拙速に再開するとヤバい、と

kazukazu88さんがリツイート

1918年のスペイン風邪が流行していた時に米国北部のミネソタ州で、川を挟んで位置するミネアポリスとセントポールの両市が外出規制をそれぞれ116日と28日継続。死亡率と失業率が高かったのは短かったセントポールという結果。拙速に再開するとヤバいという教訓。https://t.co/cKb5VnXMd3

— OKUYAMA Masashi ┃奥山真司 (@masatheman) April 23, 2020

“The pandemic itself is just so destructive to the economy, so any policy that you can use that directly mitigates the severity of the pandemic can actually be beneficial for the economy,” Mr Verner said. Stricter interventions “actually make it safer for economic activity to resume, and they mitigate the negative impact of the pandemic itself on mortality”

How can we save lives and the economy? Lessons from the Spanish Flu pandemic

Non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) such as social distancing can have positive effects on the economy, through limiting spikes in infections and avoiding mass casualties.
A study of the economic impact of the 1918 Spanish Flu in the US has found those cities that implemented early and extensive NPIs suffered no adverse economic effects over the medium term.
Cities that intervened earlier and more aggressively actually experienced a relative increase in real economic activity after the pandemic subsided.


Altogether, our findings suggest that pandemics can have substantial economic costs, and NPIs can lead to both better economic outcomes and lower mortality rates.

スペイン風邪の場合、経済の停滞を気にして社会経済生活の制限を躊躇するより、積極的に制限した方が死亡率も低くなるし、パンデミック終息後に経済的によい結果がえられた、と。