Lockdown - harmful to children

[Eric Cartman]

Re: Lockdown - harmful to children

You honestly think that? That had Cheltenham not happened and had Liverpool not played Atletico Madrid at home etc, then those people would not have got covid over the next year before the vaccine was rolled out? I didn't think anyone believed that anymore.

Our approach wasn't about stopping healthy people catching covid, it was always about stopping everyone catching it at the same time because the health service likely wouldn't cope, we got very close to capacity in some areas as it was and that was with lockdowns.

As for the point about Sweden in another post, it's interesting and needs looking at. They had a higher death rate than their neighbours who did have a stricter approach but they kept things more open and didn't breach capacity within hospitals. That could be because they have a better equipped health sector, I don't know but I do definitely know that staying in your house doesn't spread Covid.

[lardy]

Re: Lockdown - harmful to children

I think you are on the right tracks but not quite right.

The only point of locking down was to slow the virus down once it 'became apparent' that we were quickly heading towards a countrywide situation similar that region in Italy (i.e. bodies lying in corridors of hospitals because capacity was significantly breached).

Deaths would have likely been significantly higher if capacity had been breached because people who wouldn't have died with basic treatment, would have died in a corridor

Now, if we hadn't completely ****ed up the first lockdown then I doubt there would have been such a knee jerk reaction second time around. First lockdown was by a mile too slow and primarily that was because they were still deciding upon their strategy.. lockdown vs the absolute dumb**** leap of faith of bau 'natural immunity' to a virus we didn't understand, once it was sufficiently proven that our health service had been run down so much that business as usual was a ticket to a complete disaster they began to lock certain things down. But not all things were equal, I can remember thinking, and probably saying on here at the time, why are their hundreds of flights coming in per day from countries with severe outbreaks already?

Basically we made our strategy up as we went along (as has been proven since) and it meant that lockdowns were deeper than they probably needed to be.

As for the effect on kids, no shit Sherlock.

Agree particularly with your last sentence. My daughter was very young during 2020 and it worried me that she was beginning to become aware of the world while everyone she saw wore a mask as seeing expressive faces is an important part of development - plus what she missed through lockdowns. Luckily she seems to be unaffected by it now.

But obviously it was bad for kids. It's not like it was introduced as a radical new teaching approach.

Covid was only three years ago, it amazes me how short some people's memories are, as if millions of us didn't hate what we had to go through and as if there wasn't a serious global reason for it.

[SLUDGE FACTORY]

Re: Lockdown - harmful to children

Kids had it tough , it was difficult

But it was those with chronic illnesses and the elderly in care homes that suffered the most

The kids on the whole will get through unlike the oldies who died

But of course they were going to die anyway

At least that seemed to be the excuse for not taking covid seriously along with its a hoax or a plot

Nutters

[jon1959]

Re: Lockdown - harmful to children

I think you are on the right tracks but not quite right.

The only point of locking down was to slow the virus down once it 'became apparent' that we were quickly heading towards a countrywide situation similar that region in Italy (i.e. bodies lying in corridors of hospitals because capacity was significantly breached).

Deaths would have likely been significantly higher if capacity had been breached because people who wouldn't have died with basic treatment, would have died in a corridor

Now, if we hadn't completely ****ed up the first lockdown then I doubt there would have been such a knee jerk reaction second time around. First lockdown was by a mile too slow and primarily that was because they were still deciding upon their strategy.. lockdown vs the absolute dumb**** leap of faith of bau 'natural immunity' to a virus we didn't understand, once it was sufficiently proven that our health service had been run down so much that business as usual was a ticket to a complete disaster they began to lock certain things down. But not all things were equal, I can remember thinking, and probably saying on here at the time, why are their hundreds of flights coming in per day from countries with severe outbreaks already?

Basically we made our strategy up as we went along (as has been proven since) and it meant that lockdowns were deeper than they probably needed to be.

As for the effect on kids, no shit Sherlock.

Top post.

[jon1959]

Re: Lockdown - harmful to children

Yeah I do think so, but the biggy for me was the amount of flights coming from a country where for weeks we had seen/heard of people dying in hospital corridors. I was baffled that we didn't try and make more of the fact that we could isolate ourselves from other countries which had earlier outbreaks. I don't think it is simple to 'protect the vulnerable' while everybody else is mixing and getting covid, it just doesn't work. I lived with my parents at the time, who I deemed to be vulnerable (Dad was 75 and mum had pneumonia a few years back), same for lots of people with parents/grandparents, or they work with them, or they live with someone who works with them.

Someone joked at the time that the best solution would be to move every vulnerable person to the highlands in Scotland and everybody else carry on as normal, maybe true but it just highlights how intertwined everybody's lives are that this would be the only way to have separation.

Another top post.

[jon1959]

Re: Lockdown - harmful to children

Our approach wasn't about stopping healthy people catching covid, it was always about stopping everyone catching it at the same time because the health service likely wouldn't cope, we got very close to capacity in some areas as it was and that was with lockdowns.

As for the point about Sweden in another post, it's interesting and needs looking at. They had a higher death rate than their neighbours who did have a stricter approach but they kept things more open and didn't breach capacity within hospitals. That could be because they have a better equipped health sector, I don't know but I do definitely know that staying in your house doesn't spread Covid.

Nailed it again. Absolutely right!

[JamesWales]

Re: Lockdown - harmful to children

But aren't we talking here about the impact of lockdowns on children? I don't think anyone disputes that in order to stop an airborne disease then you stop people mixing - without doubt, according to the science of that, the best thing to do was to have a strict lockdown from March 2020 until we were all vaccinated?

It was always about balance and isn't this discussion about the counter side to that policy? That's not to say lockdowns were wrong (although I do think they went on too long and after the first one another approach was needed?) but more a recognition and respect for those who have been negatively impacted?

[lardy]

Re: Lockdown - harmful to children

But aren't we talking here about the impact of lockdowns on children? I don't think anyone disputes that in order to stop an airborne disease then you stop people mixing - without doubt, according to the science of that, the best thing to do was to have a strict lockdown from March 2020 until we were all vaccinated?

It was always about balance and isn't this discussion about the counter side to that policy? That's not to say lockdowns were wrong (although I do think they went on too long and after the first one another approach was needed?) but more a recognition and respect for those who have been negatively impacted?

I'm not sure what you think is wrong with the discussion so far.

[JamesWales]

Re: Lockdown - harmful to children

I'm not sure what you think is wrong with the discussion so far.

It's reiterating the justification for lockdowns, as opposed to talking about the consequences for younger people.

Both valid topics, both related, but different.

I'm not sure we deal with the surge in mental health problems, sad kids, lacking social skills, absenteeism etc by reiterating the benefits of staying away from people in 2020.

It's shifting the debate from the needs of young people in 2023 to the needs or generally older people in 2020.

Both critically important, but also different topics really.

[lardy]

Re: Lockdown - harmful to children

It's reiterating the justification for lockdowns, as opposed to talking about the consequences for younger people.

Both valid topics, both related, but different.

I'm not sure we deal with the surge in mental health problems, sad kids, lacking social skills, absenteeism etc by reiterating the benefits of staying away from people in 2020.

It's shifting the debate from the needs of young people in 2023 to the needs or generally older people in 2020.

Both critically important, but also different topics really.

I'm sorry we haven't addressed the thread in the manner and depth that you wished.

[JamesWales]

Re: Lockdown - harmful to children

I'm sorry we haven't addressed the thread in the manner and depth that you wished.

Nothing wrong with threads going off topic, but this is one about the impact of lockdowns on kids. Still time for it to come back on topic..

[lardy]

Re: Lockdown - harmful to children

Nothing wrong with threads going off topic, but this is one about the impact of lockdowns on kids. Still time for it to come back on topic..

On the last page you were talking about the effects of having the lockdown in place earlier, and on this page you're telling everyone off for straying from the topic of kids. As if the discussion on this forum is going to help "deal" with their mental health and social skills and truancy.

I've talked about the effects of my own family, but i don't see how this can be discussed without mentioning the reasons why lockdown had to happen. It's not going off topic. And actually, I think understanding the reasons is a big part of why so many people have been able to deal with it so well. Humans are pretty resilient.

[TWGL1]

Re: Lockdown - harmful to children

On the last page you were talking about the effects of having the lockdown in place earlier, and on this page you're telling everyone off for straying from the topic of kids. As if the discussion on this forum is going to help "deal" with their mental health and social skills and truancy.

I've talked about the effects of my own family, but i don't see how this can be discussed without mentioning the reasons why lockdown had to happen. It's not going off topic. And actually, I think understanding the reasons is a big part of why so many people have been able to deal with it so well. Humans are pretty resilient.

With regards to your last sentence, it it never more true when it comes to people who chose not to get vaccinated

[JamesWales]

Re: Lockdown - harmful to children

On the last page you were talking about the effects of having the lockdown in place earlier, and on this page you're telling everyone off for straying from the topic of kids. As if the discussion on this forum is going to help "deal" with their mental health and social skills and truancy.

I've talked about the effects of my own family, but i don't see how this can be discussed without mentioning the reasons why lockdown had to happen. It's not going off topic. And actually, I think understanding the reasons is a big part of why so many people have been able to deal with it so well. Humans are pretty resilient.

I'm not telling anyone off. I'm just saying, justification for the lockdown at the time and the impact of it on (in this case) young people are two different topics, although as you say, clearly linked.

And no, this forum won't help deal with anything, but that goes for every topic ever discussed on here. Still, conversations can be useful on topics.

[Heathblue]

Re: Lockdown - harmful to children

AV.jpg