A new study out from Stanford University claims, after nearly a year of crippling COVID lockdowns that have devastated global economy and bankrupted untold numbers of businesses both large and small, that new data shows forced shutdowns don’t help any more than voluntary measures.
If that makes you want to throw your phone across the room, just hang with me here.
Because it gets worse.
“A new study evaluating COVID-19 responses around the world found that mandatory lockdown orders early in the pandemic did not provide significantly more benefits to slowing the spread of the disease than other voluntary measures, such as social distancing or travel reduction,” Newsweek reports, citing the study.
The study compared countries that immediately implemented lockdown measures (referred to as “more restrictive non-pharmaceutical interventions,” or “mr-NPIs” in the study) with those countries that didn’t (referred to as lr-NPIs, or “less restrictive non-pharmaceutical interventions”), saying researchers found no comparable difference between the two methods in the spread of COVID.
"Implementing any NPIs was associated with significant reductions in case growth in 9 out of 10 study countries, including South Korea and Sweden that implemented only lrNPIs [less restrictive NPIs] (Spain had a non‐significant effect). After subtracting the epidemic and lrNPI effects, we find no clear, significant beneficial effect of mrNPIs on case growth in any country," the study said.
"We do not question the role of all public health interventions, or of coordinated communications about the epidemic, but we fail to find an additional benefit of stay-at-home orders and business closures," researchers concluded.
While it's difficult to determine the total economic impact of the pandemic and subsequent lockdown measures in the United States, it's estimated that it will cost Americans roughly $16 trillion when all is said and done.
OK. You may now throw your phone across the room.