How can it go from a (not all that reliable measurement) of 10% to 25% to 30% while the reported cases are in a slight decline vs increased testing.
Even if 10% was reached from the first detected case on Februari 15th, 1 month of unhampered growth (Sweden started social distancing on about March 10th) plus another 20 days of restricted growth. Then how on earth can it now be 25% to 30% after 1 more month without further growth.

Sweden reported 17,370 new cases since April 1st. Even if we assume that it's still 10x under reported, and we pile all those cases onto Stockholm, and we take the 10% on April 1st for granted, today Stockholm could at most be at 24% infected. That's a lot of ifs, wild guesses and incorrect counting piled on top of each other.

So basically what your virus dude wants to happen is kill another 5 times as many people in Stockholm, then the rest of the country as well?
(Wild guess on deaths, it will still take 20 days to find out the fatalities from April 1st to today, when that number is known and it is indeed 24% currently, then it would 'only' be another 2x to 3x as many piled on top, excluding the rest of the country)

This is what's slowing it down

Not as drastic a change compared to other countries, hence no real decline.

At least Sweden kept the parks open and people go there to I assume stay apart from each other. That's the big misstep here, herding everyone into the few remaining green spaces that are not closed, closed to keep people apart... You don't need common sense to be a politician :)

And in Russia, three infected doctors jumped out of a window at their hospitals within the last days. Two thousand hospital workers are said to have been infected, with hospitals reporting zero protection masks and clothing.
The situation in Russia has become totally out of control it seems.

Case numbers aren't 10 times under reported. They're 100 times under reported.

Stockholm thought they had ~1000 cases at the end of March https://news.google.com/covid19/map?hl=en-GB&gl=GB&ceid=GB%3Aen&mid=%2Fm%2F0syfj.

Turns out they had ~100,000 and that doesn't include people who didn't need to produce antibodies.

I think you're making too many assumptions, our first reported case was in jan 31 but in the city Jönköping. We don't know when the first person who had the virus in Stockholm because someone might had it in Jan but it was never reported. Where you getting there's just 10x more infected then confirmed cases?

I don't know if these numbers will help you, these are total reported cases for stockholm.

March 01: 4 confirmed cases
March 10: 207 confirmed cases
March 15: 359 confirmed cases
March 20: 606 confimred cases
March 30: 1806 confirmed cases
April 30: 8033 confirmed cases

Edit: added more dates (March 10/March 20)

They "jumped" a day after they openly criticized the lack of protective gear. It's Russia, so it's safe to assume they had a little bit of "help" when "jumping".

Where did Tegnell say that he "aims to hover around R1"? These are the latest estimates released by the Ministry of Health and Social Affairs:

From what I've read Tegnell has been cautiously optimistic about the downward trend shown by these estimates, but if he aims for an R-value of 1 then he'd actually want the value to go back to 1 again?

Well shit any positive news to report on the virus? I heard few days ago that some Eli Lilly drug was showing some positive signs by reducing recovery time compared to placebo but I won't hold my breath.

I'm making too many assumptions? lol. I'm trying to reach your wild claim of 25 to 30% by adding up all the extremes together.

But those numbers do help.

March 10 to March 15: 152 new cases, 30.4 per day
March 15 to March 20: 247 new cases, 49.4 per day -> 1.102x daily growth
March 20 to March 30: 1200 new cases, 120 per day -> 1.093x daily growth
March 30 to April 30: 6227 new cases, 200.9 per day -> 1.017x daily growth

While the totals may be off, relative growth is still a pretty accurate indication of how it spreads once testing is up to speed.
It's slow, but expected since social distancing started around March 10th.

Now work backwards, 300K infected April 30th and 100K infected by March 30th.
Since it looks like the cases peaked during this period let's take 5500 new cases a day for March 30th, peak of 7400 and back down to 5500.
5500 new cases per day on March 30th means there were 818 new cases daily on March 10th, and 36,820 total cases in Stockholm.
Before March 10th the virus likely spread faster, R0 at 2.2 gets to 818 daily new cases in 45 days (at most if starting with 1 active case)
However that only subtracts another 900 cases, almost 36K cases unaccounted for.

It doesn't fit, trying 30x the reported cases as the 'true' number.

I tried a few different approaches with 100x the reported number and or a bunch of infected people arriving in Stockholm. Either there is no way to get to 100K by March 30th or none of the observed data trends fit.


Btw is this true?

Still, on the most basic of measures, Sweden is faring worse than its more-locked-down neighbours: Norway has reported 30 deaths per million population, Denmark 58, and Sweden 139. As the National Post’s Colby Cosh noted earlier in the week, Anders Tegnell, Sweden’s epidemiologist-in-chief, defends this as a failure not of the approach, but of component systems: It turns out Swedish nursing homes are fantastically vulnerable to COVID-19 outbreaks, just like ours. Somali immigrants are hugely over-represented among the infected. Tegnell suggested this was because they’re not doing the things public health officials are asking them to do, because they’re poorly integrated into Swedish society. (Swedes don’t need to be ordered around, because they are so trustful of officialdom, and of each other, that a kind request is all that’s needed — or so the story goes.)

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/chris-selley-canadians-should-wish-sweden-well-in-its-no-lockdown-approach-to-covid-19

(Just some garbage google came up with, recommending a link to covid19 coming from a lab again lol)

It's taken from here using global statistics, not just Sweden:

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-sex-demographics/

I made a mistake as the 0-9 age group is low enough to be not statistically significant (or it's out of date), 10-19 is 0.2% likelihood of death.

Age of Coronavirus Deaths

COVID-19 Fatality Rate by AGE:

*Death Rate = (number of deaths / number of cases) = probability of dying if infected by the virus (%). This probability differs depending on the age group. The percentages shown below do not have to add up to 100%, as they do NOT represent share of deaths by age group. Rather, it represents, for a person in a given age group, the risk of dying if infected with COVID-19.

*Death Rate = (number of deaths / number of cases) = probability of dying if infected by the virus (%). The percentages do not have to add up to 100%, as they do NOT represent share of deaths by age group.

That's still up to 15,000 10-19 year olds dead in the UK if we assume they all get infected. So, is that acceptable?