[ad_1]
Last night, French President Emmanuel Macron announced that a curfew will be established in Paris and eight other major metropolitan areas starting Saturday, October 17, with the aim of reducing the spread of the coronavirus. The limitations will affect some 22 million people who will not be able to leave the house, except for valid reasons, from 9:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. the next day. Other countries have taken similar measures, or are considering doing so, although there are still doubts about their usefulness from many experts.
Curfew and epidemics
The word “curfew” may suggest war scenarios that are far removed from the current ones linked to the pandemic, but in reality the word is itself quite neutral and can be used to indicate any type of prohibition to go out during the hours of at night, for reasons of public order or particular emergencies. It derives from the compulsory practice in medieval times, in several countries, of covering domestic fire with ashes at night, to reduce the risk of fires that could damage homes and entire villages.
It is not the first time that a curfew has been decided to combat an epidemic, but past experiences have often referred to restricted geographic areas and contagious diseases other than the current one. Therefore, there is not much scientific research on the subject, although several researchers are analyzing the trend of curfews imposed so far in some countries against the coronavirus pandemic.
The Melbourne case
In Australia, for example, the city of Melbourne was subjected to a fairly severe curfew for about a month, with the obligation to stay indoors between 8 a.m. and 5 a.m. the next day. The restrictions were then relaxed in late September, but while they remained in place, they were accompanied by several other restrictions more akin to an actual lockdown. Therefore, it is difficult to get a precise idea of the usefulness of the curfew in this context, especially in order to reduce infections.
Unsurprisingly, Melbourne’s law enforcement agencies identified violators more easily during the curfew month, thanks to less nighttime traffic. The controls have helped to act as a deterrent, but many have observed how the problem of new infections in the state of Victoria, of which Melbourne is the capital, was linked mainly to nursing homes and nursing homes, to jobs job. in general and to active personnel in health establishments.
Flexible curfew
In recent weeks, some solutions comparable to a curfew have also been tested in the United Kingdom, although with greater flexibility and differences according to geographical areas and the severity of the pandemic. Restrictions have been introduced on the opening hours of pubs and restaurants, the hours at which alcohol can be served have been limited and restrictions have been introduced for other social activities, both in public places and at home.
As for France, it is still too early for the United Kingdom to determine whether the curfew may have any advantage, because the most severe restrictions have been applied a few days ago and their possible effects are reflected in the trend of infections after at least a couple of days. weeks.
Expectations pending evidence
While waiting for concrete data on which to make further assessments, for now health authorities and epidemiologists have relied on what they predict will happen when there is an obligation for millions of people to stay home outside of Working Hours.
First of all, a curfew, like the one decided in France, gives a signal to the population: remember that the situation linked to the pandemic is still serious, that the spread of the infection continues and that we should not expose ourselves to risks , continuing to wear masks, practice social distancing, and minimize contact with other people. This deterrent and empowering effect cannot be easily measured, but according to several experts it could make a difference, inducing virtuous behaviors even during the day outside of curfew.
Others believe that the obligation to stay home in the afternoon and evening can specifically reduce informal social interactions, during which less thought is given to the risk of contagion. With the arrival of the cold season, many of these interactions take place indoors, often in poorly ventilated rooms, where the risks of contracting the coronavirus are greater. While drinking or eating something in bars and restaurants, the mask is not used, exposing more to the risk of contagion, especially in the case of long stays.
The lower frequencies of bars, pubs and restaurants due to curfews should also lead to a curfew on alcohol consumption during social interactions. Alcoholic beverages tend to lower inhibitions and lead to riskier behaviors: Much research has been done on the subject over the years, even if not directly related to the ongoing pandemic.
In an environment where most people consume alcohol there is a greater risk that the situation will get out of hand, that physical distance will not be maintained and that masks will be used incorrectly. If you are outdoors, the risk is limited, while it increases if you are indoors. It is a problem that mainly affects the younger sectors of the population, exposed to lower risks if they contract the coronavirus, but at the same time they represent a high risk for older and weaker people, who could develop serious symptoms once infected. linked to COVID-19.
Doubts
However, not everyone is convinced that a curfew can yield some benefits related to alcohol consumption and less responsible behaviors. If the restrictions go into effect at night, nothing prevents informal social activities such as being in the bar or pub in the previous hours from being anticipated, with the risk of a greater concentration of people interested in having a drink with friends before they fill effect. curfew.
There could also be meetings, poor maintenance of physical distance, and other good practices to reduce the risk of contagion. Others report that there is a tendency to consume more alcohol in company at the end of the night and, given the inability to do so, it could limit the effects of risky alcohol behaviors.
By imposing a limit on hours to be at home, the curfew can also have the effect of having many more people in circulation before the deadline. The activities that usually take place after work are concentrated in the few hours that remain before the obligation to go home, giving rise to the risk of social gatherings, and not only on the premises. More people shop at the same hours, going to shopping malls for shopping and other activities, which contributes to a higher concentration of people inside. In Melbourne, the phenomenon became quite evident in the weeks of highest restrictions, when queues and crowds formed in supermarkets.
However, some sociologists believe that the deterrent effect provided by the curfew can be useful to encourage virtuous behavior, without having to push for the adoption of more severe restrictions as in a real shutdown.
The objection of many is that a curfew only affects part of the day, while it does not affect the daytime hours, in which a normal life is still led (although it can be during a pandemic). People continue to go to work, use public transport and get to know each other, exposing themselves to an inevitable risk of contagion.
The directors of health institutions in countries where a curfew has been adopted think differently. They believe that any intervention, however partial, could generate some benefit to contain the pandemic. A person who stays at home instead of going to a club is exposed to a lower risk, and if thanks to this they are not infected, they are not a new source of contagion in their workplace or for their families. The idea, to be verified, is that this dynamic multiplied by millions of people carries some benefit to slow the spread of the coronavirus.
France is the first country to have adopted a fairly strict curfew that affects about a third of its population in the most densely populated areas. In a way it is a great experiment, and therefore it is watched with great interest by epidemiologists and researchers. In a few weeks, they should have some more data available, although it will be difficult to draw general conclusions about the usefulness of the curfew.
[ad_2]
