＜prologue＞
I started a blog called “The Baby Boomer Generation’s Miscellaneous Blog”（Dankai-sedai no garakutatyou:団塊世代の我楽多（がらくた）帳） in July 2018, about a year before I fully retired. More than six years have passed since then, and the number of articles has increased considerably.
So, in order to make them accessible to people who don’t understand Japanese, I decided to translate my past articles into English and publish them.
It may sound a bit exaggerated, but I would like to make this my life’s work.
It should be noted that haiku and waka （Japanese short fixed form poems） are quite difficult to translate into English, so some parts are written in Japanese.
If you are interested in haiku or waka and would like to know more, please read introductory or specialized books on haiku or waka written in English.
I also write many articles about the Japanese language. I would be happy if these inspire more people to want to learn Japanese.
my blog’s URL:団塊世代の我楽多（がらくた）帳 | 団塊世代が雑学や面白い話を発信しています
my X’s URL:団塊世代の我楽多帳（@historia49) on X
(Reference) Original article in Japanese
・三度目の緊急事態宣言はコロナ対策のメリットより経済へのデメリットの方が大！
<Added 2021/7/31> Economic Losses from State of Emergency Exceed the Economic Benefits of the Olympics and Paralympics!
Nomura Research Institute has compiled an estimate stating that “economic losses from the state of emergency will far exceed the economic benefits of the Olympic and Paralympic Games.”
The estimate states that the economic losses resulting from the application of the state of emergency to four prefectures, including Kanagawa, will amount to 940 billion yen.
Furthermore, if the extension of the state of emergency in Tokyo and other areas is included, the economic losses from a “fourth state of emergency” will swell to 2.19 trillion yen.
This far exceeds the expected economic benefit of 1.6771 trillion yen from the Tokyo Olympics and Paralympics, and the estimate concludes that the Olympic effect will “completely be canceled out.”
<Added April 21, 2021> Regarding the Third Declaration of a State of Emergency in Tokyo, Osaka, Hyogo, and Kyoto
It has become certain that a “third declaration of a state of emergency” will be issued for Tokyo, Osaka, Hyogo, and Kyoto this weekend or early next week, but I have doubts about its effectiveness.
The points I particularly feel this time are as follows:
① The “infection spread ⇒ state of emergency” approach has become simplistic and formulaic, and the effectiveness has not been sufficiently evaluated.
② “Self-restraint fatigue” is growing among the public.
③ In addition to the planned closure of restaurants, department stores and entertainment facilities are also scheduled, but the effectiveness of suppressing the spread of infection is questionable as it is merely following precedent without verifying whether clusters have occurred in these facilities.
④ There is a lack of effort to allow restaurants and other businesses to continue operating without wasting their “infection prevention efforts.”
⑤ There is little sense of effort from the government or medical associations to improve the medical system.
⑥ The sense of unfairness regarding compensation for business closures has not been resolved, and the national and local governments… It’s becoming an enormous burden on the body.
⑦ I wonder how politicians will explain the situation if the spread of infection doesn’t stop despite this state of emergency declaration.
⑧ I welcome the Ministry of Education’s policy of “not closing schools nationwide,” but I question Osaka Prefecture Governor Yoshimura’s policy of “canceling or postponing sports events in principle” as it lacks ingenuity.
The second “state of emergency declaration” as a “coronavirus countermeasure” was issued on January 7, 2021, for Tokyo and three surrounding prefectures, and on January 14 for Osaka, Hyogo, Kyoto, Aichi, Gifu, Fukuoka, and Tochigi prefectures. The initial deadline was February 7, but it was extended to March 7 in all prefectures except Tochigi.
However, regarding this second “state of emergency” (following the first one in April-May 2020), I believe the economic disadvantages outweigh the benefits in terms of COVID-19 countermeasures.
Based on the data, the third wave of COVID-19 peaked by the end of December, meaning the Suga cabinet didn’t need to issue a “state of emergency” in the first place. They should have waited a little longer to see how things developed.
However, they succumbed to pressure from prefectural governors and expert opinions and issued the declaration. And now they’ve even decided to extend it. I believe this was clearly a misguided policy decision.
Currently, the number of new positive cases is decreasing in Tokyo and Osaka, and while many may attribute this to the “state of emergency,” I believe it’s a “natural decline.”
On February 9, 2021, despite Osaka Prefecture having met its own “lifting criteria,” it abandoned its request to the government to lift the declaration, stating that it would “act in concert with Hyogo and Kyoto prefectures” because Hyogo and Kyoto prefectures had not met their respective criteria.
I also have doubts about Governor Yoshimura’s response to this.
1. Benefits of a State of Emergency Declaration
(1) It can slow down the rate at which COVID-19 infections spread.
Both during the first state of emergency and this time, the government and experts seem to be prioritizing these benefits.
(2) Raising public awareness of infection prevention against COVID-19
2. Disadvantages of a State of Emergency
(1) Extreme restriction of freedom of movement
(2) Serious economic damage due to worsening business performance, bankruptcies, business closures, and increased unemployment
(3) Compensation becomes necessary for businesses that were requested to close or shorten their hours
(4) Even among restaurants receiving uniform compensation, disparities arise depending on size
(5) Dissatisfaction increases from industries not covered by compensation
3. Misguided Thinking
(1) Perception of the Cause of Infection Spread
A common understanding among experts on the government’s subcommittee, Minister Nishimura (in charge of COVID-19), and prefectural governors is that “infections increase when people move around.”
There are also ideas that “infections increase with large group meals” and “infections increase with dining out after 8 PM.” This is also the basis for “requests for shortened business hours.”
However, the president of Saizeriya was furious at Minister Nishimura’s statement that “there is a risk of infection even during lunch.” Indeed, this statement contradicts the very basis for the request for shorter business hours.
(2) Osaka Prefecture should act in concert with Hyogo and Kyoto Prefectures
Even though Governor Yoshimura of Osaka Prefecture has created “Osaka’s own criteria for lifting restrictions,” if Osaka does not request lifting restrictions simply because Hyogo and Kyoto Prefectures have not met their respective criteria, then creating “Osaka’s own criteria for lifting restrictions” becomes meaningless.
The idea of acting in concert seems to be based on the idea mentioned in (1) that “the number of infections increases when people move around.”
If the intention is to act in concert, then a “common and reasonable criteria for lifting restrictions that the three prefectures can agree on” should be established beforehand.
For example, a criterion such as “the effective reproduction number averages less than 1 per week.”
According to data from “Toyo Keizai Online’s Domestic COVID-19 Infection Situation,” Japan’s effective reproduction number as of February 8, 2021, was 0.73. The effective reproduction number for Tokyo is 0.76, for Kanagawa Prefecture it is 0.65, for Chiba Prefecture it is 0.78, and for Saitama Prefecture it is 0.89. For Osaka and Hyogo Prefectures it is 0.69, and for Kyoto Prefecture it is 0.56.
(*) What is the “effective reproduction number”?
In the field of infectious disease medicine, there are two terms that represent the average number of secondary infections generated by one infected person with a particular infectious disease: the “basic reproduction number” and the “effective reproduction number.”
The “basic reproduction number” is an estimate of how many people, on average, will be infected with a disease from one infected person, under normal circumstances where no one has immunity to the disease.
The “effective reproduction number” is a real number that shows how many people, on average, are actually infected with a disease from one infected person at a specific point in time within a population where an infectious disease is actually prevalent. Many may recall that the expert panel previously created “epidemic scenarios of 1.4, 1.7, and 2.0” and announced that “Tokyo’s effective reproduction number was 1.7.”
When the “effective reproduction number” is greater than 1, it indicates that the infectious disease epidemic is expanding, while when the “effective reproduction number” is less than 1, it indicates that the infectious disease epidemic is subsiding.
4. What are the correct measures against COVID-19?
So, what constitutes proper COVID-19 countermeasures, excluding vaccines and treatments?
A year ago, the perception was that “COVID-19 is an unknown virus with no vaccine or treatment, a terrifying infectious disease.” However, a year later, we should have learned a great deal.
Unnecessary “mystery measures” and “excessive measures” need to be reviewed rather than continued indiscriminately.
It’s true that increased “movement of people” leads to increased “opportunities for eating and drinking” and “opportunities for large gatherings.” However, these are not the “direct causes of infection.”
In short, I believe that “proper COVID-19 countermeasures” are essentially the following:
– Avoid talking while eating.
– Wear a mask when talking to prevent the spread of droplets.
– Avoid speaking loudly or making noise when drinking alcohol.
– Wear a mask when going out.
– Wash and disinfect your hands frequently.
Other policies that should be taken include “lowering the classification of COVID-19 from Category 2 to Category 5” to prevent the collapse of the medical system, and “immediately suspending the Bank of Japan’s negative interest rate policy” as a measure to increase interest income for the majority of citizens and avoid worsening the financial situation of banks.
Regarding my understanding of COVID-19, I believe Professor Yasushi Takahashi’s “New Hypothesis on COVID-19” from International University of Health and Welfare and Associate Professor Miyazawa’s “Fried Egg Model” from Kyoto University are worth listening to.