A lockdown can’t prevent the spread unless it’s permanent. As soon it’s lifted, the spread will continue. It is a huge waste of billions and trillions of dollars to slow down the spread of something that is going to happen anyway.
The only prevention measures that should be put in place are SUSTAINABLE ones. Ones which will have to be lifted while the virus still exists are USELESS because all it does is delay the inevitable at a staggering economic cost.
Of course Sweden will have more cases upfront. Those will simply come later in places that lock down. In the end they will all have the same result except Sweden will have a much healthier economy and budget to show for not panicking and implementing pointless, meaningless, useless, irrational, counter-productive policies.
Good points.
Someone tell this to Mr. Rasputin and Mrs. Rasputin. (The two so-called experts at Coronavirus Press Conference)
That was the purpose of this lock down, to flatten the curve for the sake of care in the hospital.
I’m sure they weighed it out, have hospitals over flowing vs maintaining control. Most countries chose the latter.
What you are suggesting would cause a much greater panic which would damage the economy more. Not only will people perceive a greater chance of contracting the virus, they will doubt the ability of the healthcare system to treat them if they become sick.
I predict Sweden will take stronger measures as the virus spreads.