Jules72 Let’s say the spike in cases is to a reasonable extent driven by schools
Firstly, it is believed that schools contribute very little to the spread of covid:
https://www.ft.com/content/4842aab1-7cc8-4973-b98a-03edf1eeae54
Germany’s latest round of stricter lockdown measures, e.g. closing all restaurants, gyms and cinemas, are still leaving schools open. It is still very questionable if lockdowns of any type actually save any lives at all, rather than at best just simply kicking the can down the road.
Secondly:
Jules72 but how do you evaluate the trade off?
most governments already have policies for determining whether the cost of a potential medical treatment is justified relative to the years of life it saves; in the UK this is set by the ‘National Institute for Health and Care Excellence’ (or ‘Nice’).
‘Nice’ considers years of life saved when deciding whether to approve NHS treatments, generally approving interventions if the ‘cost per life year saved’ is below £20,000 to £30,000. Even if over-estimating the severity of covid and being generous about the benefits of lockdown, the cost of lockdowns are likely to be 6x what is considered fair and reasonable under government/Nice criteria:
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/how-much-does-it-cost-to-save-lives-from-covid
One final point, the average age of those who have died from covid in the UK is older than the average life expectancy in the UK - average age of those dying from covid has been 82.4, versus average UK life expectancy of 81.5:
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/average-age-of-coronavirus-fatalities-is-82-pcwqrzdzz
