This document may not be published, quoted or copied without the express permission of the Canadian Department of National Defence. 2 International Monetary Fund, “World Economic Outlook, Chapter 1 – The Great Lockdown, April 2020,” International Monetary Fund, April 2020. It began as localized cases of pneumonia of unknown etiology in Wuhan, an inner-city city of more than eight million.4 Originally location tracking led officials to believe the epicenter of the outbreak was a downtown market in December, but recent genome studies contradict those timelines.
As cases began to mount and the scale of the outbreak prompted national officials to take action, China initially tried to downplay the severity of the outbreak and control the narrative through state media.6 Ultimately, as Due to increasing information leaks and political pressure, they attempted to report their findings to the World Health Organization (WHO) on December 31, 2019. Once the potential threat of the virus was realized, the WHO began alerting the international community. 8 The World Health Organization, “International Health Regulations Emergency Committee on Novel Coronavirus in China,” The World Health Organization, January 23, 2020.
Last accessed May 1, 2020, https://www.who.int/news-room/detail statement-on-the-meeting-of-the-international-health-regulations-(2005)-emergency-committee-regarding- the-outbreak-of-novel-coronavirus-(2019-ncov). Regardless of the date the pandemic was declared, it is not surprising that countries have been reluctant to take action until now. To better understand the decision-making behind these measures, individual country responses need to be analyzed.
The number of reported cases is used when estimating the timelines associated with taking action, as it was the key information available to governments that outlined the severity of the outbreak and influenced their decisions. Aside from the questionable flattening of China's curve and the rapidly accelerating explosion in the US, this representation isn't terribly helpful. 23 The outbreak in China and the associated response occurred much earlier than the rest of the world at the end of 2019, and is therefore not reasonably comparable to other countries by calendar date and was excluded from the graph of above.
24 Anjali Singhvi et al, “How the World's Largest Coronavirus Outbreaks Are Growing,” The New York Times, March 12, 2020. As external pressures mounted, fear grew among their citizens and the extent of the virus could no longer be hidden. the. Unfortunately, China's desire to suppress the story of the spread of the virus and the associated slowdown had major consequences.
It is now estimated that 95% of cases could have been avoided by taking action just three weeks earlier,30 potentially reducing the severity of the global pandemic. Despite the longest border with the epicenter of the outbreak (China), official figures and statements by President Putin seem to indicate that they have been successful in suppressing the spread of the virus and that the threat was there. 51 Caroline Kantis, Samantha Kiernan, and Jason Socrates Bardi, “Updated: A Timeline of the Coronavirus,” Think Global Health, April 22, 2020.
54 Government of Canada, “Office of the Prime Minister of Canada - News Releases”, last accessed 3 May 2020, https://pm.gc.ca/en/news/news-releases.
POLICY EFFECTIVENESS
While the total number of cases is useful in determining the response time of governments,58 the total number of deaths is unfair to countries with larger populations when trying to objectively evaluate results. Instead, the total number of deaths per 100,000 of the population indicates what percentage of a country was affected:59. 58 The total number of cases is the typical measure reported by the media, and thus known to the public, and used to apply pressure on governments to make subjective policy decisions.
In the middle range is a group of Canada, Germany and Iran, while at the low end of the spectrum lies Russia, South Korea, Australia and surprisingly China, where the outbreak began. To better understand the relationship between the number of cases and deaths, a look at the various factors of mortality is required. A disproportionate ratio of deaths to cases may be the result of many factors: the number of reported cases may actually be significantly lower than the true level of infection, especially if testing has been inadequate; the demography of the country can.
Italy has conducted the highest total number of tests to date, so it is likely that their death rate is more reflective of a true outbreak than those with less testing.68 However, it also has the largest percentage of its population over the age of 65, which is likely the main reason for their result. The number of deaths can also be deliberately underreported for various reasons, not the least of which is the desired global perception. Despite this, they still report mortality rates below the global average, probably due to the relatively small number of vulnerable elderly.
Although plausible, health experts and officials have repeatedly questioned the low number of deaths.70 China, on the other hand, has not even published its testing numbers. In addition, they have reported only two new deaths over the past 17 days,71 despite being the epicenter of the outbreak and. 71 This does not include the increase in deaths reported on 17 April, which was the result of an internal review of historical cases since the beginning of the outbreak.
Previous data still present a combination of the timing of the policy along with the effectiveness, as the starting point for each country is at different levels of infection. Despite the high number of deaths in Italy and the UK, a steady downward trend indicates fewer daily deaths, meaning their policies had a large impact. 75 By estimating the growth rate as a function of daily new deaths/100,000 and the total number of deaths/100,000 at that time, the scale of infection no longer affects the data.
Since very similar steps have been taken, it is reasonable to assume that it is not the nature of the policy, but the degree to which the population is embracing these measures that is the main difference. It is very likely that this has affected the way a part of the population perceives restrictions on their civil liberties, thus reducing the effectiveness of government measures.
