[ad_1]
On the front lines of the fight against the pandemic we often hear the phrase: why point the finger at the school and not look at the problems related to transportation? According to a study tested in 79 different territories and validated by 226 countries, which includes the best systems to combat the spread of the Sars-Cov-2 pandemic, transportation does not affect the spread of the virus as much as schools. A surprising investigation that, in fact, distorts one of our main beliefs and that is that more than school, transportation was the main vector of coronavirus infection. The report states that among the 43 most effective measures to combat Covid, the closure of educational institutions ranks second, while transportation slides very low, forty.
The study published in Nature Human Behavior evaluates the impact of more than 6,000 of the so-called non-pharmaceutical interventions (therefore, systems that have nothing to do with medical care). It is the options adopted by the different governments of the world that have been faced with this invisible enemy: from quarantine to confinement, through the closure of schools to limiting transportation.
The results of this research are as dazzling as they are surprising, but up to a point. We start from a premise: the prohibition (or in any case the limitation) of meetings in small groups is the most effective way to deal with the spread of the pandemic. And this is an established fact, along with social distancing (and the other two contrast systems, the use of masks and frequent hand washing). The question, if anything, is why school closures are ranked second among the best forms of conflict, while transportation, which has always been singled out as one of the main “culprits,” is instead. among the last. What makes the difference is, obviously, the time of exposure to the risk of contagion: the spread of the virus occurs through microparticles (aerosols or droplets, the famous droplets invisible to the naked eye) in the air, as several have already shown. studies. The longer you stay indoors, the greater the risk of contagion. Consequently, public transport is as closed as the classrooms, but on average it stays there much less time.
However, in addition to this, there are two other really interesting aspects in the analysis – explains the physicist of the University of Turin Alessandro Ferretti, who for La Stampa has often addressed the issue of the pandemic, analyzing, in particular, the figures relating infections -. The first is the great effectiveness of initiatives that inform and actively involve the population: they work almost as much as the imposition of direct bans. The second is the great effectiveness of the support and financial assistance programs for vulnerable categories, which allow people to isolate themselves and heal themselves without having to suffer financial consequences. Therefore, interventions must be accompanied by timely and clear information and a significant financial effort to support the adoption of the measures themselves.
Through a series of tests and crossovers related to the different interventions adopted in countries that are having to cope with the coronavirus epidemic, the study, focused in this case on the R t index (the contagion index) shows that The answer is different and depending on the measures adopted: they work more when acting on the limitations to the places where it is easier to meet and when the exposure to risks is greater (from workplaces, bars, restaurants, schools) . However, on the list, there are also other measures considered effective and less invasive for the population: from border restrictions, to financial support for the weakest categories and, indeed, to a timely, clear and risk communication system. effective. . “It is better to take less drastic measures first,” explain the study’s reporters. ‘Our results indicate that an appropriate combination of NPI (non-pharmaceutical interventions defined as such, but simple contrast) is necessary to slow the spread of the virus. The least destructive and costly NPIs can be just as effective as the most intrusive and drastic ones, like blocking.
The conclusion
In the absence of vaccines and antiviral drugs, the study speakers explain, “Non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) implemented are the only option available to limit and delay the spread of the virus.” How to adopt them and how to cross them is another matter. And it is about the choice that each country makes. But the position in the ranking highlighted in the study is clear: they are all the more effective as the time of exposure to the risk of viruses and indoors decreases.
