by Jim Hoft, The Gateway Pundit:
A major study backed by Oxford University has suggested that strict COVID lockdowns were no more effective at reducing infections than the Swedish-style softer approach, which allowed more personal freedom and recommended rather than mandated behaviors aimed at reducing the transmission of the virus.
This conclusion challenges the tyrannical lockdown adopted by many countries, including the US, during the COVID-19 pandemic.
TRUTH LIVES on at https://sgtreport.tv/
While the US shut down all commerce for years and destroyed the economy, Sweden took a different approach to the COVID-19 pandemic on the first wave of COVID-19 than most other countries and just allowed the China coronavirus to run its course. Instead of shutting down the businesses, the government relied on voluntary measures and recommendations to slow the spread of the virus. These measures included social distancing, working from home, and avoiding gatherings of more than 50 people.
Data indicates there are no material differences in fatalities between the three countries. In fact, the COVID-19 numbers are dropping significantly in Sweden. This leads the casual observer to question why the US is killing its economy.
In September 2020, the Scandinavian country had one of the lowest numbers of COVID-19 cases in Europe.
“We don’t have the resurgence of the disease that many countries have,” Anders Tegnell, the country’s chief epidemiologist and architect of its no-lockdown strategy, told broadcaster France-24 in an interview. “In the end, we will see how much difference it will make to have a strategy that’s more sustainable, that you can keep in place for a long time, instead of the strategy that means that you lock down, open up and lock down over and over again.”
“Sweden has gone from being the country with the most infections in Europe to the safest one,” Tegnell last week told the Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera.
The research, published in the prestigious journal Nature Human Behavior, challenges the widely held belief that stringent lockdowns are the most effective strategy to control the spread of COVID-19.
The research analyzed various factors, including infection rates, economic impact, and behavioral changes, to evaluate different approaches. Surprisingly, the study revealed that lockdown measures did not offer a substantial advantage over Sweden’s strategy.
The study involved the analysis of data from around 416,000 individuals in the New York–Newark–Jersey City, NY–NJ–PA metro area. It examined various scenarios of pandemic policies, including strict lockdowns and voluntary behavior adaptations like in Sweden.