[ad_1]
Sweden has gone its own way in the pandemic. The outside world has raised its eyebrows in wonder or dismay at how Swedish restaurants, shops and gyms have remained open, by the confidence that citizens willingly follow advice and by the negative attitude towards precautionary measures. This is the country that has not complied with the advice of the WHO or the EU on oral protection and infection tracking applications and that introduced protection measures later than others.
One might think that the special solution has been widely debated among politicians. But that is not the case at all. During the spring, the opposition largely supported the government’s handling.
In early summer, when Sweden approached 5,000 dead with a covid-19 diagnosis, the political peace of mind ceased in one fell swoop. At the SVT party leader’s debate in June, KD’s Ebba Busch said that the government “has bravely allowed a great spread of the infection in Sweden.” Other party leaders were also very critical.
Now, as the infection spreads dramatically again, the tone is again softer. The moderates have criticized the government for sending double signals. Annie Lööf of the Center Party and Nyamko Sabuni of the Liberals call for support for companies affected by alcohol restrictions. But the opposition has not identified any alternative strategy to curb the infection.
Politically, no great self-criticism has been heard, despite the government saying that nursing homes were unprepared for infection.
There has been time to learn by mistake and develop the ability to track infections, tests, and more during the relatively quiet summer and early fall.
Still, the virus is now being hacked in a worrying way. Despite the Prime Minister being on edge and warning of congestion, people do not avoid streets, squares and shopping malls to the same extent as last spring. That worries the government.
One explanation may be the double signal he gave. At the same time that the spread of the infection gained new momentum, Sweden eased major restrictions. Another reason may be the expert authority signs that many Swedes have great confidence in:
“It is much more dangerous to cross a crosswalk in the city,” said state epidemiologist Anders Tegnell, for example, last month when asked about his concern about being infected with the new virus.
The Public Health Agency has fired the idea of a second wave of disease. Of course, it is extremely difficult to evaluate a new virus, but incorrect scenarios by the authority led to a lack of preparedness in health and care.
Now the situation in Sweden is once again worse than in Norway, Finland and Denmark. Testing and infection tracking has started to peak, but the spread of infections unfortunately has not.
The government has announced, without the Public Health Agency requesting it first, to stop serving alcohol in restaurants and bars after 10pm. It is a tougher measure than in the spring, which the government has taken in the fight against the pandemic in other countries. The Swedish Public Health Agency’s recommendation to many regions to avoid being physically close to people other than those who live with you is also sharper than the recommendations this spring.
More action seems to be expected. But there are still red curtains for the Swedish Public Health Agency, like mouth guards, infection tracking apps, and rapid tests. The question is whether the government will look more at other countries in terms of them too.
