Please note: this is a review article, not a refereed paper. The author sits on a comfy endowed chair at Simon Fraser University. His mountain realm looks down toward the ocean and downtown Vancouver. Our readers may know him from such hits as "The Nature of The Farm" (a play on Coase's The Nature of The Firm, ahem)
AbstractAn examination of over 100 Covid-19 studies reveals that many relied on false assumptions that over-estimated the benefits and under-estimated the costs of lockdown. The most recent research has shown that lockdowns have had, at best, a marginal effect on the number of Covid-19 deaths. Generally speaking, the ineffectiveness stemmed from individual changes in behavior: either non-compliance or behavior that mimicked lockdowns. The limited effectiveness of lockdowns explains why, after more than one year, the unconditional cumulative Covid-19 deaths per million is not negatively correlated with the stringency of lockdown across countries. Using a method proposed by Professor Bryan Caplan along with estimates of lockdown benefits based on the econometric evidence, I calculate a number of cost/benefit ratios of lockdowns in terms of life-years saved. Using a mid-point estimate for costs and benefits, the reasonable estimate for Canada is a cost/benefit ratio of 141. It is possible that lockdown will go down as one of the greatest peacetime policy failures in modern history.1. IntroductionIn March 2020 countries around the world, including the U.S., Canada, and the U.K., deployed various forms of lockdown that dragged on for over a year in many jurisdictions and show signs of returning in the fall of 2021 under the threat of new Covid-19 variants. This response to the pandemic has dominated not only the daily lives of ordinary people, but also the economic reality within which most businesses have been forced to operate. Lockdowns and the reactions to them, have had consequences for consumer demands, supply chains, profitability, and the redistribution of wealth. The average citizen and business person has had to trust that such a blunt and destructive policy tool was justified in the face of a novel viral pandemic.The public and business trust has been necessary because most people have limited or no access to the immense research response to the Covid-19 pandemic — with estimates of over 40,000 related papers produced in one year. Even with access, most people lack the time or training to decipher the complex and often conflicting reports. Thus, although the research covers every imaginable aspect of Covid-19, and despite the explosion of knowledge regarding the virus, the human reactions to it, and the consequences of these reactions, the average person and corporate executive remains unaware of most of it.....
....MUCH MORE
Related:
Covid-19: "Lockdown Harms and the Silence of Economists""Covid-19: The Stupidity Of Lockdowns"
WSJ: "The Fickle ‘Science’ of Lockdowns"
Covid-19: "China’s Global Lockdown Propaganda Campaign"
Money, Money, Money: "A Self-Fulfilling Prophecy: Systemic Collapse and Pandemic Simulation"
Is this why we had lockdowns?
