Countries that had really low numbers (much lower than Sweden) and had lockdowns and things like mask mandates (although Sweden had those too by the end) and are not islands (or continents like Australia): Norway, Denmark, South Korea.Swiftbow wrote: ↑Sun Oct 17, 2021 7:49 am
Name one? I think the only one that came close was New Zealand, and they're a small island, so they were able to basically seal the borders. And they still have lockdowns. Meanwhile Sweden is a country that had no restrictions... and about the same numbers as anywhere else.
Well okay I guess I can't name one that is not at least a peninsula (however Norway is sharing its peninsula with Sweden that has to count for something).
Sweden had far fewer mandatory government restrictions during the initial wave (they restricted gatherings of more than 50 people in March of 2020 and closed high schools and universities, for example), but did have a marked decrease in activity outside of what was officially mandated including businesses either closing down temporarily or having so few customers they might as well have been closed etc. this was in some sense voluntary but things being closed and no one going out is the effect of lockdown that people complained about, so if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it is probably a duck. If we actually define lockdown on a spectrum in terms of how much normal life is effectively restricted they had less lockdown, but the idea that there was no change in daily life in terms of frequenting public places, bars, stores etc. would just be wrong.
In terms of GDP lost in the initial wave (spring of 2020) it was the equal of or greater than neighbours who "officially" locked down, so they were as restricted on the economic front as those who had "lockdowns". Further they moved away from the relative lack of official restrictions to more and more restrictions (mask mandates, more distancing requirements etc.) including the option for widespread heavy lockdown although it looks like they never implemented the most extensive lockdown measures they allowed themselves. Finally their numbers in terms of cases and deaths were far worse than Norway which is like a geographic twin of Sweden and worse than neighbour Denmark so claims that what they did worked just as well as what other countries did seems difficult to support.
Sources:
Sweden during the first wave did not have normal life: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/hist ... s-a-luxury
Sweden had official government restrictions banning large gatherings even in March 2020 when they had no "lockdown": https://www.reuters.com/article/us-heal ... SKBN21E1XY
Sweden had just as much reduction in economic activity as near neighbours like Denmark in the first wave: https://www.thelocal.dk/20200814/denmar ... d-quarter/
Sweden passed lockdown laws in January of 2021 that would have allowed sweeping closures of businesses etc. but does not seem to have used the option (but clearly were considering it): https://www.businessinsider.com/sweden- ... oll-2021-1
Sweden had many more deaths than neighbouring countries: https://katv.com/news/coronavirus/swede ... strictions
If you don't like officially designated COVID deaths we can go by excess deaths compared to previous years in which case again Sweden worse than its neighbours: https://www.economist.com/graphic-detai ... -estimates
A breakdown of Sweden's pandemic response that makes it clear that while they had fewer official restrictions and fewer actual restrictions than many other countries they still had a fair few restrictions especially later in the pandemic: https://www.businessinsider.com/sweden- ... ate-2021-8