A study carried out by researchers on the various strategies to fight the coronavirus in OECD countries shows that the so-called "zero Covid" strategy has been the most effective.

According to them, countries like Iceland or Australia, which have maintained drastic measures even in the event of a decline in the epidemic, have fared much better in terms of health, the economy, but also individual freedoms.

INTERVIEW

More than 14 months after the start of the health crisis, eight researchers publish a comparative study on OECD countries, between those who have opted for a so-called "zero Covid" strategy and those, like France and most countries Europeans, who say we have to live with the virus.

Miquel Oliu-Barton, mathematician and economist, who is one of the authors, draws up at the microphone of a Europe 1 a much better assessment of the strategy adopted by countries like Australia or New Zealand, which according to him wins " On all fronts".

25 times less death

"The term zero Covid is a bit provocative, it should rather say: 'aim for circulation at the lowest level and above all ensure to maintain it at this level'. While living with it is to wait for the infections to rise until that it is too worrying, and then take measures to avoid the saturation of hospitals ", first explained on Europe 1 the lecturer at Paris-Dauphine. 

>> LIVE

- Coronavirus: follow the evolution of the situation Monday, May 10

Among the countries that have decided to opt for the zero Covid strategy, there are Iceland, Australia, New Zealand, South Korea and Japan, which have taken drastic measures and maintained them even when the epidemic was diminishing.

"It is true that when you are an island, it is easier to control the borders. There are five countries among the 37 of the OECD which have followed this approach. But there are also countries which do not are not in the OECD, such as Vietnam or China, which have successfully opted for this strategy, "said Miquel Oliu-Barton. 

>> Find the morning show of the day in replay and podcast here

For him, it is not necessarily a question of taking more stringent measures than in France, but rather of taking them (and / or maintaining them) at the right time.

"These are targeted measures, which do not penalize an entire country when we can simply act on a city or a department on an ad hoc basis," he continues.

And with hindsight and the data available, it is now time for the economist to learn.

"When we look back, we see that indeed, the countries which have followed zero Covid have had 25 times fewer deaths. And we are not even doing better economically: we have ten points less of GDP" , notes Miquel Oliu-Barton. 

"We are very worried about a fourth wave"

As for the argument of individual freedoms and democracy opposed by most European countries, including France, the mathematician says he does not hold up.

"Compared to closures or mobility restrictions, here too, we realize that the countries that have adopted the zero virus strategy are doing much better," he explains, basing himself on the example of the Australia, which operated strict but very short lockdowns.

"The fact that it lasts so long here is obviously much worse for mental and societal health."

CORONAVIRUS ESSENTIALS

> Covid-19: is there really a risk of contamination outside?

> Coronavirus: why can a PCR test be positive one month after infection?

> Are private parties really prohibited with the curfew?

> The English variant would cause slightly different symptoms

> Audio, webcams ... When technology adapts to teleworking

Finally, Miquel Oliu-Barton believes that the progressive and territorial deconfinement defended by Emmanuel Macron is a good option, but only when the virus is not circulating.

"Last May, we had an incidence rate of less than 5 cases per 100,000 inhabitants per week. Now we are more at 200. So we researchers are very worried that it will start again and that we end up with a fourth wave ".