I love the way that the people who decried Sweden’s light touch approach to dealing with COVID pre-vax are now trying to use Sweden as the evidence that the mRNA injections are not necessarily the reason for super-excess mortality since they were introduced.
The suggestion is that the excess is mainly due to the negative effects of the interventions (as if that is somehow more acceptable).
One thing we can agree on is that Sweden has indeed not experienced anywhere near the levels of excess mortality post-vax. Compare these charts to Italy and Austria, for example:
Given that the increases in excess deaths are closely correlated with COVID mortality, exemplified here in Texas, I think it is less likely that Sweden’s success is due to lower collateral harms of interventions.
In my opinion, it is probably more likely to be due to higher levels of natural immunity that has protected the young recovered (you know, just like centuries of epidemiology suggest is the reason why we haven’t already gone extinct!) but unfortunately not quite enough herd immunity to protect the over 70s from the pernicious impact of the jab.
Perhaps they were lucky enough to get proper training for their immune system before getting it disrupted by the faulty jab, making them less susceptible to original antigenic sin?
- Sweden did not fare any worse than any other country, despite a lighter touch. Not a good sign for lockdown advocates
- In some age groups 2021 was not clearly better than 2020, despite 5 reasons to expect it (vaccines, natural immunity, survivor bias, milder variant, better treatments). Since lockdown harms can’t be blamed for this failure in Sweden, this increases the probability that vaccines are the explanation of the bodies.
- The downward trends in some age groups are intriguing. There is no “pulling forward” to explain that, as it happens right from the start of 2020. This raises the hypothesis I’ve held since the beginning: covid may have some health benefits. Fever-causing pathogens tend to be that way (pyrotherapy). Loads of epidemiological studies on this. Possible preventative effects may happen with cancer, flu, heart disease, and stroke. It may be important to find out what people are dying less from in the 60 to 69 age group in Sweden these last couple years to see if it fits the things a virus might benefit. Can't really study this in a country that had hard lockdowns.
Maybe the difference is that vitamin D deficiency has been reduced in Sweden. Perhaps working immigrants (who are more likely to have vitamin D deficiency) avoided Sweden.
"Patients born outside Europe (n = 66) had 15 nmol/l [95% confidence interval (CI) 9.17–20.84] lower levels of vitamin D than patients born in Europe. Vitamin D deficiency was more common in patients born outside Europe (50%) than in patients born in Europe (11%, odds ratio 8.20 95% CI 2.49–26.98, p < 0.001)."
People living in Sweden benefited more from the following action than temporary working immigrants.