Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen has received criticism about the plan to begin ending the lockdown – from several quarters. It seems almost like a tradition. When a crisis occurs, there is unusual unanimity among the various political parties, and at the first sign that the crisis may be ending, they all come forth with criticism and alternative plans (DK). 

The right-wing parties complain about not being consulted about the decision to reopen Denmark for business. In an unusual move, former Liberal Prime Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen (DK), in a column in the daily B.T., warned that the strategy could cause an economic crisis because many small businesses would go under if they were kept closed until May 10. Allan Randrup Thomsen (DK), a virologist at University of Copenhagen, thinks the plan to let young children return to school and day-care centers is a risky experiment because data on how many children are infected but asymptomatic are lacking. If the new policy causes problems, it may be mean that the complete lockdown needs to be implemented again and the full reopening is delayed. Some parents are reluctant (DK) to let their children return to school, some teachers think it will be difficult to manage them and expect to become infected themselves, principals and other leaders begin to plan all of the special preparations for minimizing contact and risk.

Statens Serum Institut estimates (DK) that the actual number of infected people is 30 to 80 times higher than the official figure. The estimate comes from tests of blood donors and studies in Germany and Iceland. SSI also expects that reopening schools and day-care centers will raise the R0 factor – the number of people that the average infect person infects – from 1.00 to 1.23 and will result in around twice as many patients in ICU.

An ultraconservative strategy?

The administration had been presented with three scenarios (DK) for ending the lockdown by SSI, documents show, and it chose to follow a policy that was even more limited than the most conservative option. The first scenario allowed for all higher educational institutions to open, for example, and it would cause the epidemic to peak in mid-May. The second option would have allowed restaurants and other businesses to open. This would have raised R0 to 1.36 and would have caused a peak in ICU patients in early June. The third would have returned Denmark almost to normal conditions, raising the limit on gatherings from ten to 50, and would have caused maximum pressure on ICUs in mid-June. All three scenarios assume that the population continues to practice social distancing.

To parents who are worried about sending their kids back to school and day-care, Pernille Rosenkrantz-Theil (DK), Minister of Education, says that school activities can be conducted in a safe, responsible way. She warns that if children are kept home, it will be counted as an official absence, except in cases where the household includes people in a high-risk group, such as the elderly. The administration’s plans take into account how children’s behavior differs from adults’, Rosenkrantz-Theil continues, and guidelines have been set forth: For example, they should play with as few others as possible (one or two) for as short a period of time as possible; play with the same ones, not new ones every day. Is that realistic?

Where is the wisdom of the crowd when we need it?

It is hard to identify patterns in the reactions to the plan on Twitter and Facebook: Some say it’s Russian roulette, how do you change a diaper from two meters away? there should be more testing; other say it’s too cautious, older children should be sent out first, they should be allowed to take exams, businesses should be allowed to open, etc. Some praise Mette Frederiksen, some criticize all politicians, some say that no one knows the best strategy, and many comments are of course criticisms of other commenters. I would guess that most approve that something is happening if only to end the uncertainty. See #coronavirusdk, #covid19dk, #genåbning (reopening), and on Facebook “Mette Frederiksen som statsminister.”

The administration announced that churches may hold services on Easter (DK) on the condition that they are conducted safely. No details were given. In this case the reaction on Twitter (DK) seems predominately negative. Many felt that the decision was the result of pressure from Marie Krarup of the Danish People’s Party and was irresponsible. 

Yesterday Norway announced (DK) that it would also begin reopening certain institutions one week after Easter. The rate of infection in Norway has been similar to Denmark’s, and its plan for reopening is also similar.