Reports on effectiveness (or not!) and impacts of lockdown and other measures

[Eyersey468]

Sky News reporting this morning that self harm amongst children soared during lockdown.

Serious self-harm in young people jumped during strict COVID-19 lockdowns - study

It comes after another study suggested that people living in poverty are more likely to suffer with long COVID.

news.sky.com

There's a surprise

 

[takno]

Indeed. And the belief that large sections of the public were demanding restrictions (which some of them were).

People were demanding restrictions because they were being told they worked by the government and by scientists the government had told them to believe.

 

[yorksrob]

People were demanding restrictions because they were being told they worked by the government and by scientists the government had told them to believe.

Yes, very much a self enforcing argument.

 

[DelayRepay]

People were demanding restrictions because they were being told they worked by the government and by scientists the government had told them to believe.

There's that, and also the people who supported restrictions were very vocal on social media etc.

Those who were less supportive probably kept quiet, partly because some of them will have been breaking the rules and not wanting to draw attention to the fact.

There was also a subtext for a while where if you questioned the value of any restrictions, you were accused of wishing for the deaths of thousands of people!

 

[Eyersey468]

There's that, and also the people who supported restrictions were very vocal on social media etc.

Those who were less supportive probably kept quiet, partly because some of them will have been breaking the rules and not wanting to draw attention to the fact.

There was also a subtext for a while where if you questioned the value of any restrictions, you were accused of wishing for the deaths of thousands of people!

Exactly, and I have noticed a lot of those screaming for restrictions on social media now seem to be the ones moaning loudest about the cost of living crisis, well what did they expect?

 

[nw1]

I don't trust them to not do it again either, though it will be a long time before any of the main political parties get my vote

For me, non-Covid issues trump things and I have other reasons for never, ever voting for the Conservatives again (not that I ever have voted for them, but I dislike them even more now than I did before). So definitely something other than the Tories (Lab-Lib coalition?) for me I am afraid.

I agree Labour were too hardline on restrictions (and this was IMO a big political mistake) but given that by the next election, Covid will (presumably) not be a major issue, I am still likely to vote tactically for them. Put it this way, I certainly don't want the loathsome Liz Truss as PM for a minute longer than necessary.

Exactly, and I have noticed a lot of those screaming for restrictions on social media now seem to be the ones moaning loudest about the cost of living crisis, well what did they expect?

I do think it was a bit crazy how so many on the left took a hardline restrictionist line for a while (more than, for all his faults, Johnson, for instance).

I got the impression during the "lull" in summer 2020 that many on the left did not seem to really care about the economic and mental health issues that lockdown and restrictions cause. This was, in my view, a political mistake. I'm not coming from a "no restrictions at all" perspective (though I do believe we should have no restrictions at all in 2022) but rather from a "stop making people feel guilty if they raise concerns about lockdowns" one.

I suspect that an average person with reasonable health was, even in 2020, considerably more vulnerable to mental illness and the financial problems of job loss than they were to Covid. Many on the left should have considered this a bit rather than making those who raised these kinds of concerns feel guilty. Left-wing values should be about protecting people from poverty and looking after their mental health. Seemed all that went out of the window.

That said, I think this is now (mostly) all in the past now and as I said above, I desperately want the Tories out, I'm afraid.

 

[takno]

For me, non-Covid issues trump things and I have other reasons for never, ever voting for the Conservatives again (not that I ever have voted for them, but I dislike them even more now than I did before). So definitely something other than the Tories (Lab-Lib coalition?) for me I am afraid.

I agree Labour were too hardline on restrictions (and this was IMO a big political mistake) but given that by the next election, Covid will (presumably) not be a major issue, I am still likely to vote tactically for them. Put it this way, I certainly don't want the loathsome Liz Truss as PM for a minute longer than necessary.


I do think it was a bit crazy how so many on the left took a hardline restrictionist line for a while (more than, for all his faults, Johnson, for instance).

I got the impression during the "lull" in summer 2020 that many on the left did not seem to really care about the economic and mental health issues that lockdown and restrictions cause. This was, in my view, a political mistake. I'm not necessarily coming from a "no restrictions at all" perspective (though I do believe we should have no restrictions at all in 2022) but rather from a "stop making people feel guilty if they raise concerns about restrictions" one.

I suspect that an average person with reasonable health is considerably more vulnerable to mental health issues and the financial problems of job loss than Covid. Many on the left should have considered this a bit rather than making those who raised these kinds of concerns feel guilty. Left-wing values should be about protecting people from poverty and looking after their mental health. Seemed all that went out of the window.

That said, I think this is now (mostly) all in the past now and as I said above, I desperately want the Tories out, I'm afraid.

Same for me fundamentally. The Conservative government did most of the same things as other governments, and in the end implemented almost everything Labour were calling for anyway, so their hands are hardly cleaner. I hate the restriction, which were ultimately a deep and abiding wrong, the consequences of which will be with us for generations to come, but marginal differences between parties in the scale of the wrong are ultimately drowned out by other things. Not least of the other things is the need to remove the party which has severely restricted the public's right to protest and take direct action against terrible policies such as these

 

[nw1]

Not least of the other things is the need to remove the party which has severely restricted the public's right to protest and take direct action against terrible policies such as these

Quite. Remember the antics of Ms P. "snitch on your neighbour" Patel.

Probably the most authoritarian MP in Parliament right now, and what party is she from...

 

[Eyersey468]

For me, non-Covid issues trump things and I have other reasons for never, ever voting for the Conservatives again (not that I ever have voted for them, but I dislike them even more now than I did before). So definitely something other than the Tories (Lab-Lib coalition?) for me I am afraid.

I agree Labour were too hardline on restrictions (and this was IMO a big political mistake) but given that by the next election, Covid will (presumably) not be a major issue, I am still likely to vote tactically for them. Put it this way, I certainly don't want the loathsome Liz Truss as PM for a minute longer than necessary.


I do think it was a bit crazy how so many on the left took a hardline restrictionist line for a while (more than, for all his faults, Johnson, for instance).

I got the impression during the "lull" in summer 2020 that many on the left did not seem to really care about the economic and mental health issues that lockdown and restrictions cause. This was, in my view, a political mistake. I'm not coming from a "no restrictions at all" perspective (though I do believe we should have no restrictions at all in 2022) but rather from a "stop making people feel guilty if they raise concerns about lockdowns" one.

I suspect that an average person with reasonable health was, even in 2020, considerably more vulnerable to mental illness and the financial problems of job loss than they were to Covid. Many on the left should have considered this a bit rather than making those who raised these kinds of concerns feel guilty. Left-wing values should be about protecting people from poverty and looking after their mental health. Seemed all that went out of the window.

That said, I think this is now (mostly) all in the past now and as I said above, I desperately want the Tories out, I'm afraid.

I also got the impression a lot of people simply didn't care about the economic damage and mental health issues that was caused by lockdowns and restrictions

 

[greyman42]

Those who were less supportive probably kept quiet, partly because some of them will have been breaking the rules and not wanting to draw attention to the fact.

I fell into that category. I was still travelling around the country on trains when you were being told not to (unmasked) but i did not advertise that on this forum, as it would only have drawn attention to the fact. Incidentally i was never challenged by BTP or staff.

Same for me fundamentally. The Conservative government did most of the same things as other governments, and in the end implemented almost everything Labour were calling for anyway, so their hands are hardly cleaner.

Labour wanted Christmas 2020 locking down and were against the end of lockdown rules in July 2021.

 

[Eyersey468]

Labour wanted Christmas 2020 locking down and were against the end of lockdown rules in July 2021.

Exactly

 

[bramling]

All these people who can't forgive other people who (in the main) were doing their best in unforeseen circumstances make me concerned for the health of society - or is it just this part of the forum? I see a number of threads started including this one which have titles that are clearly intended for the expression of a particular point of view. That's not a discussion - it's an echo chamber started by the OP as a virtual space to rant in. I don't think that's a legitimate use of this forum, frankly. If this gets me banned because the OP happens to be a staff member and administrator, I guess that's just too bad.

It’s all very well saying people were doing their best, which may well be true, however these measures imposed significant negative costs. Had the west not bankrupted itself mentally and financially during 2020 and 2021, would Putin have decided to go ahead with invading Ukraine, for example?

Yes I agree they cared about their reputations and saving their own skin, they felt they had to be seen to do something even if it made no difference

We can probably add to that that some of the deciding minds were terrified of ending up having to be held accountable. This particularly applies to Johnson given he seems unable to think for himself. Hence the “follow the science” position. This was one thing in spring 2020 when there were many unknowns, but quite another in 2021.

 

[yorksrob]

It's an interesting point as to those saying they will vote in elections based on the pandemic response.

Personally, the state of the railway post pandemic will have a much greater influence on my voting intentions.

 

[35B]

I am personally of the belief that there is absolutely NO place whatsoever for ANY kind of "nudge" in a democratic country.

So governments should never try to persuade anybody to change their behaviour in any way, and if they want to achieve a result, should only do so by means of legislation? So, for example, the use of visual cues on roads to persuade drivers to slow down to the speed limit is entirely unacceptable and we should just rely on adherence to the signposted limit? Or trying to reduce sugar consumption by removing the ability of retailers to promote high sugar products by stocking them at the counter to nudge customers into purchasing. That's not calling for a discussion on those specific policies, but on how nudge can be used to achieve policy aims.

Personally, in a democratic society, I prefer to be nudged - and have the option to decline to be nudged - than just be reliant on laws permitting or banning certain things.

 

[greyman42]

It's an interesting point as to those saying they will vote in elections based on the pandemic response.

Personally, the state of the railway post pandemic will have a much greater influence on my voting intentions.

Well if Labour get in and we end up locked down again because of a respiratory virus, it won't do the railways a lot of good.

 

[35B]

It’s all very well saying people were doing their best, which may well be true, however these measures imposed significant negative costs. Had the west not bankrupted itself mentally and financially during 2020 and 2021, would Putin have decided to go ahead with invading Ukraine, for example?

I think many things persuaded Putin to go into Ukraine, but the costs of Covid were low amongst them compared with the generally craven attitude to his regime.

Much can be attached to Covid policy, but the Ukraine invasion is more than a stretch.

 

[yorksrob]

Well if Labour get in and we end up locked down again because of a respiratory virus, it won't do the railways a lot of good.

I strongly suspect that even labour wouldn't be able to turn the tide of public opinion this time. People are just getting on with it.

 

[bramling]

I think many things persuaded Putin to go into Ukraine, but the costs of Covid were low amongst them compared with the generally craven attitude to his regime.

Much can be attached to Covid policy, but the Ukraine invasion is more than a stretch.

We’ll never know the answer of course. However Putin is known to be an opportunist, and what better moment to launch into something which he’s wanted to do for many years?

I strongly suspect that even labour wouldn't be able to turn the tide of public opinion this time. People are just getting on with it.

I have to say I’m not so sure. Dangle the right things at people and enough would buy-in I think. Stuff like furlough (especially if the weather is nice), work from home, a “save the NHS” message, etc.

That said, I’m not sure people are so romantic about the NHS now they’ve found that the consequence of all this is they can barely get access to a GP.

 

[yorksrob]

I have to say I’m not so sure. Dangle the right things at people and enough would buy-in I think. Stuff like furlough (especially if the weather is nice), work from home, a “save the NHS” message, etc.

That said, I’m not sure people are so romantic about the NHS now they’ve found that the consequence of all this is they can barely get access to a GP.

That's a fair point.

But at the moment if the current government continue to try and cut back the railway and labour were to offer an alternative vision, past COVID performance would take a lower priority.

 

[MikeWM]

So governments should never try to persuade anybody to change their behaviour in any way, and if they want to achieve a result, should only do so by means of legislation? So, for example, the use of visual cues on roads to persuade drivers to slow down to the speed limit is entirely unacceptable and we should just rely on adherence to the signposted limit? Or trying to reduce sugar consumption by removing the ability of retailers to promote high sugar products by stocking them at the counter to nudge customers into purchasing. That's not calling for a discussion on those specific policies, but on how nudge can be used to achieve policy aims.

Personally, in a democratic society, I prefer to be nudged - and have the option to decline to be nudged - than just be reliant on laws permitting or banning certain things.

Interestingly, I clearly recall putting forward this exact point of view in a policitical conversation a few years ago, and the person I was discussing with was fairly horrified that I held that view, he hated the concept of 'nudging'.

This is very much one area where, after the last couple of years, I've totally changed my mind. Taking the option to 'decline to be nudged' is all very well in theory, but we've seen over the last couple of years that it can make life really rather miserable to have to be constantly fighting against it. Passing a law for/against something at least makes expectations explicit and is rather more honest.

 

[bramling]

That's a fair point.

But at the moment if the current government continue to try and cut back the railway and labour were to offer an alternative vision, past COVID performance would take a lower priority.

Unfortunately if we look back through our lifetime, the record of both parties in respect of rail isn’t great. Look at the various post-2000 “no growth” franchises as an example of that. Rail just isn’t something either of the main parties care about.

Having said that, Johnson’s seeming ideological and obsessive hatred of the railway industry is something else entirely. It is his numerous character defects which resulted in him having to be removed from office in disgrace.

 

[MikeWM]

We’ll never know the answer of course. However Putin is known to be an opportunist, and what better moment to launch into something which he’s wanted to do for many years?

My gut feeling is he saw what he perceived as weak leadership in the west - on Covid but also on various other issues - and the disastrous way the withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021 was implemented no doubt convinced him that he was correct on that and therefore was a good time to do what he wanted.

I'm fairly convinced Putin wouldn't have moved in the way he did if Trump had still been President. Only tangentially related to the above point, but perhaps more relevant to the topic at hand , I note that Trump has promised to rehire anyone fired from the US military over not taking a Covid vaccine, with back pay, if he is re-elected.

 

[yorksrob]

Unfortunately if we look back through our lifetime, the record of both parties in respect of rail isn’t great. Look at the various post-2000 “no growth” franchises as an example of that. Rail just isn’t something either of the main parties care about.

Having said that, Johnson’s seeming ideological and obsessive hatred of the railway industry is something else entirely. It is his numerous character defects which resulted in him having to be removed from office in disgrace.

I agree that both main parties have an unedifying track record on the railways (I was reliant on one no-growth franchise throughout its entire existence).

However, I agree that the current government seems to have a particularly destructive attitude towards the industry and contempt for passengers, not seen since the days of the closure programme. I don't think it's a particularly "Johnson" thing. If it were, everything would be resolved when he retired as P.M. It's not and it won't.

 

[greyman42]

However, I agree that the current government seems to have a particularly destructive attitude towards the industry and contempt for passengers, not seen since the days of the closure programme.

I do not get that impression myself.

 

[jumble]

I fell into that category. I was still travelling around the country on trains when you were being told not to (unmasked) but i did not advertise that on this forum, as it would only have drawn attention to the fact. Incidentally i was never challenged by BTP or staff.

I was a very bad dog and did the same
I remember being made a fuss of by BTP at Waterloo when I shouldn't have been there which I found rather amusing
Best Wishes
The Spaniel

 

[nw1]

Well if Labour get in and we end up locked down again because of a respiratory virus, it won't do the railways a lot of good.

I don't think it's just a Labour thing; there are authoritarians and less-authoritarian people within the Tory party, and Johnson (much as I dislike him) was, to be fair, one of the less-authoritarian.

If Priti Patel was PM instead of Johnson, I suspect the country may well have had a much more austere lockdown regime.

It's an interesting point as to those saying they will vote in elections based on the pandemic response.

I suspect that, by 2024, they will be in a minority as other concerns will dominate the agenda.

 

[greyman42]

I suspect that, by 2024, they will be in a minority as other concerns will dominate the agenda.

Whatever other concerns may be around in 2024, none of them will have an impact on the economy like the lockdowns did. That is why all parties must pledge never to lockdown again for a respiratory disease.

 

[kristiang85]

Whatever other concerns may be around in 2024, none of them will have an impact on the economy like the lockdowns did. That is why all parties must pledge never to lockdown again for a respiratory disease.

Exactly. We must not forget that pretty much all the economic problems we face now are due to that policy. You don't employ an arsonist to be a fireman...

 

[Cdd89]

I see Truss has come out vocally against lockdowns:

https://twitter.com/adambienkov/status/1555641653578309634

Liz Truss says that Boris Johnson "went too far" in imposing lockdowns during the pandemic.

"No lockdown would happen under my leadership. I can assure you of that," she says.

It is (at least) notable that a major politician is acknowledging that lockdowns do more harm than they prevent.

Unfortunately I suspect it will do nothing to reduce left-right polarisation on this issue.

 

[nedchester]

I see Truss has come out vocally against lockdowns:

https://twitter.com/adambienkov/status/1555641653578309634

It is (at least) notable that a major politician is acknowledging that lockdowns do more harm than they prevent.

Unfortunately I suspect it will do nothing to reduce left-right polarisation on this issue.

I’m left wing and I believe that lock downs went on for far too long.

I wouldn’t listen too much to Truss as she’s an air head who will have change her mind depend on what she thinks will make her popular.