I would generally go for "as few as possible given the circumstances".
Given how much higher they are over other nations—even taking into account excess deaths—I would say they have failed that metric.
Given how much higher they are over other nations—even taking into account excess deaths—I would say they have failed that metric.
The Swedes are betting that nobody in the world will be spared from COVID and therefore the delta in deaths is temporary. They are front-loading it while attempting to keep the economic impacts as low as possible. They anticipate the rest of the world will be contending with shutdowns, re-openings, shutdowns, re-openings, and when all is said and done, the death rate per capita will be the same the world over.
So far, they the Swedes have bet one way, much of the rest of the world has bet the other way. Time will tell, but it is much too soon to make that judgment today.
Partly because they are export dependant and nobody's buying & partly because enough swedes are staying home (not going to pubs etc.) for the economy to tank but not enough to avoid 10 times as many deaths as their neighbours.
So, yes, time will tell. But for now they are getting the worst of both:
Many dead and no economic benefit.
Do you think Corona is going anywhere?
If you have a look at the current infection rate in a lot of European (and others) countries, even reaching 50% of the population infected would take decades.
So yes, I believe that delaying is not the only possibility.
It's currently mandatory masks in public, keeping distances and washing hands, and no big crowds.
Life feels pretty normal over here.
I'm talking from the perspective of a European country with <100 cases/day.
A lot of places are starting to reinstitute lockdowns.
It's also a bet that medical treatments won't improve and a vaccine won't be developed.
It seems speculatively like this is due to age-linked expression of ACE2.