Containment, not containment? Since the start of the coronavirus pandemic, opinions have differed on the issue. But in the absence of a good understanding and good control of the disease, containment has been widely adopted in Europe. According to a study from Imperial College London, published in the journal Nature, it would have saved 3.1 million lives in 11 countries on the continent.
Almost a month after the start of deconfinement in France, we know that 3.4% of the population would have been contaminated by Covid-19 since the start of the epidemic. Even if the rate remains approximate given the difficulties of supplying tests. In Belgium, the infection rate broke the European record with 8%. In Spain, 5.5% of the population was affected, 5.1% in the UK and 4.6% in Italy. During confinement, the rate of transmission of the virus would have dropped (on average) by 82%.
Models and limits in the real world?
“Containment had a substantial effect“on controlling the epidemic, say the scientists in the study. it would have saved millions of lives. But it should be emphasized that these figures are based on “models”, which have their limits in the real world. Gold, they should not be “interpreted as giving an absolute result: it is a photograph at time T which is based on the last known data” said a modeler and psychiatrist Nicolas Hoertel to AFP in May.
If the models of different scenarios do not make everyone agree, the scientists say that the containment was not entirely based on this. We remember in particular a very concrete data in France: confinement aimed to relieve overloaded hospitals, lacking beds and equipment.
Read also:
- After confinement, donating blood is necessary
- Covid-19: is it safe to swim in a swimming pool?