Given that the paper is published in Nature you should certainly write the editor if you found any clear factual errors.
Look at: The mask paper that was talked about but was never published because the results were inconvenient. Anytime statistics blow up a narrative.
The Swedes actually followed the science by listening to all the recommendations prior to the pandemic. The best example of this is the WHO or the CDC prior to the outbreak having published and peer reviewed papers that said lockdowns do not work.
Now the next comparison to do is that the approaches of all the other countries followed lockdown. Sweden did not. They then proceeded to have no significant death differences between countries. Seeing that, there will be significant mental differences and knock on effects from the different reactions.
Ultimately, the Swedes got it right by not panicking, followed the non politicized science, and keeping calm and carrying on.
Just by advocating masks more and having better policy on trying to save people from dying via hospital care, they could likely have saved maybe a quarter of their total deaths.
The paper literally refers to WHO and CDC advice as "scientific evidence".
It's ludicrous. The whole thing is thinly veiled opinion piece.
It boggles my mind how far "science" as a term has been degraded and driven 8 feet under.
Lockdowns and masks are both largely non-effective, Sweden got that right, however what Sweden got wrong was the care for the elderly, many deaths that could have been prevented with proper care, but many of them never got to a hospital.
Constitutional courts probably have a bit of work cut out for them the coming years to be better prepared for another situation like this.