Sweden’s “No Lockdown” Strategy Worked, Says Heroic Epidemiologist Behind It

Anders Tegnell, the hero who saved Sweden from the lockdown madness, is so beloved by the people that men are getting his face tattooed on their skin.

The man who went against what the rest of the world is doing is now defending his strategy and announcing that it has worked.


Sweden, which chose a famously hands-off opt-in way to fight the coronavirus epidemic, may have over four times the deaths per capita compared to its Nordic neighbors, but the approach ultimately worked, the man behind it insists.

While most nations in the world relied on strict lockdown procedures to slow the spread of Covid-19, Sweden put only a few obligatory restrictions in place. That won high approval ratings for the government, but also resulted in a significantly higher death toll than in other Nordic countries, with elder-care homes affected particularly badly.

Anders Tegnell, Sweden’s chief epidemiologist, whose role in creating the ‘Swedish model’ elevated him to a celebrity in the country and spiked interest internationally, insists his approach was right.

“So far, I think, even taking into account the excess deaths, it has worked,” the scientist told Italy’s ANSA news agency on Sunday. Closing down Sweden “would not have made that much of a difference, including in nursing-home infections.”

“Each death is an immense tragedy – it is terrible to see so many people die. But there are many other aspects to consider when evaluating a unique approach – for example, the damage that is caused socially in the long term,” he added.

Thinking about what the long-term effects of doing the whole lockdown thing may be before putting it in place sounds like the common sense thing to do, but most countries went straight into full lockdown mode and forced everyone to live like prisoners in their own homes in an attempt to prevent very old people from dying.

Western governments claim to have not thought of and not cared about the fallout from these decisions, saying the only thing that mattered to them was saving the elderly. We already knew, from Chinese and Italian data, that most deaths were very old people who were already quite sick, yet governments chose to ignore the data and proceeded to force people into some weird “house arrest with supermarket visits” thing.

This obsessive focus on the short-term, on counting daily deaths, and having weekly death tolls, is preventing many from seeing that anyone who can die of coronavirus is going to die from coronavirus or something else (like the flu of previous years) anyway. What this means is that the currently lower death toll of Sweden’s Nordic neighbors is going to increase once people start moving around normally.

Just like everywhere that did the lockdown, hospitals in Sweden were never overwhelmed, and everyone who needed treatment got treatment.

(We should however mention that because hospitals were not closed to all non-corona, non-emergency patients, the staffs of hospitals in Sweden did not have time to record choreographed TikTok videos, which some will no doubt look at as a failure of the Swedish system.)

Sweden did not produce an army of TikTok nurses, leaving many to believe they failed their nation.

When hospitals are not overwhelmed, and everyone gets treatment, what determines if people die from coronavirus or not are things such as age and underlying health conditions. There’s nothing magical about spending weeks or months locked inside your house to protect yourself from the virus because eventually, once you leave your home, you’ll be exposed to the virus.

But it seems that governments outside Sweden don’t want people to know that. For some reason, they keep pushing the Doom Virus hysteria, and they keep talking about everyone needing to stay home until they can vaccinate the entire planet. One has to ask though, what happens after that? Even if they vaccinated people against coronavirus, new viruses could continue to appear out of nowhere, just like coronavirus, and they’d have already set the precedent that viruses are enough reason to take away everyone’s rights.