On Friday Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen announced that on June 15, Denmark would allow tourists from Germany, Norway and Iceland to visit Denmark as long as they stayed at least six nights outside of Copenhagen. Danes likewise could travel to these three countries and were advised to avoid large cities. The plan drew criticism from the opposition parliamentary parties and the Copenhagen tourism industry. The reactions continued yesterday.
Summerhouse rental agencies in Jutland (DK) were suddenly overwhelmed with bookings from both Germans and Danes. Meanwhile, tourism officials in Copenhagen tried to tote up the damage to the capital because of the ban on overnight stays. Mikkel Aarø-Hansen, the managing director of Wonderful Copenhagen, estimates that it will cost the city DKK 1.3 billion in revenue ($185 million) and will affect 1,400 jobs. That comes on top of a loss of DKK 4.25 billion ($600 million) already in the three months since the lockdown began.
Some healthcare researchers approve
“If you want to avoid people crowding together in the evening – since that is the situation we have seen in superspreader events,” says Jens Lundgren, Professor of Infectious Disease Medicine, “there is a good argument on healthcare grounds (DK) for not allowing tourists to stay overnight in the city.” Allan Randrup Thomsen, Professor of Virology, agrees: On a nice day, you see many people out at Nyhavn and Strøget (the main pedestrian street). You have to add tourists to them. Copenhagen has been the hotspot, and you don’t want to make it a larger one.
Danes must stick to the countryside
Danes also began to make vacation plans according to the restrictions (DK) on their travel to the three countries. Those who visit a city with more than 750,000 inhabitants must self-isolate for 14 days after returning. That limitation is irrelevant for Norway and Iceland, where there are no cities of that size, but it affects five cities in Germany, including Berlin and Munich. This is a travel advisory, not an absolute prohibition, says Erik Brøgger Rasmussen of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. “There will be no control of where people have been by the police at the airport. . . . But we expect that Danes will listen to the advice and guidelines as they have done throughout the coronavirus crisis.”
Danish tourists are also advised to follow the local guidelines on precautions when they travel. For example, in Germany people must cover their mouths and noses with masks or scarves when they enter shops and use public transportation, but in Norway there is no requirement on wearing a mask. The rules and recommendations may also vary from locality to locality within the countries, for example the limit on gatherings.
Swedish annoyance
In Sweden, the reaction (DK) to the country’s exclusion from the border policy met disappointment, as expected. Niels Paarup Petersen, a Danish-born member of the Swedish parliament, called it “a little hypocritical” that Denmark cannot tolerate its neighbors from Skåne (the southern region of Sweden), which has not been hurt badly by the pandemic. “Many Danes are running around in Skåne, and it is apparently not dangerous. But if some people from Skåne come to Denmark, it is dangerous.”
By far the greatest number of infections in Sweden, which has not ordered a strict lockdown, have occurred in Stockholm. The infection rate is actually lower in Skåne than in Zealand, the island where Copenhagen is located, says Mikael Damberg, Swedish Minister for the Interior. The Swedish Foreign Minister, Ann Linde, says that the country had hoped for a joint Nordic solution and is continuing its dialogue with the other countries in the region.
At the same time, the Swedish Minister for Social Affairs, Lena Hallengren, acknowledged that the country is still in the midst of the crisis (DK). The number of deaths rose to 4,395, in contrast to 571 in Denmark. Anders Tegnell, the state epidemiologist who designed the laissez faire policy, admitted that it was a mistake not to test skiers who returned from Ischghl, the Austrian hotspot.
At a press conference yesterday, Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen announced the government’s policy on opening the border (DK). Like the earlier steps in the reopening of society and the economy, it takes a gradual, controlled approach and it also drew criticism.
Beginning on June 15, tourists from Germany, Norway and Iceland may enter Denmark, but they must be able to document that they have booked a stay for at least six nights outside of Copenhagen. They may make day trips to Copenhagen, which has had by far the most infections in Denmark, but must sleep elsewhere. Germany has had an infection rate similar to Denmark's, and the rate in the two other countries has been lower.
Tourists from other countries, including Sweden, are excluded. Officials in Sweden, which has not had a strict lockdown and has a much larger number of infections, have complained about lack of access to Denmark. Many Swedes work in Denmark, and many Danes have summer houses in southern Sweden. After the summer, the government expects to open the border to Schengen countries and the UK, said Frederiksen. She added that it may try to find a regional solution to the issue of Sweden.
No Mediterranean beaches for Danes
Tourists will be asked to be tested for the coronavirus when they cross the border, but it will not be compulsory. If they have visible symptoms, they will be refused entry. There will be test centers at popular vacation spots, and if tourists test positive, they may stay in the country subject to the Health Authority’s general guidelines on isolation.
For people traveling abroad from Denmark, the same restrictions apply. On June 15, they may travel to the same three countries, where they are urged to avoid large cities. The government advises against travel to other countries until August 31. That includes countries in southern Europe where many Danes spend their summer vacations. Frederiksen expressed regrets (DK) that people cannot travel to warm beaches and urged them to vacation in Denmark this year and help support hotels, restaurants and other local tourist sites that are suffering economically because of a lack of customers. If people travel to other countries, they may be subject to restrictions there or become stranded. In any case, they are urged to quarantine themselves for 14 days when they return.
SSI, the agency for preparedness against infectious diseases, believes that the border opening will lead to an increase in the number of infections (DK). It estimates that 400-1,500 asymptomatic persons with the coronavirus will enter the country. Independent healthcare researchers were divided (DK) about the plan. Some think it is sensible, and others believe that tourists from additional countries should be allowed entrance.
Strange, incomprehensible, shocking
Not surprisingly, the plan drew criticism from the opposition (DK), which has been agitating for an earlier border opening. Jacob Ellemann-Jensen of the Liberal Party calls the restrictions in the plan strange and arbitrary: “Why is it six days? And what is so dangerous about sleeping in Copenhagen? It is hard to see the rationale in the necessity of hurting hotels in Copenhagen and Frederiksberg. I hope there is a justification on the basis of healthcare considerations.”
Criticism also came from Frederiksen’s fellow Social Democrats. “Sad and incomprehensible,” said Jonas Bjørn Jensen, spokesperson for the party in Copenhagen. “It is Copenhagen that generates the most money for tourism, so if you want to benefit the industry, you should start there.”
Representatives of the tourism industry of course agreed. “I am shocked,” said Peter Haaber, head of the Zleep Hotels chain. “It is almost a compulsory lockdown.” The head of VisitDenmark, Jan Olsen, however, acknowledged the loss of income to hotels in Copenhagen but noted that only about 10 percent of tourists from the three countries in question stay in the city. Most stay along the coasts, and they have already begun to book rooms.
Only 24 of the people in Denmark who have died of COVID-19 did not have a chronic illness. That is the main finding of an evaluation by SSI (DK), the agency for preparedness against infectious diseases. It covered 9,519 cases and 524 deaths related to the coronavirus as of last week (since then, the number has risen to 568). It shows that there is very little risk of dying for infected people who are not elderly and do not have chronic illness. That is, the risk is not high even for patients who are 80 years and do not have a chronic illness or for those who are under 60 and have a chronic illness.
Of the 9,519 who tested positive, 22 percent were hospitalized and 6 percent died. The researchers caution that the estimate of the number of infections is closer to 100,000 than 10,000, so the fatality rate in the population is around 0.6 percent rather than 6 percent.
Average age at death perfectly normal
Three-quarters of those who died were over 75 years old, and 82 percent of them had more than one chronic illness. The average age of death is 82, which is the same as overall life expectancy in Denmark. The danger related to chronic illness is similar to that of ordinary influenza, says Reimer Thomsen, head doctor at Aarhus University Hospital who took part in the review, but the difference with COVID-19 is that it is very infectious. It can thus overwhelm hospitals, and more patients die because there are not enough beds in ICUs, as occurred in Italy.
Results from COVIDmeter
Six weeks ago, SSI launched a voluntary survey of persons who report symptoms (DK) once a week. Some 120,000 have participated by answering three simple questions on a website called COVIDmeter: Have you had symptoms in the past week? Have you been in contact with someone who is infected? Have you been tested? SSI has released the first set of results, and they show that the number of people with symptoms has fallen sharply over the period, from around 1.3 percent to around 0.25 percent. Since the survey is voluntary and not everyone has been aware of it, the results are approximate and subject to a margin of error.
The purpose of the survey was to serve as a supplement to the testing program and get an estimate of the number of infections among people who have not been tested. The people who reported symptoms were spread fairly evenly across age groups, and the trend in symptoms has generally followed the falling trend in hospitalizations of those tested.
Symptoms declined during Easter parties
The number with symptoms fell most sharply, to about 0.6 percent, during the first week of the survey, which ended on Easter Sunday. That is an interesting development, because officials had warned that people might have a tendency to relax their observance of social distancing guidelines in order to gather with their families on Easter weekend. See the charts showing a breakdown of the results (DK).
Soccer and amusement parks are back
In other news (DK), the Tivoli and Bakken amusement parks are opening today, albeit with limitations on the wildest roller coasters in order to prevent infections from screaming riders. Soccer play resumed in the Danish Superliga as the AGF club used the Zoom videoconferencing platform on a large screen at the Ceres Park stadium in Aarhus to create a "virtual grandstand." The match with Randers ended in a 1-1 tie.
On Tuesday the tabloid Ekstra Bladet reported that on March 1 Søren Brostrøm, the head of the Health Authority, had advised against a lockdown (DK). That was ten days before Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen announced widespread restrictions. “Limitations on gatherings, closing businesses and educational institutions could have significant negative social and economic effects,” wrote Brostrøm in an email to an unnamed civil servant. “[They] could increase the population’s insecurity and give an impression of a greater risk than is the case.”
This disclosure came soon after the news that immediately before Frederiksen’s announcement the Health Authority had not recommended the restrictions that the government implemented. A spokesperson for the Liberal Party, the largest opposition party, accused Frederiksen of “speaking untruthfully,” and Frederiksen maintained that the government had followed broad recommendations of the authorities. Between Brostrøm’s March 1 email and the March 11 announcement, the number of infections in Denmark rose from four to 514, and the latter figure was later adjusted to 758.
Withheld good news
On Wednesday, another story appeared that raises doubts about the government’s communication of information from the Health Authority. It appears that the government held back news of a positive development (DK) in the spread of the virus until after it had extended the lockdown. On March 20, Brostrøm sent another email, this time to his colleague Kåre Mølbak, saying that the reproduction rate of the infection had fallen from 2.6 to 2.1. He thought that the information should be announced publicly on the same day but reported that a political decision was made to withhold it until March 23.
“The population has had a great deal of confidence in the authorities and the government,” said Martin Geertsen, the healthcare spokesperson for the Liberal Party. “One can only say that the confidence doesn’t go in the other direction. … The government and the prime minister are apparently of the opinion that there is information that the public cannot bear to hear.” After the earlier revelation, the party called for an official consultation with the government on the issue.
Mistakes will occur
Also on Wednesday, Culture Minister Joy Mogensen acknowledged that at the beginning of the coronavirus crisis, the Ministry of Culture did not have a right to prohibit a large number of employees (DK) at the Danish Broadcasting Corporation and the TV2 news service from working. The order applied to all employees at the media organizations except for news journalists. It came on March 11, when the government announced that civil servants who did not perform essential functions should not report for work. Mogensen regretted that the announcement was expressed as an order and not a recommendation: “We have always been open to the fact that this was a completely unusual situation and that because of time pressure mistakes would occur.”
Alienating allies
As the conservative commentator Jarl Cordua wrote yesterday, Frederiksen and the Social Democratic administration have attained historically strong support from the population during the pandemic but their tendency to act independently has brought the opposition together (DK). Although they have managed to react quickly to their own mistakes and miscommunications and thus reduce the political damage, they have driven one of their supporting parties, the Social Liberals, into an alliance with the right-wing parties, particularly on the issue of reopening the borders. This makes it more obvious that it is a minority government, and the opposition will take advantage of opportunities to press its criticism of the government’s management of the pandemic.
Is it possible to judge Sweden’s singular coronavirus policy yet? Denmark’s neighbor has diverged from the rest of the world in refraining from locking down large sectors of social and business activity. It has kept restaurants and schools open and has not issued social distancing rules. Like its Scandinavian neighbors, it citizens exhibit a high degree of social trust in one another and in the government, and it has relied on people to behave sensibly of their own accord. For a while it seemed to be working well. The number of infections and deaths in the country were not significantly higher than in similar countires. It was praised by critics of lockdown policies in other countries for showing the strict regulations that harm the economy are unnecessary. So what is the status of the experiment?
It has now reached almost 4,000 deaths (DK), in comparison with 562 in Denmark. Its population is around twice as large. It has 398 deaths per million persons in comparison with 98 in Denmark, 44 in Norway, and 55 in Finland. I have thought that the spread of the infection has been higher in Denmark than in Norway because the first cases involved superspreaders who returned from hotspot ski resorts in Austria and northern Italy, and Norwegians do not need to travel south to go skiing. So if Sweden’s most comparable neighbors are Norway and Finland, its fatality rate is about eight times higher.
Elusive herd immunity
The person behind the strategy, Anders Tegnell, the head state epidemologist, has defended the policy all along, contending that is too early to judge the results. If the objective was too reach “herd immunity” by allowing most of the population to become infected and afterward immune, then there would inevitably be more infections and deaths in the beginning stages. In countries that conduct extensive lockdowns, when people who have isolated themselves begin to emerge, many of them will become infected and the country will see additional waves of infection, goes the rationale.
On several days last week, the fatality rate in Sweden (DK) was the highest in the world. On day 60 of the epidemic, the rate was even higher than Italy’s at the same stage, and ten times as high as Denmark’s. And the country is still far from herd immunity. There were earlier predictions that around half of Stockholm’s population would reach immunity in June, but a recent count of persons who have developed antibodies to the disease was only 7.3 percent, and that is much higher than in the rest of the country. There is much uncertainty in identifying immunity, and the WHO had warned Sweden in April that not everyone who is infected develops immunity.
Unrealistic expectations
Now criticism is growing (DK) both inside and outside the country. For example, former state epidemologist Annike Lind said that if the country had closed down early it could have done more to protect the most vulnerable people. Tegnell had said that they would protect the elderly, she said, but it “had little relation to reality.” A large share of the deaths have come in nursing homes.
Tegnell denies (DK) that Sweden could have done anything differently to protect the elderly, arguing that the poor quality of Swedish nursing homes made them vulnerable. He also says that the objective has never been herd immunity, which is not possible until there is a vaccine. But he maintains that if people don’t change their behavior they will continue to see a decline in the number of infections.
Playing with statistics
Another Swedish researcher recently defended the strategy (DK). Matti Sällberg, a professor at the Karolinska Institute, argues that if you do not measure the epidemic by the fatality rate but rather by the number of deaths in relation to the number of infections, then there is little difference between Sweden and Denmark. With an infection rate of 6 percent in Sweden, the fatality rate is about 0.6 percent. In Denmark, the infection rate is about 1.0 percent and the fatality rate 0.8 percent. That is not necessarily the most significant statistic, says Søren Riis Paludan, Professor of Biomedicine at Aarhus University. It indicates that Sweden has been as good as Denmark in treating people who have become infected, but not whether not it has been successful in containing the epidemic.
Tegnell has maintained that it will be years before one can judge what strategy is best, and he thinks there may be not be large differences between the results in various countries. Does he have a serious case of confirmation bias or will he prove correct?
(No post tomorrow. Back on Thursday.)
Last week Germany and France reached an agreement on a relief package for European Union regions and industries (DK) that have suffered most during the coronavirus pandemic. The funding would take the form of a loan for EUR 5 billion that all 27 EU member states would be liable for. It is the first time that Germany has gone along with a proposal for some form of mutualized debt. France had wanted an even larger aid package. Italy and Spain are the countries that have been worst hit by the virus.
North vs. South redux
The measure must be approved by all 27 member states, however, and Denmark is one of a group of four northern European countries that opposes the program. The other countries in the so-called “frugal four” are the Netherlands, Finland and Austria. The group is insisting that the aid take the form of loans instead of grants and that member state contributions remain at 1 percent of GDP. Proponents of the plan say that it is necessary in order to hold the EU together. The EU Commission will present a budget that incorporates the recovery package as long-term debt on May 27.
The EU has a history of reluctantly reaching compromises in order to keep the Union intact. This project would represent a momentous step toward a fiscal union that the wealthier member states have always opposed. In the coming negotiations, for the first time the northern European countries will be on the other side of the debate from Germany, Europe’s largest economy. Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen has expressed her opposition (DK) to the plan since it was first proposed by the EU finance ministers last month.
Breakdown of party alignment
The two largest Danish opposition parties support the Social Democratic administration’s rejection of a grant and joint EU debt. “The idea of shared debt in the EU is just as crazy as if you should share a mortgage loan with your neighbor regardless of how they maintained their property,” said Morten Messerschmidt of the Danish People’s Party. On the other hand, the Social Liberal Party, which supports the Frederiksen administration, favors the proposal partly because it will benefit the Danish private sector, which depends on exports.
Frederiksen, who has recently been criticized for locking down Denmark without a clear recommendation from the Health Authority and for being too slow to reopen the Danish economy, thus faces a debate over the proposal among her own supporters in Denmark besides negotiations with the most powerful European countries.
Tourism in pandemic times
Several European countries are also working on a plan to allow cross-border travel (DK) to resume and restart the tourism industry. Germany has recently reopened its borders and has invited Denmark to do the same. German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas has proposed travel guidelines and quarantine rules to be implemented when the tourist season begins next month. Maas held a video meeting with nine other countries to discuss the practical details.
Others are skeptical that the southern European countries will be ready to allow tourists in so soon. Conditions vary greatly from country to country. Spain has only recently begun to relax its lockdown restrictions. On the other hand, Greece has already reopened tourist resorts. Under pressure from opposition parties, Frederiksen has promised to announce a decision this week on reopening the Danish borders. Denmark’s rural economies and summer house owners are anxious not to miss the approaching rental season and the usual influx of German tourists.
The Danish government’s decision to disburse the funds in the economic relief package quickly has enabled some businesses to collect money under fraudulent pretenses (DK). That was reported on Thursday by the Danish State Prosecutor for Serious Economic and International Crime, which is usually referred to by its Danish abbreviation, SØIK. The funds were intended to pay employees' salaries while they could not work and to compensate firms for operating expenses. The agency suspects that more than DKK 7 million (about $1 million) was disbursed unnecessarily, and it has thus far recovered about DKK 670,000 (about $70,000). The Secretariat for Money Laundering has received 133 referrals from banks on possible swindling with relief funds.
The industry association for small and medium-sized businesses fears that the reports may have consequences for its member firms, which are most in need of relief funds but which also have fewer resources than larger firms to satisfy the increasing requirements for documentation and control of the disbursements. The association had requested a quick release of the funds because many small firms were in danger of going bankrupt.
Whistleblowers wanted
On Wednesday, Minister for Business Simon Kollerup announced that the government, along with almost all the other parliamentary parties, passed a bill to prevent such fraud (DK). The bill includes a whistleblower program that will make it easier for employees and others to report the abuse of relief funds. Fraud related to the aid package is subject to much higher penalties than usual.
Don’t talk to strangers
At the lower end of the crime scale, there have also been reports of thieves using the coronavirus crisis as an excuse (DK) gain entry into people’s homes. For example, four men and a woman were convicted of robbery for threatening to commit violent acts against a couple in their eighties in the municipality of Hvidovre. They are also subject to higher than usual sanctions because their crime involved exploiting the pandemic.
Earlier a woman retiree in southern Jutland received a visit from two men in plastic outfits and masks (DK) who said they were from the Health Authority. She didn’t let them in, and when she lifted her phone to show that she would call the police, they ran off. The police warn that trick-thieves exploit the Danes’ high level of trust in one another and in the authorities and that people should be skeptical and ask for identification in such situations.
The most vulnerable victims
There are also suspicions of a worse sort of crime that is not being reported (DK) to the usual degree because of conditions during the lockdown. The number of reports of sexual assault against children has fallen sharply in the past two months. Cases of rape and incest are down 60 percent, and cases of other violence against children are down 42 percent. The likely reason is that children have not been in school regularly and their teachers have not had the opportunity to observe signs of abuse.
This has led Astrid Krag, the Minister of Social Affairs and the Interior, and Pernille Rosenkrantz-Theil, the Minister of Children and Education, to send a letter to schools and recreation centers urging the teachers and staff to be attentive to such developments. Spokespersons for the police and Save the Children concurred that the lockdown is probably the reason for the drop in the reports.
Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen has been recognized internationally as one of the national leaders who has responded most resolutely and effectively to the coronavirus pandemic. She has been mentioned along with other woman leaders from New Zealand and Taiwan whose approach has been contrasted with that of reckless male leaders in the United States and Brazil, where the epidemic has gotten out of control. Now she has been accused of locking down Denmark under false pretenses (DK). The daily Jyllands-Posten has reviewed government memoranda from the days before the lockdown and found that Frederiksen’s assertion at the press conference on March 11 that it was “the authorities’ recommendation that we close down all unnecessary activity” was untrue.
Not the Health Authority
The day before the press conference, the Health Authority compiled a list of possible measures to take against the virus, and a lockdown and forcible intervention were not mentioned. A memorandum dated February 28 from Søren Brostrøm, the head of the Health Authority, indicates that the Authority was against a general intervention upon citizens’ freedom and that such measures should be permitted only in certain “specific situations.” In the March 11 announcement, Frederiksen did not say which authorities had made the recommendation.
Kjeld Møller Pedersen, Professor of Healthcare Policy at Southern Denmark University says that “the government has misused the healthcare advice.” The day after the press conference, Parliament passed an emergency bill that gave the government power to dictate policy instead of the Health Authority. “It was not a pretty process,” says Kent Kristensen, Associate Professor of Healthcare Law at Southern Denmark University.
Now representatives of various political parties want to question Frederiksen about the process. Sophie Løhde from the Liberal Party says that “the prime minister has spoken untruthfully directly to the Danes.” The Social Liberals and the Red-Green Party, which support the administration, also want an explanation.
Administration defends the decision
Later on Friday, when she visited a museum that was reopening after two months, Frederiksen spoke to reporters about the accusations (DK). She said that government authorities recommended a partial lockdown of the country in order to minimize social contact. When asked which authorities did so if the Health Authority apparently did not, she said, “It was a broad group from the authorities that has advised us. And as a general principle, I won’t get into which words came from which authorities. . . . Specifically, how we closed Denmark and that we did it quickly were of course political decisions.”
In a written response to inquiries, Minister of Health Magnus Heunicke stated that “On the basis of an overall evaluation, the government made a decision according to a precautionary principle to close down all unnecessary activity in society.”
Any practical significance?
The healthcare spokesperson for the Liberal Party, which has been most critical of Frederiksen’s sometimes autocratic handling of the crisis, does not question whether the lockdown was the right decision (DK) but maintains, like several other parties, that the entire process should be investigated thoroughly after the crisis has passed.
The Ritzau agency was unable to get a comment from the Health Authority, which was closed because of the Ascension Day holiday. The story does not seem to be given much prominence in the main media sources. It appears very far down Danish Broadcasting Corporation’s home page (DK), for example.
Now anyone can be tested (DK) for COVID-19. Previously, only people with symptoms could request a test and they had to do it through their GP. On Monday, the Health Ministry announced that people who have only a slight suspicion that they have been exposed to the coronavirus can order a test on the coronaprover.dk website. The purpose is to track down as many infections as possible before they infect others, said Health Minister Magnus Heunicke. The new policy is possible because the country’s testing capacity has been expanded substantially in the past month. Up to 42,000 persons can be tested per day.
Wait your turn, boomer
In the first stage, young adults from the ages of 18 to 25 are eligible to make an appointment at one of the 16 Test Centers set up in large white tents located across the country. Later in the week, the system will be open for the rest of the population. People who are identified by contact tracers as having been exposed to an infected person will be referred for a test automatically. Heunicke cautions that people with a negative test result must still observe careful hygiene and social distancing because the result does not guarantee that someone is not infected.
Some 4,500 persons succeeded in booking a test (DK) on Monday. Many more people tried, even though they weren’t all in the right age group. By the afternoon, 25,000 people were waiting in line on the website. The Health Ministry has not announced when other age groups will become eligible.
Quarantine fatigue?
The expanded testing policy comes at a time when more people than ever are disregarding the government’s guidelines (DK) on social distancing. A new survey from Epinion and Aarhus University shows the largest drop in the number of people who avoid gatherings of more than ten people, the current limit, since the lockdown was imposed on March 13. The percentage who observed the limit declined from 85 percent on May 8 to 71 percent on May 15. The level had been stable in the range of 81-89 percent since March 20. More than 17,000 persons took part in the survey.
Unlocked and optimistic
One can also notice a difference on the streets and in shops, say observers such as retail salespeople. People are less careful to maintain social distancing and they are coming into contact with others they haven’t been exposed to before. The trend does not necessarily mean that people have become indifferent to the guidelines, however, according to Professor Michael Bang Petersen, who worked on the survey. More than half of those surveyed still wash their hands more than ten times a day. The main factor, says Bang Petersen, could be that the sphere of their daily routines has expanded with the lifting of lockdown restrictions and more people are back at their workplaces, for example. Others warn that hand-washing alone shouldn’t be considered an adequate precaution.
The exhortations by Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen and healthcare officials have always stressed that the lockdown exit process depended on the continuation of social distancing. The survey also shows that people are less worried and more optimistic about the country’s condition.
On Wednesday, after ten hours’ negotiations, the government reached an agreement with all the other parliamentary parties on an acceleration of phase 2 of the plan to reopen additional sectors of society and the economy (DK). Several types of organization can resume activities on May 27 instead of in June, as scheduled earlier. These include amusement parks, secondary education, adult education, cultural associations, nursing homes for visits, and public-sector workplaces except in the Greater Copenhagen and Zealand Regions. Museums, theaters and zoos may open immediately.
This means that almost everything that still had been closed can reopen on the condition that they observe the guidelines on hygiene and social distancing. The only exceptions are gyms and other indoor sports and recreational activities, nightclubs and concert halls, and institutions of higher education that have not already opened as well as public-sector offices in Zealand. This is the first time the reopening plan has differentiated between the policies for individual regions.
The change in the timetable was made possible because of a new report from Statens Serum Institute (SSI) showing that the infection rate in the country remained low despite the relaxation of lockdown restrictions.
Partying can wait
The parties also agreed raise the limit on gatherings gradually to 30 to 50 persons during the summer, beginning with the transition to phase 3 on June 8. On May 25, the borders will open (DK) for residents of the other Scandinavian countries and Germany who own a summer house or have relatives in Denmark, and a plan to open the borders further for foreign tourism will be announced by May 29.
A majority of Parliament consisting of the right-wing parties, the Social Liberal Party and the Alternative Party had pressed the government especially to open the borders (DK) and to increase the limit on gatherings before the end of May. The SSI warned particularly against large indoor gatherings. When people are together for an extended period without adequate ventilation or the liberal consumption of alcohol makes the observance of precautionary guidelines more difficult, there is a risk of “superspreading” (DK).
Tourists can wait
“The border is the factor that has the greatest economic significance for Denmark right now,” said Jacob Ellemann-Jensen of the Liberal Party. The right wing received support for this position from the WHO (DK), whose spokesperson recently stated that because of its progress in controlling the virus, Denmark should be able to open its borders, assuming that it does so carefully, for example by screening tourists.
The report from the SSI warned that opening the borders posed a risk of starting new chains of infection. Pernille Skipper of the Red-Green Party agreed, reminding the others that the Health Authority had advised allowing for three weeks between phases of reopening in order to monitor the spread of the virus.
The WHO vs. Mette
Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen has thus far resisted the economic arguments for large events and open borders. “When you come into Christiansborg [Parliament], you almost get the impression that we have left corona behind us,” she said. “If Denmark has a prime minister who lets herself be pressured into something that isn’t defensible, it simply won’t work. And it won’t happen with me.”
On Monday, Berlingske (DK), the Danish daily, reported that figures presented by Statens Serum Institute in March on the spread of the coronavirus were incorrect. On March 30, SSI announced that in the first 12 days of the lockdown the reproduction rate, R0, had fallen from 2.6 to 1.4. On the basis of the data available at the time, the actual levels were 2.1 to 1.3. Berlingske called the error an ”exaggeration” (DK) of both the danger of the virus and the improvement that took place after the government’s lockdown. SSI acknowledged the mistake, which it explained by saying that the figures did not include people who had been infected abroad. The other statistics released by SSI apparently did include those persons. Upon the release of the figures, Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen had announced that the country had succeeded in delaying the spread of the virus and that there were grounds for cautious optimism.
Did the mistake influence the strategy?
Allan Randrup Thomsen, Professor of Experimental Virology at University of Copenhagen, says it was a serious error. On the basis of the data available today, the figures for the period in question are even lower, showing a drop from 1.5 to 1.3. Jan Pravsgaard Christensen, Professor at the Institute for Immunology and Microbiology at University of Copenhagen, says that if the correct figures had been released on March 30, the lockdown might not have been so drastic. But he added that any reproduction rate above 1.0 indicated an accelerating spread of infections, so if the lockdown had not been as strict, the result might have been a longer lockdown period. SSI rejected the description of the figures as misleading.
Yesterday Minister of Health Magnus Heunicke responded (DK) to the report. He said that the error was irritating but that it was a minor “editorial error.” He maintained that the number of hospitalizations in early March was rising sharply and that government’s lockdown was a necessary step to control the crisis.
Independent review
In a related development that may not have stemmed directly from the controversy about the infection figures, a parliamentary majority proposed an independent evaluation (DK) of the government’s handling of the pandemic from the beginning of the year. The Social Liberal Party, which supports the Social Democratic administration, joined four right-wing opposition parties in calling for the appointment of a committee of five persons with diverse expertise who would be given access to all the government’s and the relevant agencies’ documents during the period. The faction stressed the importance of such an evaluation’s being based in Parliament rather than the administration.
“When you place the entire society on hold, people have a right to know afterward whether it was done on the basis of the correct assumptions,” said Peter Skaarup of the Danish People’s Party. It would be unusual that such an investigation would be managed by Parliament rather than by one of the ministries, but the deviation is warranted, says Mai Mercado of the Conservative Party: “At a time when Parliament has been sidelined, it is very important that Parliament takes charge of determining the model of the evaluation.”
Reopening the rest of country
The administration has invited the other party leaders to a meeting today to discuss the next steps (DK) in the relaxation of the lockdown restrictions. The negotiations will be based on the latest figures from SSI, which the administration expects to receive this morning and to pass on to the party leaders “as quickly as possible.”
Some people have become familiar with the Danish concept of hygge in the past several years when reading explanations for Denmark’s top ranking in the international happiness surveys. It refers to a special feeling of comfortable conviviality among family and friends. The adjective hyggelig is translated as “cozy.” For many people who enjoy visiting their local pubs and cafes regularly, hygge has been one of the main things they have missed since the lockdown went into effect more than two months ago.
Where everybody knows your name
Yesterday restaurants, cafes and bars were open for business again. For some of the regulars at the local pubs (DK) it was a great relief to be able to sit down in a familiar booth and toast to a reunion with their friends. Some retirees showed up soon after the place opened at 10 a.m. and started off with a cup of coffee. “It’s been pure hell psychologically,” said one. “I hadn’t smoked in a year and a half, but now I started again. Shit-crisis.”
“It’s been terrible not to have anyone to pester, tease, exchange banter and have fun with,” said another.
The bartender isn’t worried about getting infected any more than in other places. He’s just happy to be back in his daily routine. “The only positive thing about it was that I cleaned up the entire apartment. All the drawers, closets, papers. . . . You had to make use of the time, otherwise it would have been fucking boring to stay home.”
Sanitized camaraderie
The local hangout might not look quite the same. The tables are farther apart. Bottles of hand sanitizer stand on all of them. There are no stools by the bar. Some bars have set up plexiglas barriers that people have become familiar with at supermarkets and kiosks. The owners set a limit on the number of patrons so that there are at least two square meters per person, but they don’t want to have to monitor whether they all keep one meter away from one another. People ask about the rules. “If you bring a dog, does it count toward the limit of ten in a group?”
The police were checking (DK) that the establishments followed the guidelines on limiting the number of guests and positioning the tables. They needed to clarify the rules in only a few cases, and they didn’t issue any fines. They believe people have a good understanding of social distancing principles by now. The turnout yesterday might also have been limited because the weather wasn’t favorable for sitting outdoors and some people decided to wait before dining out again.
Many small businesses were able to survive because they received aid from the government to cover employees’ wages and operating expenses. But it will still be a struggle for venues that depend on foreign tourists, meetings, conferences and other large events. Restaurants may not stay open after midnight.
Middle schools and libraries
Pupils in the upper grades also returned to school (DK), including boarding schools where many kids spend ninth or tenth grade. They were happy to see their friends again, but it felt strange not to be able to hug them. They were divided into groups of eight that they can come close to and must keep clear of the others, even boyfriends and girlfriends. Other people were happy to be able to visit their neighborhood library branch again. “I didn’t know what to read,” said one visitor. “I read all the murder mysteries and other things. I picked up old books again.” In this stage of the lockdown exit, libraries are open only for picking up and returning books; people can’t sit in the reading rooms yet. But they’re getting a reminder of life B.C.: Before Coronavirus.
The good news couldn’t keep going forever. The infections and deaths have been declining steadily for six weeks; the country just saw its first day without a single death; the relaxation of restrictions is proceeding on schedule. But the virus has not been eradicated. The new policy of systematic contact tracing may be responsible for the latest discovery. Yesterday, the urology surgery ward at Lillebælt Hospital in the provincial town of Vejle had to close after a large outbreak (DK).
Last week two patients in the ward tested positive, and tracing showed that a total of seven patients and 14 employees in the ward were also positive. The hospital tested 120 patients who had been in contact with the ward in the preceding week, and five tested positive. Most of the infected persons have only mild symptoms. Thirteen of the infected employees have been sent home for self-quarantine and one has been hospitalized.
The bug beats the tests
The patients had tested negative before they were admitted, as had the many of the employees on their first test, said Mads Koch Hansen, the medical director of the hospital, who maintains that hospital had followed all of the relevant guidelines: “We can say who was the first to show symptoms and how early we identified the infection, but we cannot confirm it [the beginning of the infection]. . . . This shows how tricky an illness we’re dealing with when people can be infected without testing positive.”
Hospitals in the Southern Denmark Region had begun to return to ordinary operations because of the low number of covid-19 cases. After this episode, they will reconsider their procedures. The ward in Lillebælt Hospital will reopen tomorrow after it finishes conducting a thorough cleaning.
No second wave here
People had otherwise become optimistic about reopening businesses and resuming other activities. The day before, Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen had said in an interview (DK) that she did not expect that Denmark would need to conduct another lockdown in the autumn, when some researchers are predicting a second wave of the illness. The country had now developed an infrastructure that enables it to react quickly to new outbreaks, she said. Frederiksen has also become open to the possibility of differentiating the restrictions and reopening by region because of the large geographic differences in the spread of the virus, which has been concentrated primarily in Greater Copenhagen.
Entitled to binge
Some people say Danish teenagers are spoiled. There is a tradition here that just after their graduation ceremony, gymnasium (high school) students are drawn around town in a large open trailer, cheering and honking, stopping at their homes for snacks, and drinking and partying long into the night. There has been some concern that this year’s graduates may not be able to enjoy the custom because of the epidemic and the increased risk of its spreading under those conditions.
At the political debate on Thursday, several of the party leaders expressed a wish that this graduating class not miss out on this rich tradition (DK), even if it was borderline unadvisable because of the difficulty of following hygienic guidelines when drunk. One of them, Josephine Fock of the small Alternative Party, made the heretical suggestion that the rides could be held without drinking. After the debate, however, Fock clarified in a tweet (DK) that she had meant it only as an alternative if the rides would otherwise be disallowed and that she also preferred that they take place “WITH alcohol.”
A demonstration against lockdown restrictions (DK) has finally come to Denmark. On Saturday, several hundred people gathered in front of Copenhagen City Hall to protest the loss of their constitutional rights without a reasonable justification on healthcare grounds. Some four hundred people had signed up for the event on Facebook labelled “#TogetherforFreedom.” They listened to rock music and brandished posters with slogans such as “COVID-19 is not at all dangerous.” “The public has not at any time seen documentation that this is an extraordinary crisis situation,” said the arrangers’ statement.
Government secrecy
“These are political decisions, and we want to call attention to the legitimacy of being critical and asking questions,” said Marie Jensen, one of the persons behind the event. “The Health Authority has not recommended the interventions that the government has made. We don’t know what the Health Authority would have recommended, and we think that we haven’t gotten an answer to that.” Another of the arrangers is the doctor Vibeke Manniche, who in several blog posts has criticized the government’s actions as “corona hysteria” (DK).
It is clear from video recordings of the event that more than ten persons gathered close “together” at the site, and this would normally be a violation of rule on congregating. But the police did not react and issue fines, as they have done elsewhere, because the ban does not apply to political demonstrations.When asked whether the participants didn’t have an obligation to follow the government’s recommendations, such as keeping a distance of at least one meter from one another in order to prevent the spread of the virus, Jensen answered, “If it was very dangerous, then there would be prohibition against it. And as long as there isn’t a ban, we have a right to do it.”
Growing European movement
The demonstration appeared to be peaceful, with none of the guns or death threats that have cropped up in American protests. There was surprisingly little coverage of it by Danish news sources. There have been similar demonstrations in several cities in Germany recently, and some of them have turned violent. Many of the demonstrators there and in London appear to endorse the theories that the virus was created in a lab by a big pharma company and/or that it is being used in a plot to enforce compulsory vaccination.
There were also large gatherings in Norway (DK) yesterday in defiance of that country’s limit on gatherings, but they appeared not to be protests against pandemic restrictions as much as the traditional parties on the eve of the Norway’s Constitution Day. Police reported that there were up to 1,000 students gathered at Frogner Park and that they did not have the capacity to intervene with measures to mitigate the spread of the virus. Official events celebrating Constitution Day have been cancelled or limited in scope. The epidemic is much more limited in Norway than in Denmark, where it is also low from an international perspective.
Lockdown exit too slow
The timing of the demonstration in Denmark is somewhat ironic. Denmark has never issued strict stay-at-home orders or required people to wear masks in public. It is in the midst of phase 2 of the relaxation of restrictions. Last week shopping centers reopened and the guideline on social distancing was reduced from two meters to one meter. Tomorrow restaurants, libraries and other institutions, churches and middle schools can reopen. One of the few restrictions left to protest is the one on large gatherings at events such as concerts, theaters and sporting events – with the exception of political demonstrations.
Yesterday was the first day in two months when there were zero deaths from covid-19 (DK) registered. The disease statistics have been falling since around April 1. The number of patients hospitalized declined by ten in the past 24 hours, and the new cases of infection have been below 100 for the past five days. Here are the latest totals:
- Hospitalized: 137
- ICU patients: 32
- On respirators: 26
- Deaths: 537 (93 per million)
- Infected: 10,791
- Recovered:8,959
- Tested: 368,889 persons (400,000+ total)
The results indicate that Denmark’s strategy of beginning the relaxation of restrictions with young children (DK) was effective, says Virologist Allan Randrup Thomsen, Professor of Virology. The staff at schools and day-care centers succeeded in dividing children into groups and maintaining a distance between them. Thomsen cautions, however, that the number of fatalities is not the most important parameter because they can come after a long period of hospitalization. The number of new hospitalizations is more important, and that has also fallen steadily.
Intra-Nordic discrimination?
It’s a little curious that this announcement comes on the same day as a hypothetical complaint from Sweden (DK) about Denmark’s possibly opening its border with Germany but not the border with its closest Scandinavian neighbor. In the political debate on Thursday, some party leaders proposed opening the Danish borders to German and Norwegian tourists. This led Sweden’s Minister for Nordic Collaboration, Anna Halberg, to declare that such a move would be “unfair discrimination.” Halberg argues that one should not compare the spread of the infection in Copenhagen and Stockholm, where it is highest in Sweden, but rather the spread in Greater Copenhagen and the neighboring Skåne region in Sweden, where the spread is less extensive.
Jakob Ellemann-Jensen of the Danish Liberal Party had said that Denmark should “not wait to open the border with Germany until it is defensible from a healthcare perspective to open the border with Sweden.” Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen reiterated that the government will wait until June 1 to open any of the borders. Italy, one of the countries hardest hit by covid-19, has just announced that it will allow foreign travel next month (DK).
The long, hard trek to herd immunity
Sweden has been following a more open policy on the pandemic than Denmark and the rest of the world. It has not ordered a strict lockdown and has not closed restaurants but has rather relied on the population to practice social distancing voluntarily. Its disease statistics are much higher than those in the rest of Scandinavia. There has been some uncertainty about whether its official policy is to pursue “herd immunity,” but in any case, the earlier admirers of its controversial laissez-faire approach from other countries have begun to change their minds about its advisability. It has registered 3,646 deaths (363 per million), almost four times as many per million as in Denmark and Germany and eight times as many as in Norway.
Not everyone agrees that such caution is necessary, however. Søren Riis Paludan, Professor of Virology and Immunology at Aarhus University, says it doesn’t matter whether tourists to Jutland come from Germany or Copenhagen, which also has a higher infection rate than Jutland. He does not even think that the wider spread of the disease in Sweden is significant. While the number of deaths in Denmark fell to zero yesterday, there were 117 new deaths and 625 new infections in Sweden.
Yesterday evening, the leaders of all ten parliamentary parties gathered for their first formal, televised debate (DK) since the beginning of the coronavirus epidemic. After reaching agreements on the earlier steps in managing the crisis and reopening the Denmark’s economy, the opposition parties were eager to stake out their own distinctive positions. Jakob Ellemann-Jensen of the Liberal Party declared that his party would not support any package on economic recovery unless it froze taxes. He characterized the position as an “ultimate demand,” or ultimatum, which in Danish politics is considered an aggressive and provocative maneuver. The Social Democratic government does not necessarily need the Liberals’ votes to pass a bill, but Danish administrations usually try to gather a consensus for the fiscal budget and emergency measures. Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen agreed that higher taxes and duties would not help the private sector suffering during the crisis.
Tax break, opening the border
Before the debate Ellemann-Jensen had proposed reducing VAT by 50 percent (DK) in the second half of 2020 as a way of creating jobs. The move would lower prices for consumers and help businesses recover. VAT in Denmark is 25 percent, and the reduction would put the VAT rate below the EU’s minimum level. Ellemann-Jensen raised this issue in the debate, but got no immediate support from the other right-wing parties. Morten Østergaard of the Social Liberals supported a tax break for businesses but wanted the initiative to take the form of a permanent “green conversion” (DK) that advanced sustainable energy rather than a temporary rescue measure.
Østergaard also pressed Frederiksen on opening the border (DK) at least for German summer tourists in order to boost the rural economies that depend on summer tourism. Germany is opening its borders today and has invited Denmark to join it. Frederiksen said that the government was willing to consider the possibility but warned of the consequences if a German family proved to be spreading the virus and reiterated the government’s intention to wait until June 1 to present a plan for the borders.
Frederiksen in charge
Altogether, there was little new in the debate and not much disagreement. It concluded with the party leaders saying almost unanimously and sometimes emotionally that they looked forward, after the crisis has passed, to being able to give their parents and others a proper hug again (DK). The most noteworthy pronouncements perhaps came before the debate began, when Frederiksen was on her way into the National Gallery, where it was held. Earlier in the day, Frederiksen had sent an email to the party leaders with a new, more optimistic report from SSI, the agency responsible for preparedness against infectious diseases, and an invitation to negotiations on accelerating the reopening. On the way to the debate, she announced that she thought the reopening should proceed more quickly. She thus seemed to take credit for something that many of them had argued for and left them with few options in their response.
The sharpest exchange (DK) of the evening also occurred during Frederiksen’s preliminary colloquy with journalists. When asked whether it was wise to frighten people in the beginning of the crisis by referring to images of Italian trucks carrying corpses, she replied by asking the reporter, Henrik Qvotrup of the tabloid Ekstra Bladet, whether he was certain that things wouldn’t have gone wrong if Denmark hadn’t locked down earlier than other countries. “But you’re the prime minister and I’m the journalist,” Qvotrup answered. “That’s maybe a very good thing for the Danish people, if I may say so,” replied Frederiksen. One commentator remarked that the irritated response indicated that the issue of whether Frederiksen has overdramatized the dangers of the epidemic must be a sore point for her.
Yesterday, the EU Commission presented a tourism package (DK) that is intended to rescue the summer tourist season in Europe. Germany had just announced that it will open its borders tomorrow, and Margrethe Vestager, the European Commissioner for Competition and Danish Social Liberal politician, urged other member states to follow suit. The Danish government has said that it will not consider reopening the borders until after June 1. When asked whether that was too late, Vestager responded, “Both service and production businesses need to move across borders to a greater extent,” adding that all the necessary precautions must be taken.
The package is set of recommendations and guidelines for the member states. For example, people should not travel if they are sick; passengers should check in online and avoid lines at the airport; airlines should not serve food on board; they should take fewer passengers; unrelated passengers should not sit close together; hotels and camping grounds should follow strict hygiene policies. In the first phase, the EU recommends that countries with similar levels of infection (DK) open their borders to each other, for example Denmark and Greece, where the epidemic is under control. The entire Schengen region should not open until later.
Digital travel solutions
The Commission will also develop an interactive map that shows the status of the epidemic in various regions and will present guidelines that will allow the “corona apps” from each country to function in the other member states. The EU has no authority to determine the policies of member states, however. Tourism represents 10 percent of the EU’s economy, and 27 million jobs, directly or indirectly, depend on it, mostly in southern Europe. It represents 8 percent of the Danish economy.
The pandemic has of course been a disaster for countries with a large tourism industry (DK). The Cannes Film Festival should be taking place at the moment, for example, but the many hotels in the region are empty. Italy only last week relaxed restrictions for its own citizens, who must present documentation if they want to travel between regions. Spain, which is also heavily dependent on tourism, is still in the early stages of reopening. Airlines, whose business has plummeted during the crisis, have canceled many flights and passengers are demanding refunds. The airlines have asked for permission to issue credits toward future flights instead, but the Commission has rejected the request.
Pressure from the right
A majority of the Danish parliamentary parties is reportedly in favor of at least a partial opening (DK), for example for German and Norwegian tourists or for people who rent summer houses. At Parliament’s latest question session, representatives of three right-wing opposition parties pressed the government (DK) to follow Germany’s initiative. Danish Justice Minister Nick Hækkerup, however, maintained that Denmark is not ready to put the positive developments in controlling the coronavirus at risk, noting that the epidemic entered the country with skiers returning from Austria and Italy in February. It costs Denmark DKK 107 million ($15 million) for every day that the borders are closed, said Ulla Tørnæs from the Liberal Party.
Hækkerup answered that the losses could be even greater if the borders are opened too soon and the epidemic flares up again. He was open to the possibility of allowing foreigners who already have a rental contract to enter the country, but the session was frustrating for parties on both sides of the debate. “I must confess that I have not become much wiser from this answer,” said Tørnæs after another testy exchange. Not all parties are in favor of an immediate relaxation of border restrictions. The Red-Green Party, for example, warns that the country shouldn’t drop its precautions simply because of the positive trend in limiting infections.
