Across America and Europe, in the wake of increasing COVID-19 incidents, hospitalizations, and fatalities, many government authorities are resuming lockdowns and tightening controls.
Widespread poverty, depression, debt, and job loss include the collateral damage of lockdowns. These have been well reported. However, the advantages of lockdowns appear questionable.
Many findings indicate that there is no connection between government controls and lower mortality rates for COVIDs. Four of the said findings are below:
The Lancet (July)
The research reported in The Lancet on July 21, a weekly peer-reviewed general medical journal established in 1823, suggested that there were unsuccessful government lockdowns.
In crucial COVID-19 cases, researchers obtained evidence from the 50 countries with the most cases and noticed lockdowns were not correlated with mortality decreases, while variables such as obesity, alcohol, and life expectancy were associated.
The research concluded that boundary closures, absolute lockdowns, and a strong COVID-19 testing rate were not correlated with statistically meaningful declines in the amount of critical cases or total mortality.
Frontiers in Public Health (November)
Similarly, many months after The Lancet report, research released by Frontiers in Public Health showed lockdowns and lockdown stringencies are not associated with lower mortality rates. During the first 8 months of the pandemic, researchers crunched data from 160 nations, evaluating various variables to assess if each associated with COVID-19 mortality, such as demographics, environment, climate, public health, and government policy.
The researchers found that the strictness of the pandemic-fighting interventions, like lockdowns, did not seem to be correlated with the death rate.
Tel Aviv University Study (October)
Tel Aviv University study reported on the website medRxiv in October claimed that tight lockdowns could not save lives. Researchers examined accessibility data obtained from iPhones and noticed no causal correlation regarding lockout severity and the amount of COVID-19 fatalities.
In countries with a stronger lockout, the scientists noted fewer Covid-19 deaths. But their evidence shows that this is not the reality.
Oxford University Stringency Data's Bloomberg Review (May)
Data journalist Elaine He posted many visuals in a Bloomberg report in May focused on work conducted by the Blavatnik School of Government at the University of Oxford, which monitored several stringency initiatives throughout Europe.
The mortality of COVID, he said, did not seem to be linked to lockdown strictness.
Some, particularly Italy and Spain, implemented prolonged and tight lockdowns after the removal of infections, he continues. A much more comfortable approach was favored by others, particularly Sweden. Though instances were comparatively low, Portugal and Greece decided to shut down. France and the United Kingdom took longer before agreeing to enact the most draconian steps.
The study concluded that there is no connection between the magnitude of the constraints of a country and whether it has managed to curtail excess casualties.
Check out more news and information on COVID-19 on Science Times.
