Journal Article
18 May 2021
Kuppalli, Krutika, Gala, Pooja, Cherabuddi, Kartikeya, Kalantri, S P, Mohanan, Manoj, Mukherjee, Bhramar, Pinto, Lancelot, Prakash, Manu, Pramesh, C S, Rathi, Sahaj, Pai, Nitika Pant, Yamey, Gavin, Pai, Madhukar
View resource
India’s current COVID-19 surge is an unprecedented public health crisis. With exponential growth in the number of daily COVID-19 cases since March, 2021, India reported more than 400 000 new cases daily on May 1, 2021.1 This number is likely to be an underestimate of the true burden of COVID-19 cases, given reports of backlogs of test results, poor access to testing, and many people not getting tested due to fear and stigma.2, 3 Without mitigation, estimates suggest India could reach more than 1 million COVID-19 cases per day with over 1 million cumulative COVID-19 deaths by Aug 1, 2021.4
The Indian Government and health authorities must act fast to flatten this second wave. We strongly endorse the national action plan laid out by The Lancet COVID-19 Commission India Task Force and we have summarised some of their recommendations in the panel
.5 Early in the pandemic, India...
Journal Article
8 May 2021
Nisa, Claudia F, Bélanger, Jocelyn J, Faller, Daiane G, Buttrick, Nicholas R, Mierau, Jochen O, Austin, Maura M K, Schumpe, Birga M, Sasin, Edyta M, Agostini, Maximilian, Gützkow, Ben, Kreienkamp, Jannis, Abakoumkin, Georgios, Abdul Khaiyom, Jamilah Hanum, Ahmedi, Vjollca, Akkas, Handan, Almenara, Carlos A, Atta, Mohsin, Bagci, Sabahat Cigdem, Basel, Sima, Kida, Edona Berisha, Bernardo, Allan B I, Chobthamkit, Phatthanakit, Choi, Hoon-Seok, Cristea, Mioara, Csaba, Sára,Damnjanović, Kaja, Danyliuk, Ivan,Dash, Arobindu, Di Santo, Daniela, Douglas, Karen M, Enea, Violeta, Fitzsimons, Gavan, Gheorghiu, Alexandra, Gómez, Ángel,Grzymala-Moszczynska, Joanna, Hamaidia, Ali, Han, Qing,Helmy, Mai, Hudiyana, Joevarian, Jeronimus, Bertus F, Jiang, Ding-Yu,Jovanović, Veljko, Kamenov, Željka,Kende, Anna, Keng, Shian-Ling, Kieu, Tra Thi Thanh, Koc, Yasin, Kovyazina, Kamila, Kozytska, Inna, Krause, Joshua, Kruglanski, Arie W, Kurapov, Anton, Kutlaca, Maja, Lantos, Nóra Anna, Lemay, Edward P, Lesmana, Cokorda Bagus Jaya, Louis, Winnifred R, Lueders, Adrian, Malik, Najma Iqbal, Martinez, Anton, McCabe, Kira O, Mehulić, Jasmina, Milla, Mirra Noor, Mohammed, Idris, Molinario, Erica, Moyano, Manuel, Muhammad, Hayat, Mula, Silvana, Muluk, Hamdi, Myroniuk, Solomiia, Najafi, Reza, Nyúl, Boglárka, O'Keefe, Paul A, Osuna, Jose Javier Olivas, Osin, Evgeny N, Park, Joonha, Pica, Gennaro, Pierro, Antonio, Rees, Jonas, Reitsema, Anne Margit, Resta, Elena, Rullo, Marika, Ryan, Michelle K, Samekin, Adil, Santtila, Pekka, Selim, Heyla A, Stanton, Michael Vicente, Sultana, Samiah, Sutton, Robbie M, Tseliou, Eleftheria, Utsugi, Akira, van Breen, Jolien Anne, Van Lissa, Caspar J, Van Veen, Kees,vanDellen, Michelle R, Vázquez, Alexandra, Wollast, Robin, Yeung, Victoria Wai-Lan, Zand, Somayeh, Žeželj, Iris Lav, Zheng, Bang, Zick, Andreas, Zúñiga, Claudia, Leander, N Pontus
View resource
This paper examines whether compliance with COVID-19 mitigation measures is motivated by wanting to save lives or save the economy (or both), and which implications this carries to fight the pandemic. National representative samples were collected from 24 countries (N = 25,435). The main predictors were (1) perceived risk to contract coronavirus, (2) perceived risk to suffer economic losses due to coronavirus, and (3) their interaction effect. Individual and country-level variables were added as covariates in multilevel regression models. We examined compliance with various preventive health behaviors and support for strict containment policies. Results show that perceived economic risk consistently predicted mitigation behavior and policy support-and its effects were positive. Perceived health risk had mixed effects. Only two significant interactions between health and...