A new study finds lockdowns 10 times more costly to public health than not locking down

Proponents have continuously touted lockdowns as the way to curb the virus. When faced with the apparent economic damage caused by the lockdown, they do not hesitate to point out that we cannot sacrifice lives for the economy. Instead, even if the lockdowns save one life at the cost of a thousand jobs, such a sacrifice is worth it.

This kind of reasoning is faulty for two reasons.

First, we live in a world of scarcity. Decisions, therefore, must involve tradeoffs. Optimal policymaking involves balancing those costs and benefits.

Second, arguing for maximum lockdown to save lives also assumes that there are no costs to lockdown beyond lost jobs. But as the evidence continues to show: lockdowns have significant costs to human life as well. In fact, recessions have a damaging effect on the length and quality of life.

Costs beyond lost jobs

For one, lockdowns have been especially damaging to the mental health of young adults as well as children.

Additionally, lockdowns have also been found to reduce routine check-ups, worsening health outcomes, which could increase mortality from preventable causes.

A new report by Ari Joffe contends, for example, that in the U.S. and UK,

Fear of attending hospitals resulted in 50 percent declines in visits for heart attacks and strokes, meaning missed opportunity for time-critical treatments. ‘Non-urgent’ surgery and cancer diagnosis/treatment were delayed, with backlogs that will take years of catch-up and untold effects on prognoses. Of excess mortality during the pandemic, 20-50 percent has not been due to COVID-19 (see Kontis et al. 2020; Docherty et all 2020; and Postill et al 2020); much of that excess is likely attributable to these collateral effects. An unexplained increase in deaths of people with dementia in the US and UK also likely arose from deterioration due to loneliness. Over time, suicide, depression, alcohol use disorder, childhood trauma due to domestic violence, changes in marital status, and social isolation are projected to cause millionsof years of life lost in Canada alone.

To measure a more accurate cost-benefit analysis of locking down, Ari Joffe uses Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALY), whereby QALY is the “sum of years lived by the population, weighted by the health quality of those years.” Health is a combination of the length and quality of life. Putting it all together, the study finds that globally, the lockdown cost about 250 million QALYs while only saving roughly 25 million QALYs.

Thus, by focusing merely on controlling COVID-19, lawmakers have done 10 times more damage to public health than if they had not locked down. At the very least, that deserves some discussion.