Shutdowns Prevented 285Mln Cases In China, 60Mln In USA, 3.1Mln Lives In Europe

[doggystyle99]

Shutdown orders prevented about 60 million novel coronavirus infections in the United States and 285 million in China, according to a research study published Monday that examined how stay-at-home orders and other restrictions limited the spread of the contagion.

A separate study from epidemiologists at Imperial College London estimated the shutdowns saved about 3.1 million lives in 11 European countries, including 500,000 in the United Kingdom, and dropped infection rates by an average of 82 percent, sufficient to drive the contagion well below epidemic levels.

The two reports, published simultaneously Monday in the journal Nature, used completely different methods to reach similar conclusions. They suggest that the aggressive and unprecedented shutdowns, which caused massive economic disruptions and job losses, were effective at halting the exponential spread of the novel coronavirus.

Bhatt said Monday in an email. “The risk of a second wave happening if all interventions and precautions are abandoned is very real.”

Full article here

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/06/08/shutdowns-prevented-60-million-coronavirus-infections-us-study-finds/

 

[Cardinal Fang]

*Sits down and awaits the arrival of the conspiracy theorists*

 

[G.D. Gentleman]

Your Title is inaccurate and written to support your narrative.

Here I fixed it for you:

Study Estimates Shutdowns Prevented 285Mln Cases In China, 60Mln In USA, 3.1Mln Lives In Europe

 

[G.D. Gentleman]

*Sits down and awaits the arrival of the conspiracy theorists*

I fully support the use of Lockdown's and thankful we did so here in Ontario and Canada. It was the safest choice and we learned a lot from them.

This study and it's estimates are a great first start to looking at the 'long term' but not the complete picture, it's just the part DS99 wants to share, typical to his posting patterns.

When further studies come out providing additional estimates calculating the long term impact of the Economic Slow Down has caused then we can see a more complete picture of what impact the events of 2020 have generated for years/decades to come.

 

[doggystyle99]

Your Title is inaccurate and written to support your narrative.

Here I fixed it for you:

Study Estimates Shutdowns Prevented 285Mln Cases In China, 60Mln In USA, 3.1Mln Lives In Europe

Title is accurate.
Estimates of prevented numbers are facts, although they are estimates as long as the information used to come to those conclusions have a solid foundation those estimates will be very close to the reality of what would have happened/
As well the link that I provided are based on two completely different studies based on different criterias that have come to the same conclusion that the shutdowns and keeping them for a duration until proper health, and tracing measures are in place and combined that until a significant decline in the number of new daily cases are seen would have saved millions of cases as well as millions of deaths. There are numerous more studies that have come to the same conclusion.

 

[doggystyle99]

I fully support the use of Lockdown's and thankful we did so here in Ontario and Canada. It was the safest choice and we learned a lot from them.

This study and it's estimates are a great first start to looking at the 'long term' but not the complete picture, it's just the part DS99 wants to share, typical to his posting patterns.

When further studies come out providing additional estimates calculating the long term impact of the Economic Slow Down has caused then we can see a more complete picture of what impact the events of 2020 have generated for years/decades to come.

These are not the first studies or projections to come out, Canada along with many different countries came up with modelling just like these two studies based on scientific data. Here are a few more links from late March and early April of projections/studies based on scientific data there are numerous more out there you can find on the internet from advanced westernized nations in Europe.

Coronavirus Could Overwhelm U.S. Without Urgent Action, Estimates Say (Published 2020)

Immediate steps to limit social contact in parts of the United States where few cases have been identified are needed to slow the outbreak, a model suggests.

www.nytimes.com

Without global action against coronavirus pandemic, 40 million could have died: report - National | Globalnews.ca

“We estimate that in the absence of interventions, COVID-19 would have resulted in 7.0 billion infections and 40 million deaths globally this year,” the report reads.

globalnews.ca

With strong controls, Canada could see 11,000 to 22,000 coronavirus deaths: officials - National | Globalnews.ca

Officials have been under pressure to release national coronavirus scenarios for weeks.

globalnews.ca

You're either oblivious, willfully ignorant of the data and facts and these projections or you are attempting to troll.
Again another huge assumption on your part that we need to wait for decades to see the impact of the virus, and no we do not need to wait for decades to understand the scope of the Coronavirus, 2-5 years maybe but definitely not decades.

 

[Butler1000]

Title is accurate.
Estimates of prevented numbers are facts, although they are estimates as long as the information used to come to those conclusions have a solid foundation those estimates will be very close to the reality of what would have happened/
As well the link that I provided are based on two completely different studies based on different criterias that have come to the same conclusion that the shutdowns and keeping them for a duration until proper health, and tracing measures are in place and combined that until a significant decline in the number of new daily cases are seen would have saved millions of cases as well as millions of deaths. There are numerous more studies that have come to the same conclusion.

Ok so I'm in full support of the lockdown. And continue to be so and to use science first.

But an estimate is NOT A FACT. Especially with this virus as they still know so little about it. All this is is a paper to help politicians who may be in trouble at the polls.

 

[doggystyle99]

*Sits down and awaits the arrival of the conspiracy theorists*

Didn't take too long. Apparently all this modelling and predictions are and I quote "to help politicians who may be in trouble at the polls."

 

[Butler1000]

As I said, I believe in the science. But these numbers are mainly intended to be used to say the shutdown was needed. That's their only purpose. Especially now with things opening up on the one hand but worse economic conditions coming.

The evictions and foreclosure are about to start.

 

[basketcase]

...

But an estimate is NOT A FACT. ...

But in the politicized world, people want to use the fact that it's a scientific estimate to claim that lockdowns were wrong.

 

[basketcase]

Curious as to which politicans who were in trouble are being helped by this study/estimate? ...

Usual right wing bullshit of pretending science is a political conspiracy.

You can quite easily look up who it was who were researching, what methodology they used, and anything else you want to know about the study. But you're interested in denying, not looking for information so you won't bother.

 

[doggystyle99]

First, I wasn't responding to you.

Second - I'm sorry? What is it that I'm denying? I don't deny the science, and I believe the lockdowns were justified and that any re-opening needs to be consistent but gradual so that we can assess the impact of each individual phase before moving to the next one.

My question was in relation to the comment made by Butler1000 that the study helped politicians who were in political trouble. A paper that points out the beneficial impact of the lockdowns is not helping politicians who are in political trouble, since the politicians in political trouble are the ones who opposed the lockdown. How does this study help them was my only question.

I believe Basketcase misquoted the wrong post, his response was to Butler100%Exposed.

 

[basketcase]

First, I wasn't responding to you.
...

I'm sorry. I thought this was a public forum, not an email between the two of you.

 

[basketcase]

It isn't. I got a bit testy because I thought when you quoted me that you were accusing me of being some kind of science denier. My apologies for the misunderstanding.

No problem. My question was the way your post implied a political aspect to it and I assumed that you were one of those claiming this is all a political conspiracy. Apologies if I misinterpreted.