The COVID-19 pandemic elicited unprecedented government interventions into American life. Yet, the stringency and duration of government measures varied considerably across the U.S.
A new Paragon Health Institute study we coauthored confirms what many long suspected: more severe lockdowns did not significantly improve health outcomes but led to much worse economic and education outcomes. States that eschewed federal proclamations tended to do far better than states that adopted severe measures, like closing businesses and schools.
Under our constitutional system of government, public health decisions are generally reserved to the states. The different approaches each state took to deciding which measures to impose and for how long created a natural experiment.
We compared a quantitative index created by Oxford University of government measures taken to combat COVID-19 – including workplace and school closures, public event cancellations, stay-at-home requirements, and masking policies – to health, economic and educational outcomes across states. States with more severe government interventions did not have better health outcomes, as measured by COVID deaths (adjusted for age and pre-existing conditions) and all-cause excess mortality than less restrictive states.