Lockdown - harmful to children

[TWGL1]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/09/26/lockdown-harm-to-children-was-preventable-government-told/

Many parents were banging in about this from the beginning, but were pigeonholed as selfish, or a conspiracy theorist

Report by leading campaigners argues worst impacts could have been avoided if ministers had considered rights of the young

This person was reported and investigated when he dared mention that lockdowns would harm children. Everyone else in his profession (education) remained silent. We must empower more people to speak out

https://x.com/1mikefairclough/status/1706921077216018646?s=61&t=opXYWu2ILhmySD2aRt-GNg

[pipster]

Re: Lockdown - harmful to children

You cant say things like that on here, you'll have Professor Drakeflap on your door with the powers of arrest. You're probably alright at the moment though, as Prof Mark is busy walking up and down Cathedral road with a red flag in from of the traffic.

[TWGL1]

Re: Lockdown - harmful to children

You cant say things like that on here, you'll have Professor Drakeflap on your door with the powers of arrest. You're probably alright at the moment though, as Prof Mark is busy walking up and down Cathedral road with a red flag in from of the traffic.

Shhhhh you can’t agree with me , they will think you’re a multi account

Anybody with young kids has seen the detrimental effect of unnecessary diktats

[life on mars]

Re: Lockdown - harmful to children

I can personally relate to this via one of my grandchildren.

Wales had a chance to be different.

Too busy planning 20mph. ?

[JamesWales]

Re: Lockdown - harmful to children

A tremendously damaging policy to society at large especially children.

I think the first lockdown can be forgiven as we didn't know what we were dealing with. Subsequent ones, it because clear this would be deeply damaging to people.

Such concerns were dismissed and ridiculed at the time as 'not following the science', which is probably true, but it was following the social sciences.

'the science' was designed to control a virus (and it didn't do a great job). It took no account of other factors, whereas a much more holistic approach was needed

[Eric Cartman]

Re: Lockdown - harmful to children

A tremendously damaging policy to society at large especially children.

I think the first lockdown can be forgiven as we didn't know what we were dealing with. Subsequent ones, it because clear this would be deeply damaging to people.

Such concerns were dismissed and ridiculed at the time as 'not following the science', which is probably true, but it was following the social sciences.

'the science' was designed to control a virus (and it didn't do a great job). It took no account of other factors, whereas a much more holistic approach was needed

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.

[Tuerto]

Re: Lockdown - harmful to children

I can personally relate to this via one of my grandchildren.

Wales had a chance to be different.

Too busy planning 20mph. ?

Poor kid was locked up with you.

[the other bob wilson]

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.

Good post.

[JamesWales]

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.

Do you honestly think it would have made a difference if we had locked down several days earlier? It was going to spread anyway, no? In multiple waves.

I think it was inevitable and the focus should have been on protecting the vulnerable.

[Hilts]

Re: Lockdown - harmful to children

Do you honestly think it would have made a difference if we had locked down several days earlier? It was going to spread anyway, no? In multiple waves.

I think it was inevitable and the focus should have been on protecting the vulnerable.

Thousands mixed at various huge sporting festivals at the time. Cheltenham being a big example. Yeah it would have made a difference. Getting you admit your party screwed up isnt going to happen though.🤣

[TWGL1]

Re: Lockdown - harmful to children

Thousands mixed at various huge sporting festivals at the time. Cheltenham being a big example. Yeah it would have made a difference. Getting you admit your party screwed up isnt going to happen though.🤣

I heard on the radio today Sweden had a much different approach to the uk and they kept schools open - their excess death rates were much lower

[JamesWales]

Re: Lockdown - harmful to children

Thousands mixed at various huge sporting festivals at the time. Cheltenham being a big example. Yeah it would have made a difference. Getting you admit your party screwed up isnt going to happen though.🤣

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.

We locked down too late on the first one, that's true, but with hindsight I don't think it would have made a blind bit of difference really.

That's not to dispute covid in any way, but I think we got the balance wrong and the focus should have been on protecting the most vulnerable once it became clear that long term damages would be caused to people.

[Hilts]

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.

We locked down too late on the first one, that's true, but with hindsight I don't think it would have made a blind bit of difference really.

That's not to dispute covid in any way, but I think we got the balance wrong and the focus should have been on protecting the most vulnerable once it became clear that long term damages would be caused to people.

I didnt say over the next year they wouldnt have got it.

It was always going to go through the country.

The issue was it overwhelming the NHS / Care Homes etc.

Which happened.

[JamesWales]

Re: Lockdown - harmful to children

I didnt say over the next year they wouldnt have got it.

It was always going to go through the country.

The issue was it overwhelming the NHS / Care Homes etc.

Which happened.

Okay fair enough. I honestly don't think it made much difference although I can see how it would have bought a little extra time.

[Eric Cartman]

Re: Lockdown - harmful to children

Do you honestly think it would have made a difference if we had locked down several days earlier? It was going to spread anyway, no? In multiple waves.

I think it was inevitable and the focus should have been on protecting the vulnerable.

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.