Sweden’s strategy Once again proven correct ⋆ Brownstone Institute
Throughout the pandemic, Sweden has been met with enormous criticism and international pressure due to its willingness to adhere to established public health principles and pre-pandemic planning.
Instead of following the incessant, anti-scientific group thinking that became part of a virus-induced political religion, Sweden chose instead not to introduce the strict locks that Dr. Fauci recently claimed was not tried in the United States.
Sweden has never prescribed that masks must be worn in public spaces indoors, which correctly identifies the lack of evidence that supports their use.
They kept schools open in spite of teachers’ unions and politically motivated “experts” in the United States who advocated a policy with zero benefits and huge damages.
In essence, Sweden followed the actual science and not The Science ™, with the required trademark and capital letters. It would include the guides prepared before the panic, incorrect modeling, political motives and crisis obsession took over.
Already last year, it became clear that no one in the media or the public health institution was willing to discuss the indisputable reality that Sweden’s results were not worse than many countries around the world – and significantly better than many, many others.
In general, comparisons have mainly focused on covid-specific outcomes, but now the World Health Organization requires start-ups, authoritarian powers over sovereign nations whenever they deem it necessary, have released a new report on their estimates of excess mortality.
Excess mortality is simply the number of deaths above the expected number in a given country over a given time frame.
Excess mortality captures all outcomes in a country – it is not limited to covid-related metrics or any other specific cause.
For that reason, it can often be a better indicator of the true cost of the pandemic, whether it’s COVID mortality or the consequences of shutdowns, hospital policies or mental health breakdowns.
WHO report contains many illustrative statistics from the first two years of the pandemic which show that Sweden’s approach was undoubtedly the correct one; again, the expert contradicts derived “consensus” that advocates endless restrictions on normal life.
Sweden’s relative success is easy to see when comparing thirty European countries in estimated excess mortality per 100,000:
Sweden is in 25th place out of the 30 countries.
24 countries had a higher excess mortality per 100,000.
In summary, Sweden, the country that avoided strict locks, had some of the lowest worm use anywhere on earth, kept schools open and society functioned as much as possible and had one of the lowest overall mortality rates in any country in its region.
Although a single graph or chart does not necessarily disprove promotional arguments, this one comes remarkably close.
If locks, masks and other restrictions were as important as experts and politicians preach they are, these results should not be possible.
Countries such as Germany, Portugal and the Czech Republic were all praised for having “science-based” responses with strict shutdowns and extremely high levels of mask compliance.
Sweden surpassed each of them.
But let’s dive a little deeper.
One of the most common distances from mask advocates is that US states such as New York, New Jersey and others have poor cumulative results because they were not early aware that the masks “work”, so their policy was adjusted and the spread managed to reverse through mask mandates and other restrictions. the first wave.
However, Sweden shows the exact opposite.
Restrictions in Sweden for the whole of 2020 and 2021 were consistently among the least authoritarian and invasive compared with other western countries.
Again, if worm mandates, deadlocks and strict vaccine-based policies were so important and effective, we would expect results in 2021 to be worse in Sweden, as most of the world experienced increased proliferation with more transmissible variants.
Instead, we see the exact opposite:
Black bars indicate the 2020 course in each country, while the orange bars are the 2021 courses.
In many European countries, excess mortality became significant worse in 2021 despite the arrival of vaccines, the habitual unproven belief in masks and widespread discriminatory vaccine passport policy. Sweden had exactly opposite results, with significantly lower prices in 2021 despite its “lax” rules.
Exclusively comparing the 2021 figures also highlights Sweden’s successes:
If we look at the overall diagram from 2020-2021, it is important to highlight several other countries that had much stricter rules than Sweden:
Everyone did worse than Sweden.
The lockdown and mask apologists simply offered no explanation for this.
Oh sure, there are excuses and misconceptions, but no real explanations.
Yes, Sweden had higher cumulative prices than the other Scandinavian countries, but seeing them in context shows how similar they actually were, outside Norway, which was basically a global exception.
However, Norway had significant dispersal rates at the end of 2021 that would not be counted until the 2022 data is in.
In general, the Scandinavian countries were more relaxed than most of continental Europe regardless.
Even more important is that Europe’s broader context shows how successful Sweden’s policy actually was.
Here are several remarkable countries and how much higher than the excess mortality was from 2020-2021:
- Czech Republic 229%
- USA 163%
- Italy 147%
- Spain 106%
- United Kingdom 100%
- Germany 96%
- Portugal 71%
- Greece 63%
- Netherlands 57%
- Belgium 35%
All these countries had much stricter restrictions than Sweden with much worse results.
No matter how hard they try, all available data and evidence continue to contradict the claims of incompetent experts who desperately want to protect their shameful reputation and future contributions.
Masks, locks and strict discrimination at almost all indoor companies proved to be completely ineffective, both to reduce infections and overall mortality.
Sweden’s willingness to follow science and not The Science ™ meant that they limited the negative effects of covid while avoiding a higher number of deaths as a result of other lockdown-derived consequences.
The vast majority of mainstream media have no interest in covering these results because they run counter to the policies they have strongly advocated and consistently promoted.
CNN, MSNBC, The New York Times, and many other regular publications did their best to ensure that companies, politicians, teachers’ unions, and other decision-makers had the protection to enforce seemingly endless mandates.
Worryingly, toddlers are still masked in New York City, which seems to be on its way back to worm mandates and vaccine passes (now with boosters!).
School districts across the United States have already decided to prescribe masks due to a small increase in cases.
These policies will now be an endless, recurring threat in anti-science areas such as Chicago, San Francisco and Los Angeles.
All based on the lie that masks and mandates work. A lie that Sweden helps to expose.
Reprinted from the author Substack