Meyerowitz-Katz, Gideon, Bhatt, Samir, Ratmann, Oliver, Brauner, Jan Markus, Flaxman, Seth, Mishra, Swapnil, Sharma, Mrinank, Mindermann, Sören, Bradley, Valerie, Vollmer, Michaela, Merone, Lea, and Yamey, Gavin (2021) Is the cure really worse than the disease? The health impacts of lockdowns during COVID-19. BMJ Global Health, 6 (8). e006653.

Preview

PDF (Published Version) - Published Version Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial. Download (299kB) | Preview

 

53

646

Abstract

[Extract] During the pandemic, there has been ongoing and contentious debate around the impact of restrictive government measures to contain SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks, often termed ‘lockdowns’. We define a ‘lockdown’ as a highly restrictive set of non-pharmaceutical interventions against COVID-19, including either stay-at-home orders or interventions with an equivalent effect on movement in the population through restriction of movement. While necessarily broad, this definition encompasses the strict interventions embraced by many nations during the pandemic, particularly those that have prevented individuals from venturing outside of their homes for most reasons.

The claims often include the idea that the benefits of lockdowns on infection control may be outweighed by the negative impacts on the economy, social structure, education and mental health. A much stronger claim that has still persistently appeared in the media as well as peer-reviewed research concerns only health effects: that there has been a large toll of death and disease attributable directly to government action against COVID-19, a toll larger than that of COVID-19 itself.1 2 The tagline for this claim is that “the cure is worse than the disease”.

Actions (Repository Staff Only)

Item Control Page