Something recent that's been under-reported. The US, the country pulling an accidental Sweden, has seen a 33% decline in new cases since mid-July. The narrative is still that the US has done worse than any other developed country, but look at Spain and France. Both have surpassed their ~April peaks, have per capita new infection rates above the US.
How's Sweden's new case rates? Stable, and 1/4 of the US's.
The list of countries that have been able to maintain their low case counts is getting shorter, and the US is looking less exceptional in its response.
"Listen to the epidemiologists" only works for a bit. It turns out psychology was just as important.
France sent students back to school, and re-opened its universities, and allowed gatherings of 5,000 or more people, and did not require masks in public, or in workplaces, with predictable results.
Their response, and the results mirror that of the worst-performing US states.
Not to mention Sweden is more locked down than the US - _0_ gatherings over 50 people allowed. 0.
I'm astounded there's still people doing the 'debate me!' act about it, most gave up by July in the US, we had already clearly chose a more intense version of the Swedish 'strategy'
It was also the strategy of South Dakota, Nebraska, Iowa, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Wyoming and Utah, and they seem to be doing a lot better in terms of both GDP hit and caseload than places like California and New York with heavy lockdowns.
Iowa has a projected 9.5% GDP hit. New York has a projected ~14% GDP hit, and due to its density and reliance on elevators and public transit, will of course have a higher case load, and require harsher measures to control the spread.
Half of the population of Iowa can fit in the 22 square miles of Manhattan. Oh, and infection rates in Iowa are climbing, whereas infection rates in New York peaked five months ago... And they are currently neck-and-neck in per-capita cases.
So, how did a mostly rural state get a case rate that's as bad as a state that packs half of its population into a single sardine-can of a city? Is their strategy actually working, if they are getting the same outcome, despite having a much easier set of starting conditions to deal with?
Meanwhile, in Canada, BC is projected to take a ~6% GDP hit... While having 1/10th the per-capita case load of Iowa, and higher population densities.
Because the virus isn't coming back in Sweden, whereas its neighbours are already experiencing a second wave. Sweden's argument was always that it was "front-loading" the infections, so over the long-term other countries would see a similar number of infections as they experienced multiple waves.
Plus they avoided the rise in depression and domestic violence that countries with lockdowns endured. As well as avoiding massive violations of human rights, although you leftists seem to care nothing about that.
Because the virus isn't coming back in Sweden, whereas its neighbours are already experiencing a second wave. Sweden's argument was always that it was "front-loading" the infections, so over the long-term other countries would see a similar number of infections as they experienced multiple waves.
