Health

Quantifying the effects of Bolsonaro’s dismal management of the COVID-19 pandemic

CC BY 3.0“width =” 393 “height =” 530 “/>

Jair Bolsonaro. Credit: Gustavo Lima / Câmara dos Deputados / Wikimedia Commons, CC BY 3.0

Along with the United States and India, Brazil is one of the three countries most affected by COVID, both in terms of mortality and the number of confirmed cases (660,000 and 30 million respectively). The doubts we can make about the authenticity of official data (especially of infection, but also of mortality) cannot challenge this terrible record.

In the a article 2021we shed more light on dangers associated with infection and death from COVID-19 during the first outbreak of epidemic (October 2020). Brazil’s mortality rate can be described by any section of the population.economic factors coalition with other countries, including state poverty. the modern economy, racial inequality and poor favelas infrastructure. Above all, our research shows that the president, Jair Bolsonaro, is responsible for the spread of the disease – we call it the “Bolsonaro effect.”

Two COVID floods, an additional 500,000 deaths, 20 million infections and subsequent campaign success, are we still at the end of it?

While it is clear that the president’s rejection has prevented the state from fighting the disease effectively, it is very difficult to show how effective it is and quantify the victims. This is what we try to do in another new reading.

The effect of ‘Bolsonaro’ is measured

There are two theoretical approaches available to us while seeking to quantify the impact of Bolsonaro leadership, depending on whether we choose individual- or regional-level research.

In the case of the first method, we need to have access to the individual data of the population representation model. The latter will inform us about the COVID status of individuals (infected or not, deceased or not) and social and political data. There is a problem, however, as social and economic research only affects the living (the dead do not speak), while pathological research and registration do not say little about the characteristics of a single person (mostly, sex) and age, sometimes alliances), and do not include political choices.

The alternative is to conduct research at the regional level. While this method does not measure the risk of one person, there may be several reasons for this:

  • It allows researchers to cross-search large numbers of data from private databases.
  • It offers full coverage of the country as a whole.
  • It can affect both collective (or neighborhood) behaviors and individual values.

In response to the Bolsonaro government, policies were implemented at the local government level (states and districts). So the study focused on 5,570 districts in the country with the implementation of tens of millions of surveys.

Pro-Bolsonaro communities are more susceptible to COVID-19

The main finding is that COVID-19 has, all other things being equal, being the worst in the constituencies favored by Jair Bolsonaro (according to the first round votes in the 2018 presidential election).

The impact of the Internet is even greater given that on average we notice the opposite: in fact, in absolute terms, the Pro-Bolsonaro districts survived COVID because they were “white,” more educated, richer, and so on. – all things. which protects them from the plague to another degree.

Once these systemic characteristics are taken into account, we can identify the specific effects of Bolsonaro. This study is both the most sustainable and the strongest. Apart from age, the only thing social and economic inequality to perpetuate over time is poverty.

The president’s refusal has led his supporters to engage in risky behaviors, which could lead to infections. population around them.

All the president has to do is implement emergency money transfer for regular employees. However, this only protects them by allowing them to live without working at home in the early stages of the disease.

Degree of social distance

We also need to look at the factors that led to the effect of Bolsonaro. Drawing from existing data, we were able to test the limits of what Brazilians followed in two major global tools on COVID: public outreach and prevention.

In line with the federal government’s commitment, local governments have declared a blockade in one area. However, such measures have benefited from dramatic developments when taken, as confirmed by a reduction in the number of trips made by Brazilians (data from Facebook and Google accounts), which reached almost 50% % in the first months of the disease.

The lifting of sanctions led to a return to peace by the end of 2020. By the second half of 2021, the epidemic had returned, which led to new closures. This time, the Brazilians took a careless attitude, even though the waves were heavier than before.

In this context as a whole, our research shows the increasing number of districts supporting Bolsonaro, their small population limits their exit. This confirms my conclusion two studies conducted at the beginning of a health problem.

This is true for all time, except by the end of 2020, when the disease is at its lowest ebb. Similarly, local government coverage is related to family tensions and mortality rates.

Of course, the benefits of locks are only going up so far, as evidenced by the nature of the districts with older residents who despite being very cautious are more likely to be affected by the disaster.

At first they were skeptical of prevention, Bolsonaro supporters arrested

The number of vaccines is the second most likely factor that Bolsonaro’s effects could have on mortality.

Despite the slow start by Bolsonaro and continued resistance, the election campaign finally came to an end, which offset the initial delay. By mid-March 2022, 180 million Brazilians had received at least 1.88 million full courses of immunization (85% and 74% of the general population respectively) – similar to those in France and other European countries.

This time around, everything else is the same, Bolsonaro’s claim to actually vote has no effect on the number of vaccines (double doses). It is even better, if we consider those who took at least one percent.

However, in parallel with our thinking, it seems that Pro-Bolsonaro counties do not have the first vaccine more than the rest. It was only in the second half that they overtook them. It seems that in the first place, the president’s supporters have followed his propaganda campaign against the vaccine before they changed their minds and were satisfied with the results.

Remaining false or deceptive statements

Finally, the data collection team points to the president responsible for the high number of COVID-19 deaths in Brazil. By all accounts, his verdict in late 2021 by the parliamentary inquiry into 10 counts of crimes against humanity did not affect his reputation. He is even trying to use it in the run-up to the next presidential election in October 2022, on the grounds that he will…

After dismissing the virus as “uma gripezinha” (smallpox), Jair Bolsonaro openly violated the rules of social exclusion by participating in public meetings and socializing, usually not. without wearing a face mask – thus undermining the steps taken by the local authorities. .

Bolsonaro has repeatedly considered the benefits of hydroxychloroquine, claiming on the basis of all new research that it has been scientifically proven to be effective. Last August, he declared that wearing a mask had no effect (“eficácia quase nenhuma”). In mid-October, when more than 150,000 people died officially from COVID-19, he claimed that the disease was overgrown with seed (“superdimensionada”). In mid-November, he complied with this claim and inquired about the arrival of the second wave in Brazil (“conversinha de segunda onda”).

The announcement did not stop there. On May 5, 2021, he addresses the members of the organization Comissão Parlamentar de Inquérito da COVIDThe parliamentary committee investigating the government’s treatment of the disease, called those who rejected the quality of the early treatment of hydroxychloroquine “cows” (“canalhas”).

A fact-finding journal study examined the public statements of the president regarding COVID-19 between March 11 and September 11, 2020: of 1,417 incidents, 653 were found to be false or misleading.

Inside out false information reported or fabricated, we received, in a very specific manner, the announcement that the hospital beds would lay everything like boxes supposed to contain the dead from COVID-19, that Brazil would reach the level of collective prevention or the Supreme Court Supremo (STF) will prevent him from implementing his disease control policies. In early 2022, the president even claimed that omicron variant did not kill anyone in Brazil.


Brazilian study finds COVID-19 cases and highest mortality rates in areas supporting President Bolsonaro’s election


Its formation
Conversations

This article was republished from Conversations under a Creative Commons license. Read original story.Conversations

hint: Statistics on the effects of Bolsonaro’s negligence on COVID-19 (2022, June 16) retrieved June 16, 2022 from https://medicalxpress.com/news/2022-06-quantifying-effects-bolsonaro-dismal -covid-. html

This document is copyrighted. Apart from any genuine transaction for the purpose of personal analysis or investigation, no part may be reproduced without our written permission. Content is provided for informational purposes only.

Quantifying the effects of Bolsonaro’s dismal management of the COVID-19 pandemic Source link Quantifying the effects of Bolsonaro’s dismal management of the COVID-19 pandemic

Related Articles

Back to top button