https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/jun/28/lockdown-or-not-a-second-wave-of-covid-19-will-badly-damage-the-uk-economy
When the two countries [Sweden & Denmark] went their separate ways at the start of the crisis,
the assumption was that Sweden would have more deaths but suffer less damage to its economy.
Not so, says Dhaval Joshi, of BCA research:
Sweden’s death rate is five times as high as Denmark’s
but when it comes to economic performance there’s not a lot in it.
The reason for that, he says, is that people change their behaviour whether there is a lockdown or not.
They avoid public transport, stay away from shops and refuse to send their children to school.
< enough people do this to cut business income sharply >
So does that mean the outcome is the same whether a lockdown is imposed or not?
No, because while the majority of people will act prudently without being forced to do so in order to avoid catching the virus
a minority will refuse to change their habits.
“In the pandemic, this is critical because less than 10% of infected people are responsible for creating 90% of all coronavirus infections...
“If this tiny minority of so-called ‘super-spreaders’ is left unchecked, then the pandemic will let rip.”
There is good news and bad news for the UK in all this.
The good news is that the Denmark-Sweden experience suggests there was no trade off between health and the economy, justifying the case for a lockdown.
< Listening Are you reading ? >
The experience of New York state suggests that a tough lockdown reduces the risk of a second wave and makes it easier for life to return to normal.
The bad news is that if the virus does flare up again as a result of raves or beach barbecues, there won’t need to be another lockdown for recovery to be aborted.
It will happen anyway.