Muscillo Alessio, Pin Paolo, Razzolini Tiziano
Dept. Economics and Statistics, University of Siena, Siena, Italy.
IGIER & BIDSA, Bocconi University, Milan, Italy.
PLoS One. 2020 Sep 11;15(9):e0237057. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0237057. eCollection 2020.
The diffusion of Covid-19 has called governments and public health authorities to interventions aiming at limiting new infections and containing the expected number of critical cases and deaths. Most of these measures rely on the compliance of people, who are asked to reduce their social contacts to a minimum. In this note we argue that individuals' adherence to prescriptions and reduction of social activity may not be efficacious if not implemented robustly on all social groups, especially on those characterized by intense mixing patterns. Actually, it is possible that, if those who have many contacts have reduced them proportionally less than those who have few, then the effect of a policy could have backfired: the disease has taken more time to die out, up to the point that it has become endemic. In a nutshell, unless one gets everyone to act, and specifically those who have more contacts, a policy may even be counterproductive.
新冠病毒的传播促使各国政府和公共卫生当局采取干预措施，旨在限制新感染病例，并控制重症病例和死亡的预期数量。这些措施大多依赖于人们的遵守情况，要求人们将社交接触降至最低。在本报告中，我们认为，如果不在所有社会群体中大力实施，尤其是那些社交模式密集的群体，个人对规定的遵守以及社交活动的减少可能不会有效。实际上，如果社交接触多的人减少接触的比例比社交接触少的人少，那么政策的效果可能会适得其反：疾病消失所需的时间会更长，甚至会成为地方病。简而言之，除非让每个人都行动起来，特别是那些社交接触多的人，否则一项政策甚至可能会产生反效果。
