By the Daily Post staff
A Stanford study comparing Covid responses in different countries found “no clear significant beneficial effect” from stay-at-home orders and business closures.
The peer-reviewed study, published Jan. 5 in the European Journal of Clinical Investigation, found that lockdown orders early in the Covid pandemic didn’t provide more benefits than other measures such as social distancing and travel reduction.
The study investigated measures by England, France, Germany, Iran, Italy, Netherlands, Spain, the U.S., South Korea and Sweden.
The first eight countries imposed stay-at-home orders on residents while South Korea and Sweden took less restrictive steps.
The researchers used a mathematical model to compare the countries.
They found “no clear, significant beneficial effect of (more restrictive measures) on case growth in any country.”
“We do not question the role of all public health interventions, or of coordinated communications about the epidemic, but we fail to find an additional benefit of stay-at-home orders and business closures,” the researchers said in a statement.
The study was co-authored by Jay Bhattacharya, a Stanford professor of medicine and economics who has been a vocal opponent of Covid lockdowns since March.
He was also among a group of scientists who wrote “The Great Barrington Declaration,” a document that encouraged governments to lift lockdown restrictions to achieve herd immunity among young and healthy people, while focusing protections on the elderly.
Other studies have oppositely determined that lockdown orders have saved lives.
For instance, a Imperial College London study published in the journal Nature found that some 3.1 million deaths had been averted due to lockdowns across Europe early on in the pandemic. “This data suggests that without any interventions, such as lockdown and school closures, there could have been many more deaths from Covid-19,” said Dr. Samir Bhatt, an author of Imperial College London study.