3 ms·

So Sweden banned gatherings of 50 or more people, while countries that banned order of magnitude smaller groups did an order of magnitude better. And Spain loc

So Sweden banned gatherings of 50 or more people, while countries that banned order of magnitude smaller groups did an order of magnitude better. And Spain locked people in their homes to the point where there was a black market in borrowing other people's dogs in order to have a legal reason to go outside, and did worse. There is not an obvious relationship between severity of lockdowns and deaths or hospitalizations. You see this in the US too, where the media have been demonizing Florida for months for its relatively lax restrictions, while its death rate is right at the national average. Also I think it was never practically feasible to isolate vulnerable people as you describe. And it is practical to expect the entire population to put their lives on hold for a year because of a disease that is not a significant danger to most of them?

petre 6y ago
Locking people into their homes like Spain and France did might have other ill effects, like a depression epidemic. Or people getting fed up with stupid politically motivated approaches gathering en masse to protest, making matters worse. The problem in Southern Europe is that people like to party. That still doesn't warrant 1 km radius lockups which I hope would be deemed a violation of human rights in court. I understand that we're not allowed to gather in large groups, but restricting going out on a bike ride alone or with your partner or walking the dog is quite a different matter. Also the French curfew is exagerated, eleven o'clock would have worked equally well. I guess we shall see in a few years which approach was correct. I just hope the vaccines achieve immunity and stop this pandemic. This is great news. Too bad it's not approved in the EU yet. Hopefully early next year.