Yet Another Study Says School Closures Have No Impact on COVID-19

A new study published in Nature estimates that lockdown orders around the world “prevented or delayed on the order of 62 million confirmed cases, corresponding to averting roughly 530 million total infections.” That’s a lot! However, be aware that this is, as usual, based on a model of COVID-19 spread that may or may not be accurate.

In the US, the authors estimate that as of April 6, countermeasures reduced the number of cases by 4.8 million, or about 20,000 deaths using the current best estimate of the infection mortality ratio. That’s a whopping 93 percent decrease in cases and a 70 percent decrease in deaths.

But that’s not what interests me. This is:

The authors tried to tease out the impact of individual countermeasures and they confirmed what other studies have shown. First, school closures have no effect. Nor does shutting down churches. Travel bans are also ineffective. Just generally, rules banning large gatherings appear to have little impact. The measures with the highest impact are business closures, quarantines, home isolation, and general social distancing.

All of this has to be considered tentative, but this is now the third study I’ve seen showing that school closures have no effect—or even a slightly negative effect. These are empirical studies, and it’s frustrating that they don’t tell us why school closures have so little impact. Nonetheless, that’s what they show. I hope we take this to heart and re-open schools in the fall without thinking we have to take massive and debilitating (and expensive) countermeasures. There are some obvious things we can do to protect both kids and teachers, but generally speaking, it sure looks like only modest measures are needed to re-open schools safely without increasing the danger of COVID-19 spread.

We've never been very good at being conservative.

And usually, that serves us well in doing the ambitious, hard-hitting journalism that you turn to Mother Jones for. But it also means we can't afford to come up short when it comes to scratching together the funds it takes to keep our team firing on all cylinders, and the truth is, we finished our budgeting cycle on June 30 about $100,000 short of our online goal.

This is no time to come up short. It's time to fight like hell, as our namesake would tell us to do, for a democracy where minority rule cannot impose an extreme agenda, where facts matter, and where accountability has a chance at the polls and in the press. If you value our reporting and you can right now, please help us dig out of the $100,000 hole we're starting our new budgeting cycle in with an always-needed and always-appreciated donation today.

payment methods

We've never been very good at being conservative.

And usually, that serves us well in doing the ambitious, hard-hitting journalism that you turn to Mother Jones for. But it also means we can't afford to come up short when it comes to scratching together the funds it takes to keep our team firing on all cylinders, and the truth is, we finished our budgeting cycle on June 30 about $100,000 short of our online goal.

This is no time to come up short. It's time to fight like hell, as our namesake would tell us to do, for a democracy where minority rule cannot impose an extreme agenda, where facts matter, and where accountability has a chance at the polls and in the press. If you value our reporting and you can right now, please help us dig out of the $100,000 hole we're starting our new budgeting cycle in with an always-needed and always-appreciated donation today.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate