Intersting interview and also: And his blog I find no fact checking against him, so he seems like a good guy. He seam to be honest and a very good source of critical thinking. His not against vaccines but he is critical of aspects how we handle them. Still the only negative posts I find about him is lacking facts so really I can't judge him from the negative side. He is also good at linking to sources. I think my ex wife who is a medical doctor soon, agrees with many of his conclusions. Personally I agree that it is weird that we do not do a cost benefit analysis and that we are risking putting young people under the bus because we have just have a focus on covid deaths e.g. mostly very old people with few years left with mostly low quality of life. On the other hand he seam to have dramatized the swedish later actions a little too much. I did not find the second wave different from the first one, in my sphere there was zero collateral damage from more stricter measures.
I agree, I've always seen lockdown as a political and (very natural) emotional reaction. But then people are emotional. If no lockdown the flooding of hospitals with too many patients is big news and prevents life as normal anyway, so even if you want to stay normal people's reaction to reported deaths will prevent that.
Anyway, in the developed world we are now past that. With the vaccines no-one needs to lockdown. We still need to be a bit careful if we are to keep hospitals working properly, and that is all. Rules are adjusting to that new reality.