A second wave of coronavirus cases is forcing South Korea and China into new lockdowns and extensive tracing efforts.
There’s a lesson here for America. To get out of the mess in any reasonable amount of time, we must consider copying Sweden’s approach — isolation of the vulnerable and their caretakers, combined with the cautious pursuit of herd immunity.
More than 100 South Koreans have become infected in recent days after attending bars in Seoul. And in Wuhan, China, authorities say that at least six people have tested positive. Considering Beijing’s penchant for coronavirus lies, it’s likely far more than that, or else we wouldn’t be hearing anything at all, let alone new government plans to test all 11 million residents of the city where the virus first broke out.
We still have only a small portion of the evidence, but we may ultimately learn that relaxed lockdowns will not stop this virus. At some point, someone will travel without symptoms and infect others in a different location. Then some of those individuals who lack symptoms will infect others. The spiral will start again.
Some suggest that mitigation measures can balance public health protections with a return to some sense of normalcy. South Korea’s example is showing us how difficult that will be.
The rollout of antibody tests, which will show if someone has previously contracted the virus without their knowledge and is thus now immune to reinfection, can allow some individuals to get back to normal life, while others without antibodies shelter in place. But the growing resentment against lockdowns might hint that people are unlikely to honor such orders. All of this also misses the broader issue that continued lockdowns are inherently authoritarian and trample our freedoms, even if they are justifiable. At best, they are necessary evils — at worst, they are avoidable ones.
Sweden, which chose an alternative approach to the virus from the beginning, might yet prove to have taken a better path. The Swedish government forbade gatherings of more than 50 people and directed vulnerable citizens to self-isolate. But it also left parks, schools, restaurants, bars, and workplaces open for everyone else. The result in terms of per capita COVID-19 deaths has been no worse than in other European countries, and much better than Spain, Italy, or the United Kingdom. And although Sweden’s death rate has been higher than that of the United States, in the long run, this approach might make Sweden more resistant than we are to second and third waves of the disease.
Meanwhile, Sweden’s civil society and economy have retained some measure of normalcy. And surely, there are corollary benefits for public health, such as fewer cancer treatments missed, fewer stress-induced illnesses, more human contact, and so on, than there would be under lockdown. Continued employment also has its own health benefits, especially in terms of psychological well-being. And Sweden is on course to avoid both the massive government outlays and the massive shortfall of revenue that other governments will suffer.
The jury is out, but Americans should look carefully at what happens in Sweden in the coming weeks next to secondary outbreaks elsewhere. What if they chose the better path, taking a justifiable risk?
