How does this square up with the fact that places without any lockdowns, like Sweden and South Dakota, still have fewer deaths per capita than places like New York, Peru, Belgium and Spain?
A recent study found no correlation between lockdowns and reduced fatality; social distancing is the thing that has an effect: https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/social-distancing-more-imp....
“We found that an early implementation of social distancing is the most significant factor, with a very high correlation to the mortality rate,” said the researchers. “Countries that responded quickly with social distancing measures – not necessarily with a tight lockdown – ultimately emerged from the first outbreak with better results. In contrast, no correlation was found between mortality data and the severity and/or length of the lockdown. Even in Sweden, a country that never imposed a lockdown, we can see that the early decrease in mobility, starting in March, was manifested in the mortality rate. Our study is based purely on observations and does not relate to the premises of any existing epidemiological model. We show that the spread of the pandemic can be prevented by quickly implementing basic measures of social distancing – without a rigorous lockdown.”
Borders (local+international) were closed before there was a major influx of infected persons.
We've had hotel quarantine for ~all entries into the state.
The level of infections has been low enough that contact tracing was never overwhelmed.
The level of testing has generally been very high where outbreaks occurred.
The level of compliance with stay at home/limit travel has generally been pretty good.
And a a major factor is that we've been very lucky.
Still, there's been a lot of businesses severely impacted. Those that were already on the edge and either unable or unwilling to adapt, or were not able to make their new processes profitable have gone under.
e:
Also, lets not forget that Victoria (Melbourne) had a broadly similar situation. They were unlucky in that their hotel quarantine process was poorly managed and there wasn't a strict adherance to quarantine protocols. This was a major trigger for their massive spike.
Anyone thinking this couldn't happen here in NSW (Sydney) is fooling themselves.
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning-scena...
Not to mention the fact that Sweden specifically used this strategy in order to avoid government control over people, which as we have already seen, other countries are not doing. See: Australia. “Good policy” expands beyond a single metric.
If that's the case, then why is Sweden's population-level mortality (578 per million) lower than the USA (642 per mission) or Spain (nearly 700), or several other lockdown states? Sweden didn't close restaurants or schools for a day.
Sweden's rate is also flat, while the USA and Spain are still increasing.
> sends 10% of people to hospital, and is killing 1-2% of people.
Can you provide a source for these strange figures? The last several dozen papers on serological prevalance have found the IFR to be nearly an order of magnitude lower than you're saying it is.