What About Sweden?

This BBC headline made me actually laugh out loud:

The headline doesn’t attribute the statement to anyone, and it isn’t an op-ed. (This violates every journalism style guide.)

It is attributed in the article itself.

BBC News:

Tough restrictions are “absolutely necessary” to save lives, the World Health Organization (WHO) has warned as Europe battles a second Covid-19 wave.

It comes as millions of people in European capitals and other cities have been told they must live under strict new measures.

From Saturday, socialising indoors will be banned in London, UK, and a curfew will be imposed in nine French cities.
But the situation is not as bad as it was in March and April, the WHO says.

On Wednesday a partial four-week lockdown began in the Netherlands, while the Czech Republic is building its first field hospital for coronavirus patients.

Germany, the Czech Republic, and Catalonia in Spain have also imposed restrictions as infections soar and officials warn that hospitals are at risk of being overwhelmed.

Coronavirus is the fifth-leading cause of death in Europe, where a threshold of 1,000 deaths daily has been passed, the WHO’s European director, Dr Hans Kluge, told a press conference on Thursday.

“It’s time to step up. The message to governments is: don’t hold back with relatively small actions to avoid the painful damaging actions we saw in the first round,” he said.


They’re saying they want this second lockdown to be much, much more hardcore than the lockdown earlier this year.

But if they are necessary in Europe, why aren’t they necessary in Sweden?

Sweden has always had a lower death rate than the UK.

But now they have a lower infection rate than their neighbors.

Sweden did not do any form of lockdown. They went for herd immunity.

WHO needs to explain this.

But they won’t.

Because this is a conspiracy.