Lockdowns are a powerful tool against the COVID-19 pandemic
Lockdowns and other distancing measures have had resounding success at thwarting the new coronavirus, according to two independently conducted studies that examined different countries and measures of effectiveness.

Following the emergence of a novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) and its spread outside of China, Europe the American nations have experienced large epidemics. Governments around the world are responding to the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic with unprecedented policies designed to slow the growth rate of infections. (1) Many countries have implemented unprecedented non-pharmaceutical interventions such as closure of schools and national lockdowns. These actions impose large and visible costs on society and their benefits cannot be directly observed. (2–4)

Samir Bhatt at Imperial College London and his colleagues used data on COVID-19-related deaths to model viral transmission in 11 European countries.The team found that in those nations, the combination of policies aimed at slowing the virus’s spread prevented more than 3 million deaths from the epidemic’s start to early May. They estimate that, for all the countries considered, current interventions have been sufficient to drive the reproduction number (Rt) below 1 (probability Rt< 1.0 is 99.9%) and achieve epidemic control; and that across all 11 countries, between 12 and 15 million individuals have been infected with SARS-CoV-2 up to 4th May, representing between 3.2% and 4.0% of the population. In each country, the actions taken were enough to halt the epidemic. Lockdowns — stay-at-home orders and policies that restrict face-to-face contact — were especially effective, reducing transmission by 81%. These results show that major non-pharmaceutical interventions and lockdown in particular have had a large effect on reducing transmission. (5)

On the other hand, Solomon Hsiang at the University of California, Berkeley, and his colleagues analysed how the growth rate of infections changed over time in China, the United States and four more countries that applied policies to prevent viral spread. New data on 1,717 local, regional, and national non-pharmaceutical interventions deployed in the ongoing pandemic across localities in China, South Korea, Italy, Iran, France, and the United States (US) was compiled and empirically evaluated to measure the effect that these anti-contagion policies have had on the growth rate of infections.

In the absence of policy actions, the authors estimated that early infections of COVID-19 would exhibit exponential growth rates of roughly 38% per da. They also concluded that anti-contagion policies have significantly and substantially slowed this growth. Some policies had different impacts on different populations, but there was consistent evidence that the policy packages deployed achieved large, beneficial, and measurable health outcomes. Across the six studied countries, interventions prevented or delayed about 62 million confirmed cases, corresponding to averting roughly 530 million total infections. Lockdowns — policies that require people to stay at home whether or not they are infected — were therefore deemed effective at stemming viral spread. (6)

References:

  1. Wu F, Zhao S, Yu B, Chen Y-M, Wang W, Song Z-G, et al. A new coronavirus associated with human respiratory disease in China. Nature. 2020 Mar;579(7798):265–9.
  2. Chinazzi M, Davis JT, Ajelli M, Gioannini C, Litvinova M, Merler S, et al. The effect of travel restrictions on the spread of the 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak. Science. 2020 Apr 24;368(6489):395–400.
  3. Ferguson N, Laydon D, Nedjati Gilani G, Imai N, Ainslie K, Baguelin M, et al. Report 9: Impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) to reduce COVID19 mortality and healthcare demand [Internet]. Imperial College London; 2020 Mar [cited 2020 Jun 8]. Available from: http://spiral.imperial.ac.uk/handle/10044/1/77482.
  4. Kraemer MUG, Yang C-H, Gutierrez B, Wu C-H, Klein B, Pigott DM, et al. The effect of human mobility and control measures on the COVID-19 epidemic in China. Science. 2020 May 1;368(6490):493–7.
  5. Flaxman S, Mishra S, Gandy A, Unwin HJT, Mellan TA, Coupland H, et al. Estimating the effects of non-pharmaceutical interventions on COVID-19 in Europe. Nature. 2020 Jun 8;1–8.
  6. Hsiang S, Allen D, Annan-Phan S, Bell K, Bolliger I, Chong T, et al. The effect of large-scale anti-contagion policies on the COVID-19 pandemic. Nature. 2020 Jun 8;1–9.

further
reading

cosmetic products

The Responsible Person in the EU

Only cosmetic products for which a Responsible Person is designated in the European Union can be placed on the EU market. The Responsible Person must ensure full compliance with the European Cosmetic Regulation.

Read More »
cosmetic products

SCCS Preliminary Opinion on Genistein and Daidzein

The European Commission Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS) has published its preliminary opinion on the use of Genistein and Daidzein in cosmetic products. The deadline for comments was set at 14 March 2022.

Read More »
cosmetic products

The Cosmetic Products Notification Portal (CPNP)

Only cosmetic products for which a legal or natural person is designated within the EU as a “Responsible Person” can be placed on the European Union (EU) market. Before placing a cosmetic product on the EU market, the RP must notify it in the Cosmetic Products Notification Portal (CPNP).

Read More »
cosmetic products

French Anti-Waste Law

The Loi relative à la lute contre le gaspillage et a l’économie circulaire (Anti-Waste for a circular economy) has come officially into force in France in 2020. Since the beginning of this year, some requirements of the law became mandatory, like the Triman logo. The law provides for a ban on all single-use plastics by 2040.

Read More »
cosmetic products

SCCS Preliminary Opinion on 4-MBC

In 2019, the European Commission set out two lists of ingredients suspected of having endocrine disrupting properties. As 4-MBC (UV-filter) was included in the higher priority group, the European Commission asked the SCCS to carry out a safety assessment on this ingredient. The preliminary version of the requested opinion was published.

Read More »
cosmetic products

SCCS Revision of the Opinion on Vitamin A

Vitamin A is not currently included in the Annexes of the European Cosmetics Regulation (Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009). The SCCS published the preliminary version of its revision of the scientific opinion on Vitamin A (retinol, retinyl palmitate and retinyl acetate). The deadline for comments was set at 7 February.

Read More »
medical devices

Person Responsible for Regulatory Compliance (PPRC) under MDR & IVDR

The EU Medical Device Regulation (EU MDR) and the EU In Vitro Diagnostic Device Regulation (EU IVDR) require all Manufacturers and Authorized Representatives to have a designated employee in their company who is responsible for regulatory compliance with the applicable MDR or IVDR requirements, the Person Responsible for Regulatory Compliance (PRRC).

Read More »