In March, when Sweden’s government, led by chief epidemiologist Anders Tegnell, chose to not close down the economy and impose harsh restrictions on individual’s freedoms to deal with the virus, it was severely criticized worldwide. 
Sweden’s neighbors, Denmark and Norway, were particularly loud in their condemnation.  
As the BBC reported on 29 May, “Denmark and Norway exclude Sweden from tourism.”
But some eight months later, on 27 November, Søren Riis Paludan, a leading Danish professor of biomedicine, stated, “The Swedish approach taught us what to do and what not to do in other Nordic countries… Now we don’t have to go into lockdown but know where to be more careful, particularly with the elderly.”
Despite clear evidence that Sweden has managed to keep its citizens safer than Spain, France, Italy, the U.K., and many other western European countries, without destroying millions of businesses, lives, livelihood and inflicting the psychological pain of isolation among its people… the mainstream media keeps selling the outright lie that Sweden’s decision to not lockdown has been a deadly failure.
Why the Swedish Model for Fighting COVID-19 is a Disaster
Sweden’s unique approach to the pandemic has drawn interest from other countries. But the data are clear: it’s largely been a failure
– Time Magazine, 14 October
Has Sweden’s Coronavirus Strategy Failed?
Swedish authorities believed their approach to coronavirus would help the country in the long run. But it’s being rocked by the second wave
– Washington Post, 18 November
Both the Time and Washington Post headlines are misleading. As Professor Paluden added to his statement recently:
“Based on Swedish data, we learned that keeping schools open does not contribute to spreading the virus… There are certain groups that need to be protected, which now means we have a society that is relatively open save some restrictions on how many people can gather.”
Helping to make the case of Sweden’s success by not locking down, the British Medical Journal (BMJ) published an article on 27 November titled, “Covid-19: What Sweden taught Scandinavia for the second wave.”
Among the article’s key points:

  • “Sweden’s ‘soft’ approach meant keeping bars, restaurants, and schools (for pupils up to the age of 16) open and giving only recommendations to wash hands, maintain social distance, and keep gatherings to under 50 people. This is in marked contrast to neighboring nations Denmark, Norway, and Finland, that went swiftly into lockdown.”
  • “Sweden had relatively low infection rates despite no mandatory lockdown. With a second wave sweeping through Europe and countries struggling to balance economic recovery with ongoing pandemic measures, Scandinavia as a whole seems to be taking the lessons of Sweden to heart.”
  • “Although total mortality is higher than in the rest of Scandinavia, Sweden’s current rates are relatively low, with an average of only three fatalities as a day compared with 100 a day in early April. Nationally, new intensive care unit intake averaged around two a day in October, compared with a peak of 40-50 a day between late March and early April.”
  • “These falls are partly due to improved treatment protocols in Swedish hospitals… Thomas Linde, of the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare, said at a press conference that the number of COVID-19 patients in intensive care units was still relatively small at about 15% of capacity.”

Despite the hard data in the BMJ article showing Sweden’s ability to deal with the virus spread without destroying its economy and forcing its citizens into isolation, the same day the article came out, ABC Presstitutes posted this headline on their website:
Sweden’s coronavirus plan failed to stop the virus, and a vaccine may not be enough to “rescue” them, experts warn.
– ABC News, 27 November
The one area Swedish officials admit they failed was in protecting the elderly during the first six months of the viral spread. The BMJ data shows that “89 percent of Sweden’s COVID-19 deaths were in people over 69. During the first six months of 2020 over 2,000 people died in nursing homes as a result of what Sweden’s Health and Social Care Inspectorate described as ‘serious failings.’”
But Dr. Anders Tegnell, the architect of the Swedish coronavirus policy, recognized the failure in a statement on 6 June, and he immediately started putting safety measures in place including a six-month ban on visits to nursing homes.
And on 1 October, Reuters wrote, “Sweden ended a six-month ban on visits to nursing homes on Thursday, delighting residents and their relatives.” Dr. Tegnell was quoted at new conference that day, “It must be remembered that it’s a right for those who live in nursing homes to receive visit. The nursing homes now have to ensure that visits can be made in a safe manner.”
TRENDPOST: While the media continues to attack Sweden – as its mask-less masses celebrate the holidays in the old-style, “classic” tradition – Presstitutes ignore comparison of lockdown/no-lockdown data.
For example, in Sweden, with a population 10,127,000 to date, 7,067 reportedly died from the virus. This compares to the U.S.’s locked-down state of Michigan, with a population of 9,987,000, which has registered 10,321 virus deaths. 
Yet, the Presstitutes applaud the draconian lockdown rules imposed on Michigan by Governor Gretchen Whitmer, in which some 3,000 more people died, while attacking the Swedish Freedom model. 
Barely mentioned in the mainstream media is the hard fact that the vast majority of deaths (some 50 percent or more) were senior citizens from elder care homes and people suffering from pre-existing chronic health conditions. 
Thus, as Sweden takes measures to protect its elderly and most vulnerable, America and other western nations lock down those not likely to die from the virus while continually censoring the fact that some 99.8 percent of those who are infected by the virus recover… and ignoring the financial and mental toll it has taken on hundreds of millions. 

Comments are closed.

Skip to content