Study: Epidemic outcomes following government responses to COVID-19

[Robert Paulson]

It’s crazy because I said this from day one. None of the stuff governments did helped at all. 
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.adn0671

[Robert Paulson]

I say it’s crazy btw not because I’m some genius but because a dumb <deleted> like me could be that correct. 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

Let's start out by noting what the above study says are its own limitations, which gets a long elaboration in the article, including the admission that other past studies on the topic have come to opposite conclusions:

 

One such excerpt from the OP cited study:

 

"Inferences from this analysis deserve careful consideration, including a clear understanding of what this study cannot illuminate. First, none of the models tested can tell the extent to which any government response could have improved COVID-19 outcomes. Perhaps with another virus, other implementation strategies, or different populations, school closures could have extinguished transmission.

 

Nor can we learn from this study what COVID-19 outcomes would have been like in the absence of these responses. Second, our analysis is global in scope and examines government responses and COVID-19 outcomes at the level of countries. This is suitable for inferring global patterns and trends but cannot exclude patterns at state, district, community, or even neighborhood levels."

 

And indeed, the authors here are correct that MANY other studies on the topic have reached opposite conclusions to theirs, as illustrated below:

What We’ve Learned About So-Called ‘Lockdowns’ and the COVID-19 Pandemic

March 8, 2022

 

Plenty of peer-reviewed studies have found government restrictions early in the pandemic, such as business closures and physical distancing measures, reduced COVID-19 cases and/or mortality, compared with what would have happened without those measures.

 

https://www.factcheck.org/2022/03/scicheck-what-weve-learned-about-so-called-lockdowns-and-the-covid-19-pandemic/

 

AND

 

from the Royal Society in the UK pertaining to the UK's response:

Lockdowns and face masks ‘unequivocally’ cut spread of Covid, report finds

Royal Society review looks at non-pharmaceutical interventions when applied in packages of several measures

 

24 Aug 2023

 

Measures taken during the Covid pandemic such as social distancing and wearing face masks “unequivocally” reduced the spread of infections, a report has found.

 

Experts looked at the effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) – not drugs or vaccines – when applied in packages that combine a number of measures that complement one another.

 

The Royal Society report, called Covid-19: examining the effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical interventions, reviewed the evidence gathered during the pandemic for six groups of NPIs and their effectiveness in reducing transmission.

 

(more)

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/aug/24/lockdowns-face-masks-unequivocally-cut-spread-covid-study-finds

 

AND

 

Estimating the effects of non-pharmaceutical interventions on COVID-19 in Europe

08 June 2020

...

Here we study the effect of major interventions across 11 European countries for the period from the start of the COVID-19 epidemics in February 2020 until 4 May 2020, when lockdowns started to be lifted. Our model calculates backwards from observed deaths to estimate transmission that occurred several weeks previously, allowing for the time lag between infection and death.

...

Our results show that major non-pharmaceutical interventions—and lockdowns in particular—have had a large effect on reducing transmission. Continued intervention should be considered to keep transmission of SARS-CoV-2 under control.

 

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2405-7

 

 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

And then, it's also worth noting that the main author here -- Eran Bendavid from Stanford University -- is part of a group of conservative academics there who consistently and wrongly downplayed the COVID pandemic and opposed or doubted government efforts to control it.

 

How wrong has Bendavid been?  Well, we can look back to his March 2020 opinion article in the Wall Street Journal where he suggested the COVID pandemic in the U.S. was more likely going to kill 20,000 or 40,000 people versus killing 2 million.  For the record, the current U.S. COVID death toll now stands at nearly 1.2 million and counting.  So it's not like he hasn't been wrong before.

Is the Coronavirus as Deadly as They Say?

Current estimates about the Covid-19 fatality rate may be too high by orders of magnitude.

 

By Eran Bendavid andJay Bhattacharya

March 24, 2020

 

If it’s true that the novel coronavirus would kill millions without shelter-in-place orders and quarantines, then the extraordinary measures being carried out in cities and states around the country are surely justified. But there’s little evidence to confirm that premise—and projections of the death toll could plausibly be orders of magnitude too high.

...

This does not make Covid-19 a nonissue. The daily reports from Italy and across the U.S. show real struggles and overwhelmed health systems. But a 20,000- or 40,000-death epidemic is a far less severe problem than one that kills two million. [emphasis added] Given the enormous consequences of decisions around Covid-19 response, getting clear data to guide decisions now is critical.

 

Wall Street Journal

https://archive.ph/kJjK2

 

As it turned out, of course, the "orders of magnitude too high" COVID death toll for the U.S. that Bendavid forecast turned out to be a whole lot closer to the truth than his own minimalist projections.

 

 

https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#trends_totaldeaths_select_00

 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

And then for the impact of government efforts to control the COVID pandemic in the U.S., we had this report just recently (March 2024) from academics at UCLA and the University of Colorado at Boulder via the The Brookings Institution:

 

Study says social distancing and COVID vaccines saved 800,000 U.S. lives

 

Before the first COVID-19 vaccine became available, Americans radically changed their behavior to avoid getting the virus by social distancing and wearing masks. New research from CU Boulder says that change, along with vaccines, saved more than 800,000 lives.