For the first (and probably last) time in living memory, the whole world seems to care about the domestic policy of my plucky little home country. Sweden’s approach to dealing with coronavirus has been hailed by some, but the majority of commentators seem to think we’re conducting some kind of heartless and dangerous experiment. Even Donald Trump has attacked us.

For those that aren’t aware, while the rest of the world has been shutting down schools, shops and restaurants, banning non-essential travel, and sending the police to shout at those who dare to dawdle in their local park, Sweden remains largely open for business.

Our schools are full of students, and I can still visit restaurants in Malmo, where I’ve lived for more than 20 years. I’m working from home, but many offices remain open. I can have friends over for lunch. Should I want to, I could drive to the countryside for a weekend away.

Ministers here have been forced to defend the policy, and the armchair experts on social media track our daily deaths with disturbing relish, but I'm proud of my country's stand. And, while some people I know would like to see stricter measures enforced, most of my friends here support it too.

For starters, while we’re still “open for business”, it’s certainly not a case of “business as usual”. Everyone who can is advised to work from home, and the government has issued social distancing and hygiene guidelines. We’ve been urged to avoid large gatherings and crowded public transport, and to maintain a safe distance when socialising. However, these remain “guidelines”. Rather than imposing authoritarian rules and stripping people of their freedoms, we are relying on people’s collective common sense.

And it appears to be working. While the high streets are open, they are much quieter than usual, and the majority are following the social distancing recommendations. For most Swedes, this isn’t much of an imposition. We are generally a self-reliant (some would say anti-social) bunch. In fact, many are rejoicing as they no longer have to make up an excuse to avoid going for a beer.

Shops and bars remain open, but we are social distancing Credit: getty

The architect of our policy (the hero or villain, depending on your point of view) is state epidemiologist Anders Tegnell, and if the government trusts his advice - and that of the Folkhälsomyndigheten (Public Health Authority) - then that’s good enough for us. Here in Sweden, we trust our authorities. Corruption is rare, and our public agencies are politically independent. Why would the Public Health Agency give advice that is not in the best interests of people and society? They have no other agenda. Also, they’re disarmingly honest. Tegnell recently admitted: “We’re trying this strategy out. We don’t know if it will work or not. If it doesn’t, we’ll revisit it.” Indeed, no country knows which policy is best, or how exactly things will pan out, so why pretend otherwise?

It is also interesting to note that Sweden is one of the world's least religious countries, with around 90 per cent being atheist or agnostic. Many here think it’s actually dangerous to believe in things for which there is no concrete evidence. This is reinforced by an education system that encourages independent enquiry and evidence-based reasoning. We see that there is no hard evidence that draconian lockdowns stop the spread, so we keep shops open. We see that there is no evidence of widespread transmission in outdoor environments, so socialising in parks is still permitted. Furthermore, coronavirus conspiracies haven’t had any traction over here - our 5G towers are still intact.

And tonight I’m adding hospitalisations in Stockholm:

• Remember Sweden has not locked down like most places

• But signs suggest a steady deceleration in new hospitalisations

• Daily hospital beds occupied still rising, but currently on course for net reduction soon pic.twitter.com/Jc2K8l2OWC — John Burn-Murdoch (@jburnmurdoch) April 18, 2020

People say we are putting the economy ahead of saving lives, but the economy is lives. A stronger economy means better healthcare for everyone for years to come. Generally, Swedes like to play the long game and right now we’re thinking about the state of play two, five or even 10 years from now. It’s not just about beating the virus, it’s about coming out of the crisis healthy. It’s easy to tally up deaths from the disease, but what about the impact a lockdown will have in terms of unemployment, homelessness, mental illness, and suicides? One could even draw parallels with Sweden’s neutrality during the Second World War, which paved the way for the country to become an economic and social powerhouse in the post-war years.

Perhaps our most controversial policy has been to keep schools open. But shutting schools would mean key workers, including doctors and nurses, would have to stay at home (or else kids would need to be sent to their grandparents, a high-risk group). Also, Swedes are considering the negative long-term consequences on our kids if they miss a half year of school. Since they are unlikely to contract the virus, isn’t it better that they should carry on studying?

Not everyone in Sweden supports our coronavirus policy. Marie-Claude Dubois, an architect in Malmo, told me: “So far 1,300 people have died here, is this a price worth paying for children to go to school and for life to continue more or less as normal? How many more are we willing to sacrifice?”

But the opinions of teacher Sofie Lejdström are more typical. “Locking people up could have catastrophic consequences for people’s mental health, and we’ve seen already that quarantines do not stop people dying,” she said.

“I believe this policy will slow the spread of the virus and keep the hospitals from filling up all at once. But I don’t believe we can stop the virus. Controlled spreading to create herd immunity doesn’t sound bad to me. It sounds like the best option given there is no vaccine. I don’t believe that acting out of fear and spreading fear will ever lead to anything positive.”

Here's what Telegraph readers had to say...

@Garden Of England

"Hail Sweden. Something I never thought I'd ever say. They are being driven by reason rather than scare mongering and panic.There is very likely to be a second wave. And a third. In all likelihood everywhere except Sweden.

"Meanwhile in the UK we have attention seeking scientists with ridiculous models (and plenty of past failures), self serving bureaucrats, a sensationalist press and gutless politicians. What a toxic mix."

@Sarah Anderssen:

"Well said. The lockdown of an entire country is not a tried and tested method. It was a panicked response in Italy, which believed its healthcare system wouldn't cope, and it was hastily copied by others.

"There is no proof lockdown works any better than sensible social distancing, and certainly mounting evidence that it will cause economic devastation and many negative health and social consequences also."

Sweden was absolutely right to ignore the panic merchants and look at what was sustainable and proportionate.

"They didn't believe inflated death forecasts like the Imperial College model, they made sensible estimates and predicted their hospitals could cope, which they have.

"They also ignored the swathes of 'experts' coming out to criticise their strategy and telling them to panic themselves into ruin like the rest of the world.

"Good job, Sweden."

@KENNETH ELDER:

"Good luck, Sweden. I hope you've got it right and we can all learn from it. I wouldn't like to go through this again."

@Sue Ward:

"The Swedish government has chosen to treat its population like grown ups and they have responded by behaving like grown ups."

@Barry Agar:

"It is concerning that the rate of new infections appears to be following a better trend in Sweden than in the UK, despite our month-long lockdown. Indeed, we may well be delaying a natural seasonal decline in the number of coronavirus cases (as is normally seen with the common cold) through discouraging our population from spending more time outdoors. If environmental factors affect the method and degree of exposure to the virus, we may even be missing an opportunity to build up ‘herd immunity’ through mild or asymptomatic cases.

"Aside from the economic arguments, there are clearly many negative impacts on our collective wellbeing from continuing with the lockdown. It is obviously a failed experiment on a grand scale, and we should come out of it immediately.

"Thank you, Sweden, for having the courage and determination to swim against the tide."