How can you possibly predict the future that way? Why would Sweden be done and not the other countries?
At the same time, it's not possible at this time to declare "sweden's strategy has failed" - there's plenty of time for other countries to catch up on excess mortality.
I do think there's a very real chance that, assuming hospitals are not overwhelmed, there won't be a lot of difference in overall mortality between developed countries. This disease is, apparently, super infectious after all, and eradication seems unlikely.
I think the numbers show that countries who don't have a second wave had a strong first wave, where the lockdown came too late.
Examples: Italy, France, Germany
Then you have countries that had a strict lockdown on time, which resulted in rising rates as soon as lockdown was lifted.
Examples: Israel, Hong Kong, Singapore
Having said that, the latter countries do seem to fare better than the former, second wave or not.
100% of pre-vaccine, pre-containment pandemics ended in herd immunity.
The science is clear. If left alone, COVID-19 would rapidly burn itself out (and take about 0.5% of the population with it).
Before vaccination measles epidemics happened every few years, killing over 2 million people each year. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/measles
> Before the introduction of measles vaccine in 1963 and widespread vaccination, major epidemics occurred approximately every 2–3 years and measles caused an estimated 2.6 million deaths each year.
Where's the herd immunity to measles?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_immunity#History
> Herd immunity was first recognized as a naturally occurring phenomenon in the 1930s when A. W. Hedrich published research on the epidemiology of measles in Baltimore, and took notice that after many children had become immune to measles, the number of new infections temporarily decreased, including among susceptible children.
(Measles is also fairly uniquely virulent. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_reproduction_number)