[ad_1]
The study was conducted by researchers from nine different countries around the world, modeling how different quarantine strategies would affect the spread of the coronavirus and the probability of infection.
Almost 5 million people have already been identified worldwide. In cases of infection with the new coronavirus, the number of victims has already exceeded 300,000. aggregated statistics from Johns Hopkins University in the United States.
Many governments use quarantine measures of varying severity to limit the spread of the virus. However, to save not only human lives but also the economy, the governments themselves are calculating and looking for the safest and most effective way to gradually reduce the severity of quarantine measures.
Meanwhile, in their latest report, the researchers suggest an alternative and, they argue, a more effective way than indefinite variable-severity quarantine: toggling between clear periods of strict quarantine and reduced periods of social restriction. Regardless of the severity of the period, testing of patients should be carried out regularly, contact and isolation of infected persons should be traced, and efforts should be made to protect the most vulnerable members of society.
The researchers performed their modeling based on the circumstances of 16 different countries around the world, including Australia, Mexico, Belgium, South Africa, and Nigeria.
Under the first modeled scenario, no measures were required to limit the distance between people or to limit activity. In each of the states where conditions were modeled, the number of patients needing intensive care unit treatment was growing very rapidly in such conditions, and the capacity of the medical system in each state was rapidly exceeded. According to the researchers, without any containment measures, this infection would claim 7.8 million of the 16 states “used” to model. Live, in most states, the epidemic would actively devastate for almost 200 days.
The second modeled scenario is a strict 50-day quarantine cycle and a 30-day facilitated conditions cycle. Analysts in the model described such measures to limit the spread of the virus, which in the long run reduces the probability of transmission of the virus to new people: distance between people, stricter hygiene standards, isolation of infected people, closure of educational institutions , restriction of large public events. These measures did not include a “complete block”.
In this way, the number of victims of the epidemic would be reduced to 3.5 million. people, and a pandemic would last 12 months in highly developed countries and 18 months in developing countries.
In many cases, simulations have shown that such a measure has reduced the R (the number that shows how many people each infected person will infect) to 0.8. But simulations have shown that while the numbers appear to be under control during the first three months of quarantine, the number of patients would increase to the point that there is a shortage of space in intensive care units after the end of the first period. of reduced restrictions. In this way, the number of victims of the epidemic would be reduced to 3.5 million. the pandemic would last 12 months in highly developed countries and 18 months in developing countries.
A third set of situation modeling rules was developed, which provides for a cycle of the same duration, but with stricter “damping” measures during the first 50 days of each cycle. The “stricter” measures have been defined as measures that can reduce the number of new infections more quickly. They consist of all the measures of the previous model, complemented by strict “closing” measures.
Under this tighter scenario, the R number would drop to 0.5 and the occupation of intensive care units in all states would not exceed the possibilities. It is true that, since the number of people still susceptible to infection at the end of each cycle would be greater than without protection or protection, the pandemic would last longer, 18 months in all the countries included in the model.
The number of COVID-19 victims under such pandemic control measures would be significantly less, with only 130,000 modeling states.
In return, the number of COVID-19 victims under such pandemic control measures would be significantly less, with only 130,000 modeling states.
The researchers point out that it should be up to individual countries to decide on strict and facilitated quarantine periods to better meet national needs and capacities.
According to them, three months of strict quarantine would be the fastest way to end the pandemic and minimize the number of virus victims in most states.
A less stringent virus spread strategy would take a little over six months for new cases to approach zero.
An epidemiologist at the University of Cambridge (UK) and the chief leader of the modeling team said that the third scenario, rotating very strict restrictions and facilitated periods, would allow societies to “breathe” from time to time.
“This would make our decision more sustainable, especially in regions where resources are more limited,” said the epidemiologist.
Oscar Franco, director of the Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine at the University of Bern (Switzerland), added that the study presents a poor strategic option for countries seeking to control the spread of COVID-19.
There is no simple answer to the question “which strategy is the best?”. States, especially low-income countries, will have to face the most important dilemma: reduce deaths from COVID-19 and prevent the collapse of the public health system, or prevent economic collapse and financial difficulties for the General population.
The International Monetary Fund warned that the coronavirus pandemic is threatening the world with the deepest recession since the Great Depression. The world economy is forecast to shrink by 3 percent this year.
[ad_2]
