I think you have missed something
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.dw.com/en/coronavirus-swedens-new-covid-lockdown-law-takes-effect/a-56185101
You do realise it’s not a one size fits all approach to tackling this virus.
You cannot pick up one country and then claim that’s how it should have been done when there are a huge amount of factors involved.
Truth is Sweden has had lockdowns, they have had social distancing, they have had to wear masks, they are a country that already has work from home in place.
I think it’s a poor argument myself
The article you’ve sent is dated prior to the both I’ve sent(which state these powers were not used?)
The article you’ve sent makes no mention of any lockdown imposed, rather the granting of the emergency power to implement it if needed; the article says “Sweden's government, which has long shunned strict curbs, now has the power to act more forcefully to halt the spread of the coronavirus. The new law could be used any day amid a surge in casesâ€
Nothing says they have implemented it?
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/covid-sweden-lockdown-deaths-study-b1846216.html%3famp
And research shows that a full lockdown would have potentially saved 1000s of lives of those who died.
You can’t just take a snippet of info to make an informed opinion. Check out the factors involved before copying and pasting
That is definitely something I’ve not done(if you’ve read my previous posts you’ll see the countless other articles and studies referenced)
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/covid-sweden-lockdown-deaths-study-b1846216.html%3fampSo 2,000 deaths extra equates to (2,000/10,200,000 x 100,000) 19.670 per 100k for Sweden
Going back to the stats “According to the John Hopkins mortality analyses Sweden’s deaths per 100k stands at 141.42 as opposed to the UK’s 191.69â€
https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/data/mortalityThe lockdowns would have had a minute benefit statistically for Sweden in terms of death from covid (19 per 100,000) which in my opinion is hard to justify when balancing against the risks of lockdowns both economic and health wise.
One thing the Swedes got right in my opinion was “ relying on voluntary measures focused on social distancing, good hygiene and targeted rules that have kept schools, restaurants and shops largely openâ€.
Don’t get how it’s a poor argument, the article you’ve sent me is about the Swedish government in January 2021 having the capability of implementing their emergency powers if they so wish - which I can’t see being done anywhere? Our deaths per 100k are worse than Sweden’s- it’s valid to see how they did that without destroying their economy,healthcare and education systems and why we’ve fared so poorly.
I do realise it’s not a one size fit all situation when it comes to covid so why isn’t the same said about lockdowns when questioning it? The argument is always “others countries do it/did it†so why is that a one size fit all for that particular side of the argument?