it hasn't done any better yet. but understanding the swedish strategy always meant looking at the long run.

i don't want to say they intended for a large amount of people to die up front, because that is not true. they've admitted that it got into the care facilities - like it did everywhere else - and that they could have done a better job isolating the elderly. but, these are targeted lockdowns on the population groups most vulnerable, which is exactly the point i made from the start about what should have been done: protect the weak. and, i don't even want to say they didn't try. but, like everybody else, they weren't initially able to do that.

that 5800 figure is something like 98% over the age of 70.

the takeaway is, rather, that the lockdowns seems to have made little difference - this virus hit the elderly in high numbers just about everywhere, regardless of what was done to try to stop it, save literally ordering people to stay inside by gunpoint.

and, that's really the question - what kind of society do you want to live in?

as we move into the next phase of this, we're finally able to provide a testable question, and will have the answer we want by saturnalia if they have done well, and by samhain if they have not.

- if the swedish approach worked, and there is greater immunity in the swedish population, or in large areas of sweden at least, they will avoid or greatly mitigate a second wave, and the numbers in countries like france will far exceed them by the end of the year. that is the hope, in sweden.
- if the swedish approach did not work, and there is not enough immunity to stop the spread, then they will go through a second wave while everybody else finishes the first wave that was postponed by state intervention.

i have every reason to think the former is the right answer, and the swedes will finish the marathon ahead, as they jog by exhausted nations that fall off due to exerting too much energy on an early sprint. but, we do experiments in science because we prioritize data over deduction. we'll find out.

but, let's try not to be stupid about this. everybody wants to minimize the total loss of death. the swedish approach was designed by experts in the field that picked the approach they did because they honestly thought it was what would kill the least number of people, in the long run. it wasn't "haphazard" or "risky", it was an educated guess to do what they thought was the best thing to do. and, we'll see in the end who got it right....

we can't, yet.

but, i'll repeat what i said previously: what is happening in canada today is essentially what happened in sweden six months ago. we've already conceded that perpetual lockdowns are unworkable and we're going to have to adopt the swedish approach, in some abstraction. and, now, they're just six months ahead of us, and we're playing catch-up in trying to adjust to what they've already adjusted to.

the question we need to test is if they are actually less vulnerable or not.

and, the antibody testing i've seen suggests that, while the numbers are a little lower than hoped, they are still much higher than elsewhere.

we'll find out in the next few weeks and just need to wait for the data to come in to know.

https://newseu.cgtn.com/news/2020-09-14/Does-Sweden-s-COVID-19-experience-support-the-herd-immunity-theory--TL82pOjfpe/index.html