Neither Norway nor Finland have had a lockdown, going by the agreed definition, as neither has implemented a stay-at-home order or a restriction on household mixing. So they are both examples of success in handling the pandemic despite very light government restrictions.
It's also worth noting that the lockdowns which were apparently so successful in Sweden's Nordic neighborhood looked nothing like the UK's. As I understand it, Finland has had no lockdown since the summer, and the Denmark lockdown kept all schools open and allowed up to 10 to meet throughout.
Yes, good point. Norway also had a lighter touch. Finland has been open though recently announced a three-week lockdown that started 8 Mar. And generally there has been less masking in the Nordics than elsewhere in Europe.
The final graph was produced by Rob Slane in April and includes data only to then -- but the magnitude of departure from modelling has remained because Sweden's winter peak was about the same as its spring peak in April.
Thanks. It's a shame the plots aren't directly comparable. I looked at the Slane blog with a view to doing the update myself but couldn't see where to find the data. But it's clear that the moderate prediction was for about 2,400 deaths per million by mid summer 2020 whereas Worldometer is saying about 600 and another 600 or so since then.
The chief problem with the final graph is it shows almost none of the deaths that have occured. Currently, Sweden is about halfway to the moderate scenario, which looked at what would have happened had it reached herd immunity. It is also about half way to herd immunity. Britain is roughly the same - half the deaths, halfway to herd immuntiy.
Thank you, very well written! The measure of "lockdown stringency" is also helpful when articulating the extent to which each country or region "locked down" - just reaching consensus on what the term "lockdown" actually means is helpful.
We know that the Blatvinik school modified and adjusted their stringency index measure on Sweden so I am distrustful of their output. I also don't trust the veracity of the Google mobility data after discovering obvious flaws in it.
I believe it is important to understand the extent to which each country locked down to isolate a significant differentiating factor in the Neighbour Argument.
Yes, I use 'lockdown' to refer to a situation where legally mandated business and hospitality closures are widespread, typically combined with some type of stay-at-home order and/or school closures. The Blavatnik index can be misleading because it only distinguishes between legal mandates and voluntary guidelines by a point increment on a scale. The real-life difference between a legal mandate and guideline is more significant than the index indicates.
Excellent article, thank you. A case for the policy of "herd immunity" has recently been made by this study conducted on U.S. Marines - a very controlled environment, so to speak: https://greatamericanpolitics.com/2020/11/marines-experiment-shows-covid-quarantines-have-no-effect-on-virus-spread/
Neither Norway nor Finland have had a lockdown, going by the agreed definition, as neither has implemented a stay-at-home order or a restriction on household mixing. So they are both examples of success in handling the pandemic despite very light government restrictions.
It's also worth noting that the lockdowns which were apparently so successful in Sweden's Nordic neighborhood looked nothing like the UK's. As I understand it, Finland has had no lockdown since the summer, and the Denmark lockdown kept all schools open and allowed up to 10 to meet throughout.
Yes, good point. Norway also had a lighter touch. Finland has been open though recently announced a three-week lockdown that started 8 Mar. And generally there has been less masking in the Nordics than elsewhere in Europe.
Is there a problem with the actual data in the final graph? It doesn’t seem consistent with the Worldometer cumulative data shown higher up.
The final graph was produced by Rob Slane in April and includes data only to then -- but the magnitude of departure from modelling has remained because Sweden's winter peak was about the same as its spring peak in April.
Thanks. It's a shame the plots aren't directly comparable. I looked at the Slane blog with a view to doing the update myself but couldn't see where to find the data. But it's clear that the moderate prediction was for about 2,400 deaths per million by mid summer 2020 whereas Worldometer is saying about 600 and another 600 or so since then.
The chief problem with the final graph is it shows almost none of the deaths that have occured. Currently, Sweden is about halfway to the moderate scenario, which looked at what would have happened had it reached herd immunity. It is also about half way to herd immunity. Britain is roughly the same - half the deaths, halfway to herd immuntiy.
That’s adding in a separate winter season; the Imperial model concerned the initial spring/summer wave.
Thank you, very well written! The measure of "lockdown stringency" is also helpful when articulating the extent to which each country or region "locked down" - just reaching consensus on what the term "lockdown" actually means is helpful.
We know that the Blatvinik school modified and adjusted their stringency index measure on Sweden so I am distrustful of their output. I also don't trust the veracity of the Google mobility data after discovering obvious flaws in it.
I believe it is important to understand the extent to which each country locked down to isolate a significant differentiating factor in the Neighbour Argument.
Yes, I use 'lockdown' to refer to a situation where legally mandated business and hospitality closures are widespread, typically combined with some type of stay-at-home order and/or school closures. The Blavatnik index can be misleading because it only distinguishes between legal mandates and voluntary guidelines by a point increment on a scale. The real-life difference between a legal mandate and guideline is more significant than the index indicates.