Recent studies in Nature and Science have tried to examine the issue, but many forget that closure is only a last resort, therefore treating it as a separate solution is misleading the decision makers and serves the supporters of conspiracy theories
A short search on the net brings up a lot of claims about closures. One who knows claims that the closures do not reduce the morbidity or the rate of infection at all. Shani who knows foreshadows the superiority that there is no reason to close the education system because it exists at all Downloading the morbidity A third calls for opening the beach and a fourth - the zoo.
Opinions, in short, abound. But what does science say?
In this post I want to present a more complex and detailed opinion about the closures, and one that is not based on opinions from the net and politicians who fight for their constituents, but on science. Specifically, about two studies from December and November published in the two most respected scientific journals, surveying 41 countries (the first) and 79 territories (the second) to understand which type of closures work better than others [1] [2].
In the first study, published in the journal Nature (the second most important in the scientific world) in November 2020, the researchers reviewed the methods used by countries to deal with the spread of the virus. They created a list with 46 common methods, and checked how effective they were in reducing the infection rate of the virus. The researchers chose to focus mainly on the six most effective methods.
Ready?
The most effective method is to prohibit people from meeting with each other in large numbers. Countries where gatherings of more than fifty people have been banned have been able to dramatically lower the infection rate.
The second most effective method, contrary to the claims of certain politicians, is the closing of educational institutions. The researchers do not specify whether these are elementary schools, high schools, or even universities. They cannot reach this resolution because countries that have suspended education in their territory have usually closed all educational institutions. And yet, the answer is clear: the closing of educational institutions has a dramatic effect on the rate of infection.
The third and most effective method is closing borders - a method that the State of Israel used already in the first months of the spread of the epidemic, when it banned the entry of tourists from China. Although after that the borders were opened when the government allowed more than ten thousand yeshiva members and another 2,000 students to enter Israel towards September [3]. Most of them, by the way, are from the United States - a country where the virus has been raging since mid-2020. Fortunately, yeshiva students were required to undergo isolation in yeshiva in capsules of up to six. And we know that the Yeshiva adhere to every law and prohibition defined by the government, so it was clear to everyone that there was nothing to worry about.
The fourth method concerns the item of clothing we all love to hate: the masks. The more medical equipment for personal protection is available to citizens, the lower the infection rate. Put on masks. It works.
The fifth effective method is "restricting the movement of individuals". For example, moving from city to city, or moving more than a kilometer away from home.
The sixth and last method is the most surprising of all. Its name in English is National lockdown, and in simple Hebrew it is usually translated as "national lockdown", which includes the closing of all businesses, staying at home and all the other good things we are experiencing these days. And this method, according to the researchers, is only the sixth most effective.
Now say - "Hooray! So no need to close!"
But this is a wrong conclusion. In fact, the researchers themselves point out that when a country goes into lockdown, it already takes plenty of other measures, including closing schools (the second most effective method), closing businesses and shops and a general ban on gatherings (the first most effective method) and restricting the movement of people (the fifth most effective method) ). And as for masks - there is almost no point in them, because in any case everyone is supposed to stay at home and not meet anyone outside the nuclear family.
In other words, if you want to give up the quarantine - no problem. Just please, don't hold family events, close the educational institutions, close the borders, make sure to wear masks and don't go too far from home. If you do all these, then yes - it will probably be possible to waive the quarantine.
These conditions, by the way, can explain how countries like Japan managed to deal with the virus with impressive efficiency even without a lockdown. Japan prevented the entry of tourists from China, schools were closed, and citizens made sure to wear masks (as in all Far Eastern countries) and stay away from crowded areas. Together, all these were enough to stop the spread of the virus [4].
Now ask - what about the second study I promised to review? Well, it was published in the journal Science (the most important in the scientific world), and a truly miraculous thing happened in it: the researchers reached a general agreement about the methods to stop the virus. They tested only seven methods: banning gatherings of a thousand, one hundred, or ten people, closing some or almost all non-essential businesses, closing educational institutions, and finally - banning people from leaving their homes.
As in the previous large study, here too the researchers discovered that the most effective method for reducing the spread was to prohibit gatherings of more than ten people. The second most effective method? Closing the education systems. The closing of almost all non-essential businesses was a little less effective, and last but not least - you guessed it - a total shutdown that requires everyone to stay at home. But such a closure only comes when all the other methods are used at the same time, so its effectiveness is relatively low. And yet, even he helps in reducing the infection rate.
We will conclude
One of the saddest things in the Corona era is the radicalization of attitudes. Each sees the other in the worst possible light. On one side stand the opponents of vaccines, the spreaders of diseases, the conspiracy theorists who believe that Bill Gates will soon plant a chip in them at the behest of the Illuminati. On the other side, you can find those who want to poison everyone through vaccinations, sterilize the human race, sheep following the herd and so on.
What about the more nuanced opinions? They're pretty much gone. It is impossible to speak against the lockdown without being immediately branded as a "corona denier". You can't speak in favor of the closure without someone yelling "Sweden!"
In this post, I presented the conclusions that came from two studies that were conducted on dozens of countries, and reached very similar conclusions. No - we don't have to impose a lockdown to stop the spread of the virus. But if you don't do a complete lockdown, then you have to be careful about all the other methods to reduce the infection: don't hold large gatherings, don't send the children to schools, don't let potentially sick people enter the country, don't stay away from the cities you live in, and make sure to wear masks.
If we had followed all these conditions, and some would say - if the government had imposed and enforced them properly and equally on all sectors and strata of the population - we would not have reached the closure we are in today.
Hopefully, the third lockdown will be the last thanks to the vaccines, which will provide herd resistance (or close to it) from the virus. But the sad fact is that we would not have had to reach the first, second or third closure at all, if only we had followed the rules.
Isn't it comforting to know?
[1] https://science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2020/12/15/science.abd9338
[2] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-020-01009-0
[3] https://www.themarker.com/coronavirus/1.9041661
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic_in_Japan
Dr.Roey Tsezana is a futurist, lecturer and author of the books "The Guide to the Future" and "Those Who Control the Future"[4]
More of the topic in Hayadan:
