![]() ![]() We ran the experiment a second time to observe the effects on caseloads of the reopening that began in mid-April. The only factor that seems to make a demonstrable difference is the intensity of mass-transit use. And it makes no difference if the analysis includes other potential explanatory factors, such as population density, age, ethnicity, prevalence of nursing homes, general health or temperature. But the surprising negative correlation, while statistically weak, persists even when excluding states with the heaviest caseloads. It could be that strict lockdowns were imposed as a response to already severe outbreaks. ![]() The five places with the harshest lockdowns - DC, New York, Michigan, New Jersey and Massachusetts - had the heaviest caseloads. States with longer, stricter lockdowns also had larger outbreaks. Measuring from the start of the year to each state’s point of maximum lockdown, which range from April 5 to April 18, it turns out that lockdowns correlated with a greater spread of the virus. This is captured in highly detailed anonymized cellphone tracking data provided by Google and others and tabulated by the University of Maryland’s Transportation Institute into a “Social Distancing Index.” That is measured not by the mandates put in place by government officials, but rather by observing what people in each jurisdiction actually did, along with their baseline behavior before the lockdowns. We then compared that with the timing and intensity of the lockdown in each jurisdiction. TrendMacro, my analytics firm, tallied the cumulative number of reported COVID-19 cases in each state and the District of Columbia as a percentage of population, based on data from state and local health departments aggregated by the Covid Tracking Project. But now evidence proves that lockdowns were an expensive treatment with serious side effects and no benefit to society. At first, when little was known, officials acted in ways they thought prudent. Given the high economic costs and well-documented long-term health consequences beyond COVID-19, imposing lockdowns appears to have been a large policy error. Counterintuitive though it may be, statistical analysis shows that locking down the economy didn’t contain the disease’s spread, and reopening it didn’t unleash a second wave of infections. Six months into the COVID-19 pandemic, the United States has now carried out two large-scale experiments in public health - first, in March and April, the lockdown of the economy to arrest the spread of the virus, and second, since mid-April, the reopening of the economy. Threads blocks search for 'COVID,' 'vaccines,' 'coronavirus' over 'disinformation' fearĬIA tried to pay off analysts to bury COVID lab leak findings: whistleblowerįlorida Surgeon General goes on anti-vaccine rant against new COVID-19 boosterīiden's 9/11 snub and more: Letters to the Editor - Sept.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |