SoylentNews

Economists Warn of 'Widespread Costs' from Lockdown

posted by martyb on Thursday July 30 2020, @09:49AM   
from the lockdowns-were-supposed-to-be-just-one-part-of-defense-at-depth dept.

Phoenix666 writes:

Economists warn of 'widespread costs' from lockdown:

Blanket restrictions on economic activity should be lifted and replaced with measures targeted specifically at groups most at risk, say economists.

[...] They argue that while the extent to which the lockdown contributed to a subsequent slowing in the rate of new infections and deaths is not easy to estimate precisely, it seems clear that it did contribute to these public health objectives.

However, they say it is "very far from clear" whether keeping such tight restrictions in place for three months until the end of June when they began to be lifted was warranted, given the large costs. They say that the costs of carrying on with such a lockdown are likely to have become significantly greater than its benefits.

Debate over the global dilemma continues.

---

Original Submission

• Re:Serious flaws in the analysis (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 30 2020, @11:47AM

  by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 30 2020, @11:47AM (#1028549)

  And we even have real-world data on this, thoughtfully provided by the Kingdom of Sweden, who ran a don't-lock-down experiment for us. Result: Twenty times the death toll of their neighbours who did lock down, and no economic benefit compared to said neighbours.

  And then we have Latvia, with a reverse situation compared to neighbors. Now what?
  https://www.statista.com/statistics/1104709/coronavirus-deaths-worldwide-per-million-inhabitants/ [statista.com]
  BTW, we have Belarus as well, while on the other end we have Belgium.

  Cherry-picked data demonstrate things about you, not about the right way to respond to the virus (if indeed such a way can be deduced this early; observe the "second wave" rising presently in all those places that sat months in lockdown in the spring).

  Parent