### Sweden and COVID-19: The Truth Behind the “Lax Approach” Narrative

Sweden’s management of the COVID-19 pandemic attracted worldwide attention for steering clear of strict lockdowns during the pandemic’s initial stages. The Swedish government chose a strategy that leaned significantly on citizens’ voluntary adherence, as opposed to enforcing the stringent restrictions seen in many other nations. Although some proponents have hailed Sweden as a model for effectively balancing public health and individual liberties, the situation is more nuanced. A deeper examination shows mixed outcomes, featuring both achievements and substantial hurdles concerning public health results and societal effects.

—

### Sweden’s Pandemic Approach: Misconceptions vs. Reality

#### Not So Lax After All
In contrast to prevailing opinions, Sweden did not embrace a fully hands-off response to the pandemic. While early actions were more relaxed than those of other countries, the government laid out guidelines for remote working, restricting non-essential travel, and practicing social distancing. Older individuals, who are at higher risk for severe COVID-19 outcomes, were explicitly encouraged to self-isolate. As the pandemic progressed, Sweden implemented tougher measures, including promoting mask-wearing and closing upper secondary schools during crucial periods of increased transmission.

However, primary schools remained open for the majority of the pandemic. This choice, likely aimed at reducing educational interruptions for younger students, set Sweden apart from numerous countries and has been regarded as beneficial for early childhood development and mental wellbeing.

#### Herd Immunity: A Goal Not Achieved
A key aspect of Sweden’s strategy was the aspiration for a more relaxed approach to cultivate widespread herd immunity. This goal was premised on the belief that permitting segments of the population to get infected and recover would bolster collective defenses against the virus. Nonetheless, data from October 2020 indicated that merely 5% to 10% of Swedes had generated antibodies against COVID-19, significantly lower than the thresholds required for herd immunity. This highlighted the difficulties associated with depending on natural infections for pandemic control without straining healthcare systems.

—

### Comparison with Nordic Neighbors and Europe

#### Mortality Figures
Sweden faced considerably elevated COVID-19 mortality rates per million residents compared to its Nordic counterparts like Norway and Finland, which enacted stricter measures. By late 2021, Norway boasted one of the lowest death rates in Europe, whereas Sweden’s total mortality rate approximated that of the United States—a nation with a considerably larger population, higher population density, and a greater prevalence of risk factors such as obesity and diabetes.

A significant point of contention for Sweden was the high mortality rate among its elderly demographic, especially those residing in long-term care facilities. Around 40% of Sweden’s COVID-19 cases were among individuals over 70 during the pandemic’s early phases. This susceptibility was further exacerbated by insufficient protections in care facilities, where staff frequently transitioned between these high-risk settings and their local communities.

#### Excess Mortality
While Sweden’s overall mortality data for 2020–2022 indicated fewer “excess deaths” compared to several European nations, ‘excess mortality’ is a complex metric. Discrepancies in the categorization of COVID-19 deaths, along with indirect consequences of the pandemic (such as untreated non-COVID-related conditions), can complicate comparisons. For example, earlier and more effective testing could have influenced outcomes across various countries.

—

### The Influence of Public Trust and Voluntary Compliance

Sweden’s dependence on voluntary guidelines instead of government mandates underscores the nation’s strong cultural focus on personal accountability and faith in public institutions. A significant number of Swedes adhered to recommendations without the need for compulsory enforcement. This elevated level of societal trust is a distinguishing characteristic that sets Sweden apart from other countries where compliance might be more heavily reliant on regulations and penalties. However, even in this framework, voluntary measures showed limitations during peaks of transmission.

—

### Economic and Social Repercussions

#### Continued School Operations
One realm where Sweden’s approach seems to have thrived is in curtailing educational interruptions. By maintaining open primary schools, Sweden sidestepped some of the long-term educational and social consequences observed in other nations due to extended school closures. Research points to relatively minor impacts on early childhood development in Sweden compared to countries that enforced stricter restrictions.

#### Economic Health and Overall Well-Being
Sweden’s choice to keep numerous businesses and public venues operational was aimed at minimizing economic downturn. While this might have alleviated certain immediate economic pressures, Sweden’s economy still faced contraction during its preliminary pandemic response, indicating that lenient strategies were not shielded from the global economic ramifications of COVID-19.

—

### Insights Gained and Ongoing Discussions

#### Critiques and Reflection from the Commission
A government-commissioned report released in 2022 criticized Sweden’s pandemic management, especially its slow initial reaction and inadequate protective measures for care facilities. The commission also recognized the fragmentation of Sweden’s public health and infection control systems, which aggravated early challenges. Notably, the report defended Sweden’s choice to forgo lockdowns as a means of improving the situation.