@louis What is?
I dont know the facts here so i cant say for sure. But if you can show that there is more stigma (perhaps by showing a low prevalence of seeking help when you need it) then I'd say its a fairly rational argument. I dont doubt this is the case, just haven't confirmed it.
Ok so read the article.. Here is my take.
1) In this case I'd imagine that the article is likely somewhat accurate just because it sounds plausible.
2) the article on cites a single reliable source, and that link didn't work. so I cant confirm the data myself. Though again If i had to guess i wouldn't be surprised if the article is still true.
3) vice is certainly as discredited a source as the other one presented earlier. They are known to have a fairly extreme left leaning political agenda. Objectivity is not their goal, promoting a left-agenda is. I am not saying the left is bad or anything, only that this is no more an objective source than the other links.
So in short, I dont disagree with your general argument, though still lack the data to confirm. But the link itself is not a credible source to make your case regardless.
@werekat Doesnt surprise me at all. Any healthcare system that is based on extremist ideologies like 100% pure free market or single-payer universal healthcare is bound to be shitty. We see it in the USA, England, and apparently Sweden. I can say as a Dutch person it is also true of the Dutch system.
Sadly people are just really shitty at come up with good systems that dont behave at one end of an extreme or another.
@freemo Anecdotal evidence incoming: the Swedish mental health system isn't exactly very good. No idea about depression, as I only had to work with a different kind of neuropathology, but getting doctors to read non-outdated manuals was a bit of a challenge. There's some good research happening at the forefront of it, but the state of the clinics is a peculiar one. Also, the climate is conducive to SAD and depression, because much less sunlight than people normally need -> Vitamin D deficiency.