Coronavirus, Stay-at-Home Rules, and Protests

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Background
Benefits of Stay-at-Home Rules
Opposite Views
Conclusion
Works Cited

Introduction

Today, the world experiences hard times as it faces one of the most complex challenges of the 21st century. The pandemic of coronavirus is considered a serious threat to the health of nations, their economies, well-being, and even the future. Regardless of all attempts to localize the outbreak of the disease and avoid its spread, COVID-19 managed to enter multiple countries and precondition the emergence of difficult situations related to people’s health. Globalization of the contemporary world and modern lifestyles can be considered the central reasons for the fast propagation of the disease. The high popularity of traveling and the ability to reach different countries by using planes promoted the development of pandemic. There are multiple measures that are offered today as the method to stop the deterioration of the situation, and minimization in the number of contacts remains one of the most effective ones. For this reason, adherence to the stay-at-home rules introduced by the government is vital to struggle against COVID-19.

Background

China was the first state that experienced the epidemics of coronavirus and had to introduce specific measures to avoid critical outcomes. The government managed to introduce extremely severe measures presupposing complete isolation of regions affected by COVID-19 and minimization of contacts, movement, and interactions. Regarding the fact that there is no effective treatment against the disease, the given measures turned out to be effective as they minimized the risk of new patients’ emergence and provided the healthcare sector with the time and resources needed to face the challenge. The success of the given approach is also evidenced by the fact that today China comes back to normal life and removes constraints. For this reason, other states, where the situation is critical, such as Italy, Spain, and the USA, adopt this experience and introduce stay-at-home rules to decrease the speed of COVID-19 spread and control the situation.

Benefits of Stay-at-Home Rules

Decreased Speed of the Disease

The ability to slow down the disease and avoid the emergence of new patients is one of the central benefits of the stay-at-home rules. Researches show that COVID-19 is an extremely virulent pathogen that affects people in different environments (De Soto et al.). Its transmission occurs when small drops of water that contain the water are expelled by an infected individual (De Soto et al.). It means that these virus-ridden particles can be inhaled by health people during simple contacts such as talking, shaking hands, eating together, or moving close to each other (Bruns et al.). In such a way, the absence of a specific and complex method of transmission makes the virus extremely dangerous for the society, and at the same time, justifies the introduction of the stay-at-home rules as they minimize interactions between people and help a person to remain healthy.

Faster Recovery

Strict limits that are introduced today can also help to create the basis for faster recovery. Recent investigations of COVID-19 and its impact on states show that the virus is a serious economic burden. For instance, because of the complexity of the situation in the USA, about 32.1% unemployment rate is predicted in the worst-case scenario (Makridis). Moreover, the outcomes can be even more severe than the results of the 2008 financial crisis, which means that the economy will suffer (Makridis). For this reason, it is vital to implement measures that help to avoid the worst-case scenario and guarantee that the first signs of recovery will be observed in the next several weeks. Stay-at-home rules can be considered one of the measures that can help to achieve it as they result in the decreased number of patients and new cases daily, and contribute to the end of the pandemic.

Relief

Another advantage of the stay-at-home rules is their ability to give some relief to the healthcare sector. For instance, since the start of pandemic, the U.S. health facilities had to provide services to 1,171, 510 patients (CDC). Moreover, the recent statistics show that around 19,138 new cases emerge every day (CDC). It means extremely high pressure on the healthcare sector and the lack of facilities, equipment, and medicines to treat all patients. For this reason, there is a need for the relief and a significant reduction in the number of new cases to support the effective work of the caregivers and their ability to resist coronavirus (Banerjee and Mayank). The Chinese experience shows that isolation is an effective method to achieve the given goal, which means that stay-at-home rules will have a positive effect on the situation.

Reduced Number of Deaths

Finally, adherence to these rules can help to save many lives and avoid new lethal cases. COVID-19 is characterized by comparatively low mortality as it ranges from 2% to 12% depending on the type of the virus, complications it triggers, and other factors (Banerjee and Mayank). However, there is still no vaccine or effective treatment against it, which means the situation more complex. Additionally, it is hard to predict the progress of the disease and its outcomes, which introduces the high risk of lethal results (Banerjee and Mayank). In the USA, the total number of people who died from COVID-19 estimates 68,279 (CDC). It means that the emergence of new patients will increase the risk of lethal outcomes. For this reason, adherence to the stay-at-home rules can also be considered a way to avoid the further spread of the disease and new deaths.

Opposite Views

Exaggerated Risks

Unfortunately, regardless of the complicated situation that can be seen today and the proven effectiveness of social distancing, there are opponents of stay-at-home rules who organize large-scale protests and emphasize the need for the cancelation of these measures. One of the central arguments offered by representatives of this cohort is the absence of the serious threat and exaggerated risks that are associated with COVID-19. At the same time, the economic losses, the inability to work and earn money are considered more significant problems that should be given attention (Coaston). People call to reopen businesses and return to the limitless functioning of the society as it is the only way for them to survive. The given protests become one of the visible elements of the current COVID-19 pandemic as they represent views of a significant part of the population.

However, the given position can be refuted by using the latest research data and statistics. Regardless of protestants’ claims, coronavirus is a severe and extremely virulent disease that affects people living in different regions and contributes to the development of multiple complications, including lethal ones. The number of deaths globally (258,511 cases) shows that risks are real, and the disregard of the situation can precondition the further spread of the disease, appearance of millions of patients, and collapse of economies and states (CDC). Moreover, such protests can also increase the speed of the propagation as there are crows of people who do not adhere to the rules of social distancing and face the high risk of being infected. In such a way, this argument becomes irrelevant as it contradicts the existing facts and results of scientific research.

Counterproductive Measures

Another argument offered by this party emphasizes the fact that some areas are less affected by COVID-19 than others, but limits are introduced for all states. In the USA, big cities such as New York are the main centers of the pandemic with the thousands of patients, while rural areas and distant regions remain comparatively safe and untouched by the coronavirus. Under these conditions, such measures as the necessity to wear masks, social distancing, ban on meetings, and some businesses seem counterproductive and excessive as they decrease the quality of people’s lives, infringe their constitutional rights, and precondition severe financial losses (Coaston). For this reason, there are multiple claims to eliminate restrictions for these areas and reopen all enterprises to guarantee that no serious circumstances or related to the financial sphere will be observed.

However, the given arguments can also be considered illogical and even dangerous. As it has been stated above, one of the features that make COVID-19 extremely dangerous for the world is its virulent character. It means that it can spread to different regions regardless of the distance or physical obstacles. The virus firstly emerged in China, but today it affects almost all countries and territories, and this factor evidences the idea mentioned above. One infected person can contribute to the outbreak of the disease, even in distant or rural areas, if no measures to limit communication and interaction are accepted (Banerjee and Mayank). For this reason, the stay-at-home rules are effective not only for states hit hard by the pandemic but also for areas where the situation is better as they help to avoid the deterioration of the scenario.

In such a way, the opponents of social distancing and limiting measures destabilize the situation in the state and contribute to the increase of new problems. Instead of consolidating to resist a new threat that might precondition the collapse of the economy, protestants create conditions that are beneficial for the further spread of COVID-19 and the development of the worst-case scenario. The arguments offered by these parties can be refuted by the existing scientific research and statistic from other states, which also introduced stay-at-home rules to minimize the risk of being infected and avoid the growth in the new cases of patients daily.

Conclusion

Altogether, the coronavirus pandemic that can be observed today is one of the most difficult challenges of the 21st century. It affects the majority of states and contributes to the appearance of thousands of patients every day. Additionally, the further deterioration of the situation might precondition catastrophic outcomes in the sphere of the economy as states already lose millions per day. There is a need for the introduction of measures to struggle against the disease, and the adherence to the stay-at-home rules can be considered an appropriate solution. It helps to minimize the number of contacts, preserve social distancing, and slow down the speed of the illness propagation, which is vital in terms of the existing environment.

Works Cited

Banerjee, Debanjan, and Mayank Rai. “Social Isolation in Covid-19: The Impact of Loneliness.” International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 2020, doi:10.1177/0020764020922269.
Bruns, Debra, et al. “COVID-19: Facts, Cultural Considerations, and Risk of Stigmatization.” Journal of Transcultural Nursing, 2020, doi:10.1177/1043659620917724.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). “Cases in the U.S.” CDC.
Coaston, Jane. “What the Anti-Stay-at-Home Protests Are Really About.” Vox, 2020. Web.
De Soto, Joseph, et al. “The Pathophysiology of Virulence of the COVID-19.” Preprints, 2020. Web.
Makridis, Christos. “The Cost of COVID-19: A Rough Estimate of the 2020 US GDP Impact.” The Bridge, 2020. Web.

Click Here To Order Now!