Status: 07/01/2022 1:02 p.m
The Advisory Council has presented an expert opinion on the effectiveness of the corona measures – especially at the beginning they were therefore useful. However, even the experts consider the informative value of their report to be limited.
After more than two years of the pandemic, the German government’s Corona Advisory Council has presented an expert opinion on the effectiveness of the measures adopted by politicians. According to the experts, the steps taken so far have definitely had an effect, even if the individual measures are rated differently in the evaluation report.
For example, access restrictions such as the 2G/3G measures were rated rather positively. Only those who have been vaccinated, have recovered and/or have been tested may take part in certain events or visit certain locations. “The effect of 2G/3G measures is high with the current variants in the first few weeks after the booster vaccination or recovery,” says the report. However, protection against infection decreases significantly over time.
Masks only help if they fit correctly
The verdict on wearing masks was also positive: This could be “an effective tool”. But there are limitations: “However, an ill-fitting and not tight-fitting mask has a reduced or no effect.” If a mask requirement is issued again in the future, it should only apply indoors, because the risk of infection is higher there. “A general recommendation to wear FFP2 masks cannot be derived from the data so far,” it says.
Regarding the effectiveness of lockdowns, the experts state: “Once a few people are infected, lockdown measures have a much stronger effect.” The longer a lockdown lasts and the fewer people are willing to support the measure, the smaller the effect. Similar to the lockdown measures, contact tracing was particularly effective in the early phase of the pandemic.
No statement on vaccinations
However, there are also measures on which the committee makes no statements. This includes vaccinations. This is the task of the Standing Vaccination Commission (STIKO), said the virologist Hendrik Streeck. The experts also assess the effect of school closures as ambiguous because several measures come together. Their exact effectiveness is “remains open despite biological plausibility and numerous studies,” it says.
Poor data, limited meaningfulness
In their presentation, the scientists involved also emphasized the conditional significance. The main reason for this is the poor data situation. The Green health expert Janosch Dahmen also attaches only limited significance to the expert report. “The report provides additional information, but by no means a conclusive assessment of the effect of corona protection measures,” said Dahmen. “The absence of evidence of efficacy is not evidence of the absence of efficacy,” he noted. “The informative value of the report is therefore limited.”
Recommendation to politicians
The report is nevertheless important because it is intended to serve as a basis for future decisions. In this way, insights could be derived as to how a possible autumn or winter wave will be dealt with this year. The report also says, for example, that current and future measures must focus on the “transition to endemics” with the protection of “vulnerable groups”.
Scientists from various disciplines belong to the 18-strong Advisory Council. On behalf of the legislature, the evaluation should primarily shed light on the specifications in the context of the “epidemic situation of national importance”. This situation, determined by the Bundestag according to the Infection Protection Act, lasted for several months until the end of November 2021 and made it possible to close numerous facilities and meet everyday requirements.