Japan and the rest of the world are coming together to resume economic activity, but wasn’t the self-restraint and lockdown actually unnecessary?
Many Japanese are remembering the question.
Did the infection peak out before the lockdown?
On May 25, the government’s task force announced that all prefectures except Tokyo, Kanagawa, Saitama and Chiba were locked down The decision to lift the ban has been announced. The nearly two-month-long period of self-restraint has come to a close. The majority of the world’s nations, as opposed to the enforceable lockdown, have limited themselves to “self-restraint”. Regardless, the response has been applauded for keeping the death toll much lower.
At the same time, people are beginning to wonder if the lockdown was really necessary. This is a voice that raises the question. One of the rationales for this is the “effective reproduction number,” or “how many more people are infected by one infected person. The data we estimated. this indicator, which means that the number of people infected will continue to rise above 1, is actually a lock It peaked out before April 7, when the downturn began, the “skeptics” point out. The point is. The number of infected people would have decreased naturally even if the declaration had not been made.
Once we are relieved, we must ask ourselves what would have happened if the lockdown had not been enforced.
In the US and UK, the “lockdown is meaningless” analysis
In fact, even the enforceable lockdowns that have taken place around the world have been claimed to have been “unnecessary We’ve seen a few: on March 16, President Trump ordered the public to restrict movement, and since then In the U.S., where the lockdown has begun in New York and other cities, Japan and other East Asian regions The Wall Street Journal reported on April 27th that the number of deaths is significantly higher than The study examined the correlation between deaths per million population and days to urban blockade by U.S. state. It looked at the number of patient deaths, although simple, and found that “the correlation function was extremely low at 5.5%”.
Also, the University of East Anglia in the United Kingdom, which began the lockdown on March 23, said on May 20 The study, published in While sporting events and schools have been effective in reducing the number of people infected, the number of infections is increasing every day. The number of persons increased. This suggests that the curfew may be ineffective.
In Japan, where people were trying to get through the lockdown with only self-restraint, the opposite of the lockdown, everyone was surprised by the increase or decrease in the number of new infections. It’s been a joyous time, but in some of the social networking communities and elsewhere, the incidence and severity of the disease is low to begin with, and the number of deaths The government has noted that the number of people who are ill is much lower than in other countries and is biased towards the elderly and those who have had underlying diseases. Resume economic activities by immediately lifting the nonsensical declaration of a state of emergency and restricting the activities of only the elderly and “sick minds” Some of those who had argued that it was better to let them die than to let them die had also rallied their support. The bottom line is that even if the number of infected people increases, it’s okay if they don’t die.
The courts aren’t open, so they can’t “go bankrupt” either.
The “bad side” of economic life due to the lockdown and its extension is, of course, the period of the lockdown It’s starting to happen. People used to be told to choose between life and the economy, and it was considered natural to choose “life,” but now they are putting the economy second. Some will also lose their lives.