Kavaliūnas, a Lithuanian epidemiologist working in that country, told the Delfi portal a little earlier that certain bans apply in Sweden.

“Depending on the epidemiological situation, various measures have been and are being applied in Sweden, both mandatory requirements and recommendations. In particular, it must be emphasized that ministers and politicians in Sweden have limited powers.

“Ministerial governance” and interference in the areas entrusted to the services and their activities is prohibited, since here it is customary to have specialists.

Second, expert agencies and services, including the Public Health Agency, cannot impose mandatory requirements. The strongest word in his speech are recommendations, “said the epidemiologist.

You can read the full interview with epidemiologist A. Kavaliūnas here.

Quarantine criteria must be different

According to S. Čaplinskas, the fact that there were fewer excessive restrictions in Sweden affected not only the country’s economy, not only the psychological health of the population, social activities, but also other health care services. Thus, there were fewer neglected chronic diseases, fewer excessive deaths.

“Previous research has already shown an increase in excess non-covid deaths in virtually all European countries where such research has been conducted,” said the professor.

S. Čaplinskas also recalled that the World Health Organization (WHO) has emphasized from the beginning: the quarantine is only a postponement of the solution of the problem in order to buy time to prepare to solve the problem.

When asked whether it would be logical to introduce quarantine in Lithuania now, S. Čaplinskas replied: “I think now we should listen to what the Prime Minister says. She says that quarantine is now more understood as a kind of legal concept for the government to make one decision or another.

Quarantine decisions should take more into account the ICU bed occupancy rate: whether or not they are sufficient to save lives when needed, rather than making an automatic decision immediately: whether 300 beds are already available in hospitals. Busy, so we’ll start by introducing some restrictions. I don’t think such an approach is very forward thinking. “

He noted other aspects

Other health experts believe that interpreting data on overdose deaths showing that the situation in Sweden is better than in most European Union countries is risky, ignoring important differences.

“We all have to be very careful when interpreting deaths from COVID-19, no matter what the solution is, no one is perfect.

They question whether Sweden’s strategy has really been a success, “said Mark Woolhouse, professor of infectious disease epidemiology at the University of Edinburgh in the UK.

Keith Neal, professor of infectious diseases at the University of Nottingham in the UK, also suggested interpreting the data with caution. He cited many important factors such as the age and general health of the population, average household size, and whether the country has metropolitan transportation hubs.

In Sweden, people over 80 years in 2019. at the beginning of the year was 5.1 percent. – less than the EU average of 5.8%, but higher than in Norway and Denmark.

The Swedish population is also generally healthier than the EU average. Life expectancy here in 2018 was 82.6 years compared to 81 years. In the European Union.

Despite harsh criticism of Sweden’s choice of the coronavirus strategy, up to 43 percent Swedes trust or rely heavily on it. Only 30 percent. they have little or no confidence in the method chosen to fight the coronavirus.